Top Five History-Based Holiday Ideas

big shoe

The controversy over Columbus Day got me to thinking of history-based holidays we could have, if only we thought a little harder. They’re not in order of preference, but in calendar order:

  1. Rubicon Day — OK, so this didn’t happen in America. But Julius Caesar’s decision to cross that creek with his troops had a huge effect on something that matters to Americans. It ended the last republic we would see for 1,000 years. But I’m also thinking we could have some fun with it. We could have toga parties each Jan. 10, and go around saying “iacta alea est” to each other. Maybe not your idea of a good time, but maybe we could make a drinking game out of it.
  2. British Invasion Day — No, it’s not about 1814. It’s about 1964, and this holiday would be pure fun. We’d celebrate it on February 9, the day the Beatles first appeared on “The Ed Sullivan Show.” We’d all play music by the Beatles, the Stones, Herman’s Hermits, the Animals, Freddie and the Dreamers, Peter and Gordon, and so forth. We’d have theme parties in which we’d all dress like the invaders, and go around saying “gear” and “fab.” And if you said bad things about the holiday, we’d all say you were “dead grotty.”
  3. Lincoln’s Birthday, Feb. 12 — Yes, bring it back, and repeal this “President’s Day” nonsense, in order to drive home the fact that he was our greatest president, and is largely responsible for America being America, having thrown off its original sin via that war that we fight on until the slave states’ unconditional surrender — and making sure it didn’t end until the 13th Amendment was passed, so that all that bloodshed served a purpose. Sorry about the run-on sentence…
  4. Smallpox Day — This is sort of related to the idea of “Indigenous People’s Day,” but I actually have three reasons to mark the day. First, it seems to me that the most horrific public health disaster in human history (way bigger than the Black Death) was back in the 16th century when 95 percent of the native population was wiped out by European diseases for which they had no resistance — usually before the victims had even encountered the Europeans. Something so awful should be remembered. My second reason is celebratory — celebrating the fact that we’ve been so successful at wiping out the disease that a rite of passage of my childhood, the “vaccination” (that’s what we called it; we didn’t know what it was for), is unknown to today’s children. Third, as a warning — that it could come back some day, and we need to fully prepared to wipe it out again if it does. This would be on May 17, the birthday of Edward Jenner.
  5. Independence Day, July 2 — So that we’d be celebrating the actual day that Congress voted to declare independence, not the day that the document’s final edits were approved. This is personal, because John Adams is my fave Founder, and this was day that HE thought should be celebrated, after his weeks of hard work arguing the Congress into taking this momentous step — debate during which Thomas Jefferson, who gets the glory, sat there like a bump on a log. Harrumph…
One idea for celebrating Rubicon Day.

One idea for celebrating Rubicon Day.

80 thoughts on “Top Five History-Based Holiday Ideas

  1. bud

    Ok, I’ll take a crack at this:

    War is Hell Reminder Day – June 28 (1914). The day the Archduke of Austria was assassinated. It’s a good day to remind people of just how foolish national leaders can be when it comes to matters of war.

    First Flight Day – December 17 (1903). This one is pretty self explanatory. What unfolded following this event has been extraordinary.

    Underground Railroad Day – September 17 (1849). This was the day Harriet Tubman and her brothers escaped from Slavery. A movie about her life is coming out soon. Can’t wait to see it.

    Football Day – June 4, (1875). The first football game played with essentially modern American football rules such as 11 men on a team and carrying the football until tackled. The touchdown was also established in this game. The opponents were Harvard vs Tufts University.

    First Responders Day – September 11 (2001). This has already developed into a day of commemoration. We could take one positive from this terrible day by paying tribute to the courage and determination of the first responders who sacrificed that day and for many years afterward. And also commemorate first responders everywhere.

    Climate Change Day – March 21 (1994). This was the day the first international treaty addressing the dangers of global warming – United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

    Florence Nightingale Day – October 21 (1854). The day Nightingale and her fellow nurses arrived in Crimea to deal with the horrible conditions of the wounded. Her contributions to the care of wounded soldiers has had a profound effect on the treatment of the wounded.

    Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Day – April 10 (1866). The day the American Society for the Cruelty to Animals was founded in the US. We’ve come a long way in eradicating the hideous practice of cruelty to animals. For example fur coats are pretty much gone and circuses are generally getting away from the practice of elephant shows. But much still remains to be done. Vegan is the way of the future.

    Reply
    1. Brad Warthen Post author

      Some good ideas — in fact, I think it may be better than my own list overall (I’m just going to ignore Football Day, though — I look around me, and it seems like every day is Football Day)…

      And one of yours (First Flight) is similar to one I meant to go back and add:

      Moon Day, July 20 — I really think that, if our species is still around in 10,000 years, the first moon landing will likely be THE event that is still remembered and seen as significant. It would be seen as the first of millions of steps — if mankind gets off its butt and resumes space exploration….

