#DemDebate Thread

admin: Fiorina has adopted a brash style and has come across as well-practiced on every answer she's given.

I don't this is an accurate representation. Yes, she's quick to answer and appears informed, but isn't well-versed in foreign policy to any regard. Her implications of exercising troops outside of Russia is a terrible idea. Moreover, she's not demonstrated that she's knowledgeable on domestic policy, either. Being from NZ, you might perceive her as informed, but the reality is different...

Rubio has a slower, more emotional style that has frequently stolen the spotlight on issues like immigration.

I'd say this is pretty spot-on description of how his answers are, but they are much more informed than most of the candidates (including Fiorina).

admin: If anything the larger field of republicans makes it harder to stand out in those debates on particular issues.

This, unfortunate as it may be, is quite true. I'd be pleased if candidates that aren't nearly as competitive (Kasich, Christie, Pataki, etc. + the "Little Kids") would go ahead and drop out... it'd clear the field and open up the debating aspect a lot more.

ColeTrain: You're using "well versed" here in the sense of how well-informed, not in the sense of how she says them. In a debate, the latter is infinitely more important. I've won plenty of debates before with absolutely zero knowledge of what the topic is actually about. Appearing informed makes a giant difference.

admin: No doubt appearance is pivotal, but I'm saying she hasn't shown (to people who actually study these things) that she knows about them. She appears informed, but isn't as much as I'd like her to be.