With Round 2 of the Democratic primary debates beginning today, it’s worth looking back at what was asked in the first round to see whether the issues of most concern to Democratic voters are being addressed.
The initial debates, hosted by NBC, focused heavily on the economy (19% of questions), healthcare (18%) and immigration (18%) — central issues to many voters, to be sure. But other issues that Democrats want to hear about got short shrift. Climate change, which multiple polls put second only to healthcare as a top issue for Democratic voters, got only 10 questions (8%), while core issues around race and women’s rights got eight (6%) and five (4%), respectively. Two questions were asked about LGBTQ concerns.
Savannah Guthrie: “What do you say to those who worry this kind of significant change could be risky to the economy?”
The first question on the first night (6/26/19) gave a pretty good sense of the network’s approach to the debates. Turning to Elizabeth Warren, NBC‘s Savannah Guthrie asked:
You have many plans — free college, free childcare, government healthcare, cancellation of student debt, new taxes, new regulations, the breakup of major corporations. But this comes at a time when 71 percent of Americans say the economy is doing well, including 60 percent of Democrats. What do you say to those who worry this kind of significant change could be risky to the economy?
Who, exactly, is worrying about these plans being risky? Guthrie’s sleight-of-hand suggests it’s Democratic voters, when in fact they overwhelmingly support pretty much all of the plans she listed. (Warren’s “new taxes” are highly popular wealth and corporate taxes.) And, in fact, even the general population tends to support such policies. But the fiscally conservative, risk-averse, largely-happy-with-the-status-quo voter—which, by the way, probably fits the profile of most of the corporate media questioners—would haunt much of the debate.
A single question was asked about education, but “free college” was mentioned among other social welfare policies in four other questions, all of which were framed around cost, or supposed pragmatism, rather than benefits—e.g., asking whether such policies give “a false sense of what’s actually achievable,” or whether “Democrats have a responsibility to explain how they will pay for every proposal they make along those lines” (6/27/19).
Chuck Todd: “What’s your message to a voter who…suddenly feels as if government’s telling them how to live?”
Climate, too, got the “how will you pay for this” treatment in two of its 10 questions, in addition to a question asking Beto O’Rourke to respond to a hypothetical voter who—in response to “big changes,” like “switching to renewable energy [and] pushing to replace gas-powered cars in favor of electric ones”—”feels as if government’s telling them how to live and ordering them how to live.” Meanwhile, none of the environment-related questions raised the issue of how much not addressing the climate crisis will cost, or foregrounded the fears of voters concerned about insufficient government action on climate. The Green New Deal was not mentioned at all.
Questions about organized labor were also notably absent, as were the issues of campaign finance and Citizens United—a noteworthy omission, when several of the candidates have made a point of swearing off money from various corporate interests or Super PAC money.
The foreign policy questions, 11% of the total, were notably bellicose, with Lester Holt asking three different candidates, “How would you stand up to China?” and Chuck Todd asking everyone in the first debate to give a one-word answer for “greatest political threat.”
The threat the US poses to the world might have been a relevant issue, given that the US is involved in ongoing drone wars in at least six countries, and at least 5,000 civilians in Iraq and Syria have been killed in drone attacks and other US and US-allied airstrikes since the beginning of Trump’s presidency. But the only drone question asked in the first debates was about worries that drones will take over domestic jobs.
Compared to the questioning in the early Democratic presidential primaries for the 2016 election, there was a dramatically greater focus on healthcare (from 2% to 18%) and immigration (from 6% to 18%). Questions about foreign policy dropped significantly, from 25% to 11%. Non-policy questions, which often eat up an outsize portion of debate time with a focus on non-substantive issues like electability, personal questions or general questions about other candidates, also dropped significantly, from 21% to 2%. New this year were a series of questions about governance: ten questions about bipartisanship, gridlock, court-nominee obstruction and damage to our political institutions.
| TOPIC | NUMBER | PERCENT |
| Economic | 24 | 19 |
| Healthcare | 22 | 18 |
| Immigration | 22 | 18 |
| International | 14 | 11 |
| Guns | 11 | 9 |
| Environment | 10 | 8 |
| Governance | 10 | 8 |
| Race | 8 | 6 |
| Women | 5 | 4 |
| Non-Policy | 3 | 2 |
| LGBTQ | 2 | 2 |
| Education | 1 | 1 |
| Total Questions | 124 |
Methodology: FAIR counted all questions except for requests for opening or closing statements, interjections, clarifications and follow-ups to the same candidate on the same subject. Some questions were classified as belonging to more than one category, so total percentages exceed 100%.