      I was thinking of another one last night, but it’s slipping my mind now…

      Reply
      1. David T

        “I really think that, if our species is still around in 10,000 years”

        I highly doubt we will be, we’re merely a blip in the history of this planet. Think about it, dinosaurs roamed this planet for hundreds of millions of years, modern man hasn’t even been around for 5000 years and done more damage in the past 100 years than in the previous 4900. I’m no tree hugger, but I do believe Mother Nature will take care of this parasitic problem herself…. humans are about as useful to this planet as gnats are to humans. I give us maybe another 1000 years.

        Reply
        1. Mark Stewart

          “Modern” humans have been around for about 50,000 years; and complex civilizations for something less than 15,000 years. What we call recorded history began about 6,000 years ago. Biblical history talks about cultures 5,000 years old.

          Human ancestrers are apparently close to 400,000 years old at this point in our discovery of that timeline.

          Reply
      2. Norm Ivey

        We’ll still be here. We’re going to have to make drastic changes, but we are not only the most adaptable large species on the planet, we are the most adapting, meaning we have the knowledge ans technology to alter our environment. I think the greatest threat to our continued existence is an as-yet-unencountered disease.

        Reply
  2. Norm Ivey

    My non-nominees:

    Television Day (September 27): A technology that had an opportunity to educate the citizenry did just the opposite, and caused us to rearrange our parlors from conversation centers to look more like a place of worship for the boob tube.

    Residential Air Conditioning Day (??): This technology made us close our doors and windows, cutting us off from our communities.

    Commercial Oil Production Day (August 27th): If we had left the stuff in the ground, we’d be so much better off today.

    Atomic Energy Day (August 6 or 9): Not because of any moral judgement of right or wrong, but because if the weapons had not been the world’s introduction to nuclear power, we’d be doing more with it now.

    Time Travel Day (??): Because if and when travel into the past is discovered, I’m pretty sure we’re going to muck things up. Or did. Or whatever.

    Reply
    1. Brad Warthen Post author

      Good ones, although I’m thinking the Internet is a way bigger deal than TV. Before the 90s, I would have seen TV as the one development that did the most to rewire the human brain, but the effect on human cognition of the Web is exponentially greater.

      The effects are staggering. Aside from the fact that it’s tearing us apart socially and politically — elevating extremism, creating a new sort of mob rule (cancel culture being but one manifestation), destroying the ability of millions to see reality clearly, and so forth — it’s rewiring people from birth and redefining human priorities. I’m thinking of all those young people don’t have sex, don’t date, don’t care about driving cars, don’t hang out with friends in person, etc., because they spend all their time online…

      Reply
      1. bud

        I’m thinking of all those young people don’t have sex, don’t date, don’t care about driving cars,
        -Brad

        They don’t drink, smoke or do drugs as much as folks did in the 50s, 60s, 70s or 80s either. They’re also not getting VD or pregnant, suffering heart break or dying in traffic crashes as often. So really this is kind of a mixed bag sort of thing. Frankly the latest technical gizmo probably had the same effect on earlier generations as well. Take radio. I’m sure my grandfather had to shut that device off in the 1920s to get my dad to go outside and ride his bike. I can hear him now, “Edwin, shut that dang Lone Ranger off and get outside!” For me it was TV, once referred to as the boob tube. Gilligan’s Island was hardly a brain stimulant. (Mary Ann or Ginger?) My kids had traditional video games. Many hours wasted on Mario Cart. Now it’s social media. At least kids today are engaging with other humans. This too shall pass.

        Reply
        1. David T

          However kids today are taking social media with them when they go outside. Go visit the USC campus during a class change, are those students engaging in conversation with each other or are they walking like zombies staring at their phone?

          Reply
          1. Brad Warthen Post author

            I walk around the campus when the weather is suitable (I walked in a deserted mall each day during the summer, but have started walking the campus again in recent years). And of course, you’re right. But I find them engaged in another activity almost as much as staring at their phones — taking pictures of each other. With their phones, of course, but also quite frequently with SLR cameras.

            I don’t mean candids, action shots, or impromptu selfies. I mean formal poses. These are usually taken on the Horseshoe, but sometimes in front of the pool in front of Thomas Cooper Library.

            This has to be the posingest generation in human history….

            Reply
      2. Norm Ivey

        I’m a little less critical of the web. While it has done all of the things you describe, it’s also undone some of the effects of TV. And one of the greatest things it’s done is made young people not just tolerant of differences, but accepting and welcoming of them.

        Reply
  3. Brad Warthen Post author

    Looking back, I’m having second thoughts about some of the ones on my list. Rubicon Day?

    SMALLPOX Day?

