so, i watched a small part of the debate. they're talking about immigration.

i indicated that i thought warren was going to come out swinging against sanders, and i don't think i was wrong, despite the msm coverage of the debate; she hasn't hit him directly yet, but she seems keen to interrupt him and inject herself as the replacement for him. i'm not sure if she's figured out yet that she's being used as a prop, but the moderators seemed to be suggesting that they were in the process of pivoting the coverage. and, the recent polls - however meaningless they are - have indicated she lost support after the debate, probably because she's being seen as bernie-lite. why vote for bernie-lite when bernie is running? given that this is coming from somebody that doesn't seem to understand regulatory capture, i should probably be less surprised by the poor tactical decision than i actually am.

but, i highly doubt that they came to a truce before hand; rather, it seems like her goal was to talk over him, rather than talk down to him. and, it seems to have backfired.

unsurprisingly, bernie slayed in the health care section. and, delaney offered himself up as a pinata; he walked right into it. that was what bernie needed, and it's easy to see how and why he got a bump from it.

i'm also still not sure if warren actually supports a single-payer plan or not; all she's really clarified is that she doesn't intend to tell us if she does or not.

on immigration, it's likewise not surprising to see them walk back the decriminalization thing, as that was really pretty much ridiculous. i have a no one is illegal meme on my page, and i believe that, but it's such a complicated debate with so many clauses. see, and this is what they're all doing wrong, here - they're trying to oversimplify a topic with legislation that is going to be full of complicated clauses and corollaries into a vacuous moral slogan, and then getting spun around in circles on it. they need to stand up and state this clearly: immigration is complicated. in the end, everybody stands in front of a judge, which will make a determination on a case-by-case basis. so, it's not about slogans, and it's not about values, and it's not about morals, it's about very detailed applications of a very large body of law. at least they're being more honest about it, but all they can accomplish by oversimplifying this complicated thing is coming off as demagogues, which is not appealing. at all.

so, if somebody is in detention, they should get healthcare. and, if somebody is awaiting a decision, they should get health care. but, no country on the planet extends health care to people that came into the country through improper channels. it's just not real, anywhere. they need to be specific, or at least explain that it's complicated, rather than falling back on these universals, and then getting spun around on them. because, i'll tell you what the truth is - these networks are setting them up.

i'll watch the rest later.