October 23, 2020

Hallelujah! The muting of each candidate during his opponent’s opening answers might have actually resurrected some sense of what a presidential debate should look like. We could actually hear the contenders speak. Going into the debate, I feared for Kristen Welker, the moderator, given Trump’s propensity for attacking and demeaning women, particularly Black women. Thankfully, he did not tell her she was “rude” or “hostile,” as he reportedly once said to veteran journalist April Ryan. He didn’t tell her to “be nice” and “not threatening,” as he once said to PBS NewsHour’s Yamiche Alcindor. Nor did he call Welker a “monster,” as he has said of Senator Kamala Harris. NBC’s Welker had complete control, and, as we saw just a few weeks ago, attempting to control Trump is not for the faint of heart.

Thursday’s debate succeeded in doing exactly what our democracy demands. It gave the American public an opportunity to judge the content of the character of the men who wish to lead the greatest nation on earth. If you were unable to do so before Thursday night, you should now be able to answer the question of what you want our nation to stand for. Will we elect a man who sees the nation as red states and blue states, or a man who, as Biden said, would be an “American president”? Will we elect a man who seemingly has no remorse for the 223,000 Americans who have died of Covid-19, or the more than 44,000 children who were diagnosed with the virus in the past week alone? Will we elect a man who compares himself to Abraham Lincoln, and believes that he has done more for the African American community than any other president? Will we elect a man who is responsible for separating 545 children from their parents at the border and has no plan to reunite them? Will we elect a man who throws out terms meant to divide us—“the China virus,” “coyotes” “pigs in a blanket,” “AOC plus three”—and then declares that he’s the least racist person in the room?

Biden was superb; this was arguably the best debate performance he has ever had. He had the tone, tenor, demeanor and empathy of the president that so many Americans long for. He was almost “Obamaesque,” and succeeded in reminding the American public and the world what our nation stood for four very long years ago.

Trump’s behavior and the dizzying number of primary candidates this cycle have probably changed presidential debates forever, but we need debates, muting or not. When done well, they can reflect what the soul of our nation can and should be.

Michelle Bernard is a political analyst, lawyer, author, and president and CEO of the Bernard Center for Women, Politics & Public Policy.

The post “Attempting to control Trump is not for the faint of heart” appeared first on Bernard Center.

10/08/2020 01:00 AM EDT

The vice presidential debate made three things crystal clear: We are not yet a post-racial nation. We are not yet a post-sexist nation. And Mike Pence is nothing more than Donald Trump’s white-haired, achromatic, smooth-talking doppelganger.

Like Trump, Pence refused to abide by the rules both campaigns agreed to in advance. Pence’s performance was just a kinder, gentler version of Trump’s WWE-worthy brawl just one week ago.

Pence ran roughshod over the debate moderator and literally stole Sen. Kamala Harris’ speaking time. He repeatedly and intentionally interrupted Harris. He incessantly spoke over Harris. He exceeded the time allotted him to answer questions or rebut statements made by Harris. On at least three occasions, Harris had to remind Pence that she was speaking, thus demanding that he stop interrupting her and allow her to speak. He rarely answered the question asked of him by the moderator, but demanded that Harris answer his questions. He repeatedly glared at Harris. He made sure to pepper his responses with words meant to rile up his base, like “liberal,” “Hillary Clinton,” “pro-life,” “sanctity of human life” and “Dr. Fauci.”

If she were a white male, Harris could have pulled a Biden and told Pence to “shut up.” She could have remarked, “It’s hard to get any word in with this clown.” However, doing so would have meant risking the label of the “angry Black woman” that haunted Michelle Obama during her husband’s first presidential race—and plagues ambitious, forceful Black women to this day.

If she were a white male, she could have pulled a Trump, and turned the tables on the debate moderator for her inability to rein in Pence. She could have declared, “I guess I’m debating you, not him.”

Watching this debate, it was clear in Pence’s treatment of Harris and the debate moderator that a Trump-Pence administration wants a United States of Gilead, not a United States of America.

Michelle Bernard is a political analyst, lawyer, author, and president and CEO of the Bernard Center for Women, Politics & Public Policy.