    I must have been in the middle of celebrating Hallucinogen Day when I came up with that one…

    Reply
  4. Doug Ross

    Billionaire Appreciation Day: April 16. The day we set aside to thank the top 1% of income earners who pay more in income taxes than the bottom 90%. Without them, the federal government wouldn’t exist.

    Tax Freedom Day: variable.. Calculated each year as the point where all income covers all government spending for the year. This year it was April 10.. We work the first three months for the government.

    Super Bowl Monday: This would be supported by most Americans.

    Reply
    1. Barry

      “Billionaire Appreciation Day: April 16. The day we set aside to thank the top 1% of income earners who pay more in income taxes than the bottom 90%. Without them, the federal government wouldn’t exist.”

      Heck, maybe we would not waste so much money if those billionaires had to pay a significant part of their income to the government. Let’s give it a try.

      Reply
      1. bud

        Barry lay off the billionaires. They are Doug’s heroes. Most teenagers growing up in the 70s had a poster of Farrah Fawcett on their bedroom wall. Doug probably had a poster of J. Paul Getty or John D. Rockefeller.

        Reply
        1. Doug Ross

          I didn’t understand how important billionaires were until I was an adult and understood facts. But I’d put a poster of Bill Gates and Warren Buffett on my wall now if my wife would let me. They are geniuses.

          Reply
            1. David T

              I wonder if either of them have teams of tax attorneys or if they just do their own taxes and take the usual deductions that everyone else takes. If they want to pay more taxes then they’re required to pay the government will accept their additional payments.

              Reply
              1. Barry

                Their issue isn’t just what they pay. Their issue is what people like them pay too. Therefore you have a public policy debate.

                Reply
      2. Doug Ross

        That makes zero sense. Giving the government more money is like giving Michael Jackson a key to the kindergarten.

        Are my facts incorrect? Who pays for most of federal income taxes?

        Reply
        1. Barry

          “Who pays for most of federal income taxes?”

          Irrelevant.

          My trust fund neighbor with the Porsche pays more in auto taxes than my dollar store manager neighbor with the Ford Tempo.

          That he pays the most taxes tells us ZERO about what he should be paying.

          Reply
          1. David T

            So what you’re saying is that both neighbors should be paying equal taxes on those vehicles. Because they weigh close to the same weight and do equally as much wear and tear to the streets and highways. I’d agree with that.

            Reply
          2. Doug Ross

            From Rand Paul today in response to an AOC tweet that read “Tax The Rich!:”

            “Those making over $200,000 comprise just over 5 percent of the nation’s taxpayers, earn 32.3 percent of the income, but pay 46.7 percent of total federal taxes and 70 percent of federal income taxes.”

            70% paid by 5%. And that’s not enough for some of you. The same people probably complain when there isn’t enough lobster at the free buffet.

            Reply
            1. Mark Stewart

              It’s people who make >$5 million who pay the lowest taxes as a % of income, Doug. We no longer have a progressive tax code, it drops way off for those with the assets to financially engineer their taxes…

              Reply
              1. David T

                Are you one of those people who thinks the person who makes the most money should pick up the check every time you go out with a group? Or do you prefer that everyone pay for what they ordered? It sounds like you should be more angry at those who write the tax codes than those who have the ability to employ those who can use those written tax codes to their advantage.

                Reply
                1. Mark Stewart

                  Did you see what happened with the “Trump” tax cut? The people who pay the lobbyists are the same as the one’s who benefit from this top-end cut. It was all a smokeshow – have you STILL not caught on to that?

                  And I’m not angry at anyone. This is a discussion about politics. I have a life to live.

                2. David T

                  Did your taxes go down after the Trump tax cut? Mine did. Not a lot but they still went down. Not that much because they started in the middle of a tax year. This year will be the true test as to how much less I paid than two years ago (skip the modified tax rate from last year).

                  This is no different than the Obamacare health coverage, how many employed people actually saw a cost savings? The only ones I know who benefited were those living below the poverty line. The people hurt the most were those who were self employed and saw their premiums quadruple as well as their co-pays.

                3. Brad Warthen Post author

                  I don’t know. I don’t really keep track of stuff like that. I sign what the accountant has me sign, and pretty much forget about it.

                  The one year I remember sort of what I had to pay was the tax year 1987. It’s the year I left Kansas to move to SC, and I was so eager to do so I took a 25-percent cut in pay. It was also rough because I had to pay most of my moving expenses out of my pocket. The State was such an insular institution in those days that the didn’t have a budget for paying moving expenses for new hires, because before me (I was the first editor to come to the paper after Knight Ridder bought it), they had never hired an editor from out of state.

                  And yet, despite those financial blows, it was the first year in my life that I had to PAY at tax time — that is, the first time I hadn’t had enough withheld.