Research assistance: Harrison Malkin
Excellent article but just one quibble. You leave the impression that progressive candidates are not fiscally conservative. That is not the case. For example, the Sanders campaign has shown how all proposals would be funded. The national debt would actually be lower than otherwise if all of his proposals, along with funding suggestions, were enacted. The debt/GDP ratio would fall substantially too.
Wake me when the media asked “how do we hold government accountable?” Trust in Government is at 17%–and that descent began long before Trump. Maybe the media should ask candidates, “how do we hold the FDA accountable given their role in facilitating the opioid crisis”. The Political Industrial Complex doesn’t want accountability questions. Neither does the media want to ask them.
I still find it hard to believe that people seriously think that they can find useful political information in debates. They’re obviously just pander-fests with political figures trying to homogenize whatever mildly controversial views they might have in order to not get caught in a ‘gotch-ya’ question by conservative questioners. It’s just bad theater with pronouncements that typically bear little resemblance to what the ultimately elected politico will do.
You forgot an entire category.
The adventures of our war machine and the flirtation with nuclear catastrophe.
Which would read 0 questions and 0%
“What measures would you take to rein in the massive Pentagon budget and avert the threat of nuclear war?”
I bet that one was not asked.
I’m willing to bet that 17 of the 23 candidates would shite their pants at the thought of questioning the budget for the MIC. Oddly enough, 17 of those candidates are neolibs whose sole job is to defeat the three New Deal Democrats. MSNBC may not know math, but the DNC does.
It sure seemed like the debates were rigged against Bernie in 2016, but now the “liberal media” can’t even be bothered to hide their bias. They are out for progressive blood.
Lousy questions media people.
Standing up to China???? What? How about emulating China in the sense that they have GOLD backing their money—does America have that , or was First Knox robbed in the Iraqi war?
Ohh Climate Crisis question too! How will you pay for it???Gee, ask the military that question because they never seem to worry about money—I mean did they ever find those pallets full of missing money In Iraq? Oh and to help solve the Climate Crisis—–stop bombing the world and 800 U.S. bases is a bit excessive, you know.
And Samantha Gutherie: well gee, how will Warren’s plans for education and health care pay for those ideas which apparently were normal items after WW 2—–how will we pay for the Pentagon, is a better question, and besides –what is it that we citizens get as benefits of being citizens? Let’s review: higher taxes higher drug costs, medical insurance which covers nothing. Do you reporters think that most Americans have what you have? And by the way, in the 1960s minimum wage was $1.25 hey it might go to $15—–and Congress was paid $30,000————wow and now Congress has a base of $174,000—— and some Americans, like those who live in the horror of MITCHLand still make $7.25. I think the PEOPLE should vote on Congressional pay raises, don’t you Ms Gutherie?,
“find those pallets full of missing money in Iraq?” and the TRILLIONS missing from the pentagon, as announced in a press conference by none other than Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld on Sept 10th 2001…. yes, Sept 10th! Well try looking in some Swiss bank accounts and we just might be a little surprised.
Why is gold backed money necessarily a good thing ? Gold has no inherent value (beyond the effect it seem to have on some peoples imaginations ). Its only real economic value is is its price, and that comes from the reliance on capitalist social relations . We cant eat it.Its not light-speed gas, or medicine, etc., And it has to be dug out of the ground.Why should the value of money be based on further abuse of the earth ? Why should the yellow dirt be so much more valuable than the human labor that that was required to extract it from the ground ?
To the dimwits parroting the silly question of – How can we pay for Medicare For All, or anything else for that matter? Simple and easy. Cut the Pentagon budget by 50%, end trillions spent on wars, increase taxes on the top 3% and mega corporations who pay NO TAXES AND stop giving $10 MILLION A DAY to Israel. That is the obvious and very easy to do solution.
The MSNBC & CNN “debates”:
Why are these “anchor” clowns the ones asking the questions? Cuz they work for MSNBC & CNN? Who writes these slanted limited questions for them to read? Why do the candidates only get a few tiny minutes to respond to huge topics? Why are these so called “debates” not broadcast live on ALL major media, including C-Span, NPR and PBS without COMMERCIALS? Why should MSNBC & CNN be making money using the public owned airwaves to air OUR so called “free election debates”? Why do voters have to be in a “financial race” to generate money to BUY IN to being ALLOWED their candidates in a “free election”? This is NOT a democracy.
“…..Chuck Todd asking everyone in the first debate to give a one-word answer for “greatest political threat…….”
Exceptionalism
I’m old enough to remember when the League of Women Voters asked the questions, they asked fair, relevant and probing questions. All of that came to end when George H.W. Bush thought that they suckered him and after that “journalists” started asking the questions.
I think that a grave disservice has been done to working Americans by removing the League of Women Voters from the questioning! That may have contributed towards the hammering away of our democracy – because real debate is no longer possible. WE the PEOPLE deserve better!