The post The VP Debate: “Pence’s Performance was Just A Kinder, Gentler Version of Trump’s WWE-worthy Brawl Just One Week Ago” appeared first on Bernard Center.

By, Michelle D. Bernard

‘It was the most undignified, unpresidential presidential debate in the history of the country’

It was the most undignified, unpresidential presidential debate in the history of the country. The moderator appeared impotent in his ability to wrangle and control of Trump and, at times, Biden. Trump was like a wild beast, relentlessly charging his opponent and the moderator. In between lies, name calling and dog whistling, he told the world all we needed to know about him: He is not the president of all Americans. He is the president of those who would deny American women the right to choose. He is the president of those who would deny health care to millions of Americans. He is the president of those who equate democratic norms with socialism. He is the president of those who don’t believe in science. He is the president of those who believe that those who died in war are “losers” and “suckers.” And, he is the president of those who refuse to condemn white supremacists, who refuse to say that Black lives matter, and who believe that the killing of unarmed black women and men under the guise of “law and order” is an act of patriotism.

After Tuesday night, the American people may very well declare, “A pox on presidential debates! Give me Biden or give me Netflix.”

Michelle Bernard is a political analyst, lawyer, author, and president and CEO of the Bernard Center for Women, Politics & Public Policy.

The post The Trump-Biden Presidential Debate: “Give Me Biden or Give Me Netflix.” appeared first on Bernard Center.

Published in Politico Magazine, March 16, 2020

By, Michelle D. Bernard

For Bernie Sanders, the 11th Democratic primary debate was Custer’s Last Stand.

And Sanders was Custer.

It was the effective end of democratic socialism.

As with Custer, in the short term, many will romanticize Sanders’ loss. They will see him as their Robin Hood—the man who asked important questions about the “corporate elite”; vilified billionaires; advocated for “Medicare for All,” free college, the “Green New Deal” and “workplace democracy.” At first, maybe even for decades, some of his supporters may demand revenge for his defeat. Some may refuse to support Biden and the Democratic Party. Some may stay home on Election Day. Others may vote for Trump. Many will forever see him as a heroic man of the people, victimized by the Democratic establishment.

However, today, tomorrow, and possibly 100 years from now, the history books may see things quite differently than some of today’s Sanders supporters do.

Sanders was defeated in a debate at a time when everything the United States stands for and stands to lose is at stake. The nation is in the midst of a pandemic. Schools and businesses are shuttering their doors. Many Americans lack health insurance or are underinsured. Closures and shutdowns may be imminent. Jobs will be lost. Homes may be lost. Countless lives are at stake.

Add to this the changing demographics of the country; the gender gap; the thousands of women and people of color painfully aggrieved by the losses of Cory Booker, Julián Castro, Kamala Harris, Amy Klobuchar, Elizabeth Warren and Andrew Yang to two septuagenarian white men; and the extraordinary pragmatism of the members of the Democratic Party who can be relied upon to stand in line for as many hours as it takes to vote.

And add to this Biden’s unequivocal commitment to name a female running mate if nominated; his pragmatism; his understanding of what would have happened to America’s workforce if Wall Street had not been bailed out in 2008; his willingness to enlist the Army in building 500-bed hospitals to confront the coronavirus; his willingness to reach out to the progressive left on issues like Sanders’ plan to make public colleges and universities free for certain families; and his place in our nation’s history as a white man who stood behind the nation’s first African American president through thick and thin. And Sanders no longer looks like a hero, but more like a man who was misguided by hubris and led his army to a resounding defeat.

Michelle Bernard is a political analyst, lawyer, author and president and CEO of the Bernard Center for Women, Politics & Public Policy.

The post The 11th Democratic Presidential Primary Debate: “Bernie’s Last Stand.” appeared first on Bernard Center.

Published in Politico Magazine, 02/26/2020 01:41 AM EST

By, Michelle D. Bernard

In the wake of Sanders’ decisive victory in Nevada with a broad coalition that included the largest number of nonwhite voters in the state, I could see why so many “feel the Bern.” I saw why so many Americans of every race, ethnicity, sex, gender and religion support Sanders’ bid for the presidency. I saw a man who appears to understand the fears, hopes and dreams of all Americans in a way that we have not seen since Barack Obama left office.