                  What makes this stick out in my mind is that this was the first full year that much-ballyhooed Reagan tax “reform” — sometimes simply called a tax “cut” — went into place. It gave me a super raw deal…

                4. Brad Warthen Post author

                  “Are you one of those people who thinks the person who makes the most money should pick up the check every time you go out with a group?”

                  If it’s a work gathering, yes. The boss should pay (and get reimbursed, if the gathering has any sort of work aspect to it).

                  I’m just programmed for that. The top guy at the first paper where I worked after college always paid, whether it was a lunch or a couple of beers after work.

                  So I learned that from him, and started doing it with my subordinates, as soon as I had any.

                  It just seemed like the classy thing to do…

                5. Mark Stewart

                  I don’t know what you mean when you say self-employed people saw their health insurance premiums “quadruple” from before to under Obamacare? My experience was that mine actually started to decrease some once Obamacare was in effect – most likely, I would think, because the self-insured plans now had competition and also because the individual market was more robust (which actuaries like). I think the false premise you are peddling is instead the idea that the year one cost of Obamacare was some magic baseline – when the reality is nobody knew that first year, and for a lot of reasons premiums were lower than it turned out they should be. But taking 2005 to today, I believe my self-insured premium has fallen a bit – but, yes, my deductible has also gone up quite a bit; though the HSA account offsets that, so it’s hard to say.

                  Here’s my bottom line on income taxes: when the rates paid for “investment” earnings are lower than they are for earned income, we have a fundimental problem in how we allocate taxes. Doug would say Damn Right! but I think most people would agree that this situation is out of whack. When we are talking about tens of millions of income, no one has earned income – it is almost all classified as investment income. So it’s the “suckers” who earn less than a couple of million dollars a year who pay the earned income taxes at the highest rates.

                6. David T

                  I’m not talking about a work lunch, I’m talking about a group of friends. Would you expect the person who makes the most money to pick up the check every time you go out rather than everyone pay their share? Afterall, he can afford it.

                  Put it this way, if we both break our arm falling off a ladder, should I be charged less by the doctor than you if I make less money than you do? We both received the exact same treatment by the same doctor, is it fair for me to pay $50 and you $500 simply just because you make 10x what I make?

                7. David T

                  I believe Doug is self employed, let’s let him answer the question of whether or not his insurance premiums and deductibles went up because of Obamacare. The people I know saw a substantial increase in premiums, a reduction in coverage and increased co-pays.

                  So let’s do away with earned income, investment income, etc… and have just plain old income. Have a flat tax, everyone pays the same rate whether you have $1 in income or $1 billion in income. No deductions, no income exemption status. The catholic church, USC, Oliver Gospel Mission all pay the same income tax rate.

                8. Doug Ross

                  Not self-employed for the past several years. My current private insurance has seen an in increase in cost and deductibles that exceeds the inflation rate for the past 4-5 years. Obamacare did nothing to make healthcare affordable except to those who couldn’t afford it in the first place. Just shifted costs…

              2. Doug Ross

                Why does the % matter? The total dollars is more important.

                Do you think it’s wrong for a person making $50K to pay 20% in taxes ($10K) versus a person making $50 million paying 15% ($7.5 million)? I think 7.5 million is a decent contribution to the benefit of everyone else. Just because they have it and have earned it doesn’t mean we’re entitled to it. Personally, I think we should have a flat tax that kicks in at some multiple of the poverty rate. Everyone pays the same. We’re all in this together.

                Reply
                1. David T

                  A flat tax or better yet a nationwide sales tax on everything except prescription medications and unprepared food (staple ingredients). None of this sales tax cap like SC has on vehicles. No one is exempt, not schools, not churches, not non-profits… everyone and every group pays the same.

                2. Mark Stewart

                  Yes, Doug, I do believe that it is an abomination that someone making millions per year can now pay less of a tax percentage than a family struggling to make $50,000 per year.

                  Here’s the deal about making a lot of money – there just isn’t much to do with it but hoard it. It’s really hard to spend it all. So the idea that there is some magical fixed number where one has paid enough is just a nonsensical trope you continue to peddle. If all other expenses decrease as a percentage as income rises then it just makes sense to have a progressive tax code.

                  At the same time I would never support the idea of a “wealth” tax – that’s a total quagmire of an idea. But taxing income progressively is the way it should be. We have got away from that and it is leading to a consolidation of wealth which is counter to a functioning democratic republic.

                3. David T

                  “Here’s the deal about making a lot of money – there just isn’t much to do with it but hoard it.”

                  So you’d like to see us go back to a progressive tax rate where after say $500,000 of income the remainder gets taxed at say 90%. Because nobody needs to have that much money. Mark how about you let me and Doug tell you how much money you’re allowed to make and how you’re allowed to spend it.

                4. Mark Stewart