The First Debate: a Few Observations

first debate

  1. Mi nombre es Arius Aardvark, y no soy candidato para presidente.
  2. I don’t think Rep. Tulsi Gabbard will be the next president of the United States.
  3. The average IQ of these ten candidates is maybe 15 to 20 percent higher than that of the 2016 Republican field.
  4. A propos of point 3, I do not contend that Republicans as a group are that much less intelligent than Democrats as a group. The point is that Democrats prefer intelligent leaders, while Republicans prefer less intelligent government leaders.
  5. I remain deeply impressed by Pocahontas. (At least she didn’t tell us about growing up on the reservation.) Here’s the reason: her big issue—that rich folks are running a racket, and are picking your pocket—is profoundly true, profoundly important, and profoundly relevant to who’s going to win in 2020.

I come to this insight in part based on my life experience, much of which has involved being a well compensated water boy for the plutocracy, and in particular for the pharmaceutical companies.

I think that some of my fellow progressives who have had a different life experience—maybe they were schoolteachers or social workers or research scientists—hear what Pocahontas has to say, and it sounds shrill and exaggerated.

No ladies and germs. A trifle shrill it may be, but it’s all true. Every word of it.

Now, you could take the argument to the next step, and say, “Well, maybe it’s true that the rich people are scamming us all, but the most important issue is climate change, because climate changes threatens to kill us all.”

Or maybe you might think, “Well, what Pocahontas has to say about inequality is basically right, but I don’t think it’s a winning argument, politically.”

Those are legitimate debates. You could also legitimately think that Pocahontas is just a bit shrill.

But if you don’t understand the truth of what Elizabeth Warren is saying, then you lack a fundamental grasp of what is going on in this country.