Then, I watched Tuesday’s Democratic debate.

What a mess.

It was exhausting. At times, I felt as if I was watching a team of 5-year-old kids peacocking for attention. They raised their hands incessantly, talked over and interrupted one another frequently, and ignored the questions they were asked to discuss whatever they felt like discussing. Bloomberg even delivered an incredibly bizarre joke about the Naked Cowboy that no one outside New York could have comprehended.

It was impossible for any of the candidates to even begin to pretend to look presidential in an atmosphere so focused on pummeling one another at any cost.

So, in this very unpresidential presidential debate, the winners were Bloomberg, Buttigieg, Sanders, Steyer and Warren. The losers were Biden, Klobuchar and, quite possibly, the Democratic Party.

On issues of racial and economic justice, Steyer really stood out. His statements on these issues gave him standing with the African American community that he probably hasn’t enjoyed to date. For the first time over the many weeks of debates, he made us want to listen to and believe in him.

As always, Warren was superior on issues of gender, racial and economic justice. However, Tuesday’s attack on Bloomberg didn’t seem to resonate with the audience and may have caused her campaign more harm than good. Bloomberg does not appear to be a Harvey Weinstein, and the allegation made against him and voiced in the debate will inevitably be investigated. If it proves to be inaccurate, Warren’s attack on Bloomberg may hurt her campaign and the #MeToo movement. If it turns out to be accurate, Bloomberg will be out of the race.

Bloomberg’s discussion about his experience with charter schools in New York was a beautiful symphony for the ears of the thousands of people of color who are advocates of school choice. His work in creating Moms Demand Action and Everytown for Gun Safety are huge feathers in his cap, but his ability to get things done may not be enough for him to dispel the myth that he is a Republican in Democratic clothing.

Biden and Klobuchar were fine, but fine isn’t good enough. They just didn’t rise to a level that seems capable of putting together a coalition close to anything that will be needed to win the 2020 election. If Biden or Klobuchar loses South Carolina, their campaigns will effectively be taken off life support.

The Democratic Party has changed drastically before our very eyes. The caucuses in Nevada proved that a large swath of Democrats of every demographic believe in and want all of the things that Sanders and Warren are promising. The phrase “democratic socialist” doesn’t frighten many of them. However, no matter how boring he was in demeanor, Bloomberg was correct when he declared that the country just can’t afford many of the things that are being promised. Most Americans must know that a wealth tax will not propel a Democrat into the White House; that there will never be government-mandated free tuition for public colleges and universities; and that capitalism is as American as apple pie.

Michelle Bernard is a political analyst, lawyer, author and president and CEO of the Bernard Center for Women, Politics & Public Policy.

The post The 10th Democratic Presidential Primary Debate: “It was Exhausting” appeared first on Bernard Center.

By, Michelle D. Bernard, Published in POLITICO MAGAZINE

02/20/2020 01:50 AM EST

Michelle Bernard is a political analyst, lawyer, author and president and CEO of the Bernard Center for Women, Politics & Public Policy.

After 10 weeks of hype, millions of dollars spent on ads, endorsements from highly respected members of the African American community and a double-digit surge in the polls, we learned that Bloomberg does not deserve any of the African American support he has received to date. From stop and frisk to overt and unapologetic sexism, the former mayor appears to be nothing more than Trump bathed in blue.

I watched this heavily anticipated debate wondering whether Bloomberg and his billions can beat Trump and herald in an era of racial, gender and religious justice—all casualties of Trump’s presidency. Bloomberg failed miserably.

It doesn’t matter how many African Americans of note endorse him. In his debate performance and his failure to respond to questions about stop and frisk and discrimination against communities of color, Bloomberg gave me no reason to believe that if elected, he would be any different than Trump. There was no real apology. No declaration of shame. No statement about the need for racial or gender justice.

