1. The NBC moderators did an excellent job. Lester Holt in particular managed to highlight the differences of opinion among the candidates without engaging in useless confrontations.
2. Campaign contributions from wealthy people aren’t as big a problem as Sanders makes them out to be. Yes, the rich have disproportionate influence on the system, but campaign contributions are a small part of that–otherwise, Jeb Bush would have a commanding lead in the GOP race. Most of the public opposition to Bernie’s agenda is driven by honest differences of opinion about the role of the state and by identity politics, not by PAC money. Does Bernie really think that Alabama would be a blue state but for campaign contributions?
3. Clinton did a decent job of identifying her practical objections to single-payer, but her argument still needs work. It would have helped if there had been more of a discussion about Vermont’s failed experiment with single-payer. Now that more details of the Sanders plan are known, the debate should come into better focus.
4. All of the candidates (understandably) were pandering for minority votes. I don’t dispute that Black Lives Matter has a point about institutional racism in the judicial system (and elsewhere), but we are electing a President, not an absolute monarch; virtually all of these problems have to be addressed by local leaders, not in Washington. Since minority votes are absolutely critical to all three candidates, however, no one was going to say that.
5. The parties don’t even agree on what the issues are. Do you recall any discussion about climate change, or police shootings, at the GOP debate? Me, neither.