In watching him on the debate stage, I saw only the faces of Sandra Bland, Trayvon Martin, Atatiana Jefferson, Michael Brown, Natasha McKenna, Sean Bell, Amadou Diallo and all of the other African Americans who have been persecuted by and lost their lives as a result of police violence. I saw all of the black boys and men in New York thrown up against walls, terrorized and searched repeatedly by NYPD because of a bigoted assumption by Bloomberg that brown skin is to be equated with criminality. In Bloomberg, I saw “Golfcart Gail,” “Permit Patty,” “BBQ Becky,” “Cornerstore Caroline,” and all of the white women who have called the police on black people for things like yelling instructions at their own child during a soccer match or charcoal grilling without a permit. And in Bloomberg, I saw white men scheming about ways to suppress the black vote and laughing behind the backs of women they “would do in a minute.”

The emperor has no clothes.

And then, there was Warren, who took one helluva a stand. She skewered Bloomberg, making sure that America knows that Bloomberg is no different than Trump, as evidenced by his reportedly calling women “fat broads” and “horsey faced lesbians.” On Bloomberg’s stop and frisk, Warren declared: “This isn’t about how stop and frisk turned out. This is about what it was designed to do to begin with. It targeted communities of color. It targeted black and brown men from the beginning.” She forced the issue of environmental justice and the impact of environmental policy on communities of color. She masterfully attacked the issue of nondisclosure agreements relating to the treatment of women in Bloomberg’s workforce, using the term “muzzle” in a way that any woman in the workplace could relate to. Warren dispelled any doubt that she can beat Trump, and she proved that she is everything women and communities of color could want in the next president of the United States.

This article appeared in Politico Magazine on February 20, 2020 at 01:50 AM EST

The post The 9th Democratic Presidential Primary Debate: “Bloomberg Failed Miserably” appeared first on Bernard Center.

February 19, 2020 5:00 AM ET By Bobby Allyn

He isn’t on the ballot in Nevada’s caucuses, but billionaire and former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg will be on the national debate stage for the first time, joining five other Democratic candidates Wednesday night during the debate in Las Vegas. He qualified after surging in the polls.

Bloomberg is expected to endure heavy attacks from his opponents, and his performance may be a crucial test of his candidacy, political experts say, and for the party’s 2020 nominating fight.

On Tuesday, Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren said “it’s a shame” that Bloomberg “can buy his way into the debate. She tweeted: “At least now primary voters curious about how each candidate will take on Donald Trump can get a live demonstration of how we each take on an egomaniac billionaire.”

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, who is the front-runner in Nevada in several polls, took similar aim at Bloomberg.

“Democracy to me means one person, one vote, not Bloomberg or anybody else spending hundreds of millions of dollars trying to buy an election,” Sanders said.

Some political analysts say anti-billionaire broadsides from the other Democratic candidates are to be expected during the Nevada debate.

“Bloomberg risks being viscerally attacked and damaged by taking part in this debate, especially by Bernie, and the rest of the field saying he is trying to buy his way to presidency,” said national pollster John Zogby.

Political analyst Michelle Bernard, who runs the Bernard Center for Women, Politics & Public Policy, points out that the tactic might not connect with voters the way Bloomberg’s competitors hope.

“There’s a problem when you denigrate people who have been able to do well financially. There are many Americans, probably most Americans, who look to that kind of wealth to something they aspire to be able to achieve,” Bernard said. “Candidates who do that put themselves on the side of the party that looks like quote-unquote ‘socialists.’ “

No matter what kind of swipes rivals make on Bloomberg, Bernard said a weak performance could prove influential to voters.

“It’s possible he’ll hit that debate stage and the public will say, ‘the emperor has no clothes,’ so he’s really got to be prepared for what could make or break his campaign and how he’ll do on Super Tuesday,” she said. “It’s going to be an enormous test for him.”

Bloomberg has a novel strategy that he hopes will make him the Democratic Party’s nominee. If successful, it would be unprecedented: forgoing early nominating contests and instead focusing on delegate-rich Super Tuesday, when 14 states will vote on March 3.

Skipping early states and going all-in on Super Tuesday is a risky bet, Zogby says.

As one of the richest people in the world, worth some $64 billion, Bloomberg has seemingly boundless cash to expend on his campaign.

Indeed, Bloomberg has spent some $300 million on political advertising so far, which is more than several of the other Democratic candidates combined. He has hired thousands of campaign staffers and is positioning himself as a centrist candidate who is best poised to take on Donald Trump in November.

But as Bloomberg’s profile has risen, so has the scrutiny. He has been forced to defend himself over his previous adamant support of the police tactic known as stop and frisk, which critics say law enforcement uses to racially profile pedestrians. Audio of blunt comments he made in 2015 about throwing suspects against walls and frisking them recently resurfaced, prompting Bloomberg to apologize again for his advocacy of stop and frisk as mayor of New York City.

He has also faced criticism for remarks he made claiming the end of discriminatory housing practices known as “redlining,” which systemically deprived people of color of the ability to secure financing to purchase homes, helped spark the 2008 economic downturn.

“The clips and things we’re hearing about from the past are unbelievably damaging,” Bernard said. “If he cannot come out incredibly strong, it could be the end for him. The other candidates are tried and tested. They’ve been able to hone their message.”

Wednesday night’s debate comes as the moderate wing of the party is still trying to consolidate among former Vice President Joe Biden, former South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar.

Sanders has shown himself to be the progressive favorite after a chaotic start to the nominating process. Warren has lost ground to Sanders but could rebound following the Las Vegas debate.

Meanwhile, Bloomberg was able to qualify for Wednesday’s night debate from rule changes instituted by party leaders that nixed the requirement that candidates meet an outside donation threshold to be onstage.

The old rules would have blocked Bloomberg from the debate, since he is self-funded through his vast fortune and not accepting campaign contributions.

For the Nevada debate, presidential hopefuls had to either capture 10% support in four polls, or 12% in two polls in South Carolina and Nevada. Five other candidates made the cut as well: Joe Biden, Pete Buttigieg, Amy Klobuchar, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren.

Recently released surveys, including a new NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll, provided Bloomberg the percentages he needed to get into the Nevada debate.

The squaring off among top Democratic contenders comes as Bloomberg has been under scrutiny over the reemergence of past comments about race, as well as reporting on sexist comments Bloomberg made in years past.

He and Sanders have been engaged in especially harsh attacks in recent days, with Sanders supporters seizing on the controversial comments from Bloomberg’s past and the candidate accusing him of trying to “buy the presidency.”

Bloomberg’s campaign is tying Sanders to Trump, saying both are fearful of the moderate Democrat, and former Republican, candidate’s appeal.

As part of Bloomberg’s effort to clinch the nomination and deny Trump a second term, the former New York mayor has pumped millions into a digital media campaign in which his campaign is paying popular meme accounts on Instagram to publish content about him in an effort to engage younger voters.

“Mike Bloomberg 2020 has teamed up with social creators to collaborate with the campaign, including the meme world,” Bloomberg campaign spokeswoman Sabrina Singh said in a statement. “While a meme strategy may be new to presidential politics, we’re betting it will be an effective component to reach people where they are and compete with President Trump’s powerful digital operation.”

This article appeared on NPR.org on February 20, 2020 at 5:05 AM EST.

The post The Nevada Debate Could Be A ‘Make Or Break’ For Bloomberg appeared first on Bernard Center.

Senators Amy Klobuchar and Elizabeth Warren, the leading female candidates in the 2020 Democratic primary race, are polling in fifth and sixth place nationally. Michelle Bernard, President of Bernard Center for Women, Politics and Public Policy, tells MSNBC’s Ali Velshi why she believes female candidates are treated differently in politics than their male counterparts.

Video here: MSNBC Live with Ali Velshi, February 13, 2020.

The post Why Female Presidential Candidates Are Treated Differently appeared first on Bernard Center.

Democratic Presidential Candidate former South Bend Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg speaks during a Democratic presidential primary debate, Friday, February 7, 2020, hosted by ABC News, Apple News, and WMUR-TV at Saint Anselm College in Manchester, N.H. (AP Photo/Elise Amendola).

Michelle Bernard is a political analyst, lawyer, author and president and CEO of the Bernard Center for Women, Politics & Public Policy.

One week after Iowa, the winner of the night was ABC’s Linsey Davis. Her performance in the two debates she has co-moderated easily make her my top choice for our next commander in chief. She’s brilliant, no-nonsense, gets to the point, forces the candidates to answer the question asked and asks the questions that really matter to the American public. She is a woman who appears to be quite capable of beating Donald Trump. If only she were a Democratic candidate. Better yet, if only the DNC adopted rules that would allow a supremely qualified African American woman to take the stage. But it’s 2020, so despite my wishes, even if Davis could be coaxed into joining the madness that is the 2020 presidential campaign season, the DNC would have erased her as it did Kamala Harris, Cory Booker and Julián Castro.

So, since she’s not a candidate, it looks like the winner of the night was—(think obligatory drum roll here)—Buttigieg. And possibly Sanders followed by Klobuchar.

As for Biden, it’s not looking good at all. In fact, it’s looking really, really bad. The Obama magic seems to work only when Biden is standing literally next to Barack Obama. In Obama’s absence, substance aside, there is a certain “je ne sais quoi” about Biden that doesn’t seem to bode well for 2020.

Back to Buttigieg: Maybe it’s the Opie Taylor thing he has going on. Whatever it is, at least for the time being, it’s working. On every issue raised, he consistently delivered a message that combined empathy, respect for the American people and hope for the future that the other candidates just miss the mark in expressing. When he spoke of Medicare, I actually wanted to listen. When the others spoke about Medicare, I wanted to turn off the television. It was like this for every issue discussed over the course of the near-three-hour debate. Maybe the key to 2020 is not beating Donald Trump at his own game. It’s beating him by giving all Americans someone and something to believe in again.

This article originally appeared in Politico Magazine on February 8, 2020.

The post The 8th Democratic Presidential Primary Debate: “Maybe It’s the Opie Taylor Thing He Has Going On” appeared first on Bernard Center.

AP Photo/Patrick Semansky

By Michelle D. Bernard, Published in POLITICO MAGAZINE

01/15/2020 02:42 AM EST

Michelle Bernard is a political analyst, lawyer, author and president and CEO of the Bernard Center for Women, Politics & Public Policy.

Anne O’Hare McCormick, the renowned foreign news correspondent and a woman ahead of her time, once said: “The real test of power is not capacity to make war, but capacity to prevent it.” It is through this lens that I believe many Americans viewed Tuesday night’s Democratic presidential debate. Foreign policy and what U.S.-Iranian relations will look like in 2020 and beyond were the only issues of any consequence.

If I were a betting woman, I would argue that in the wake of the killing earlier this month of General Qassem Soleimani in a U.S. drone strike, Iran’s subsequent attack of the Ayn Al Asad airbase in Iraq and the threat of a looming war with Iran, most Americans couldn’t care less whether Sanders told Warren that a woman can’t be elected as president of the United States. This sentiment probably goes equally for women and men.

In this time, when Americans worry about the possibility of a retaliatory strike by Iran or war, raising this issue looked like throwing spaghetti at the wall, hoping it would stick and that American women would look at Sanders as a buffoon and cast their ballots for Warren simply to prove him wrong and punish him.

For any American woman whose only 2020 concern is to elect a woman as the next president of the United States, Hillary Clinton’s 2016 loss is more than enough reason to cast a ballot for Warren or Klobuchar, the two women on Tuesday night’s debate stage. What was said between Warren and Sanders in a private meeting will not be the issue that gets a woman elected in 2020.

At this moment in time, there are more important questions that transcend any voting gender gap. Who will keep us safe? Who will protect our nation and our democracy? Who will protect the lives of our troops? Who will protect our sons and daughters from an unnecessary war with Iran? Who has the foreign policy experience, ego and self-restraint necessary to prevent an unnecessary war? Looking through this lens, the clear winner is Biden. In this unfortunate era of zealotry both in the White House and in Iran, Biden’s calm and professorial demeanor was soothing. He was the dignified, restrained and highly knowledgeable foreign-policy statesman that the country yearns for. Biden was the candidate who appeared to have the best capacity to prevent war. In the scope of things, nothing else mattered.

This article originally appeared in Politico Magazine on January 15, 2020.

The post The 7th 2020 Democratic Presidential Primary Debate: “The Clear Winner Is Biden” appeared first on Bernard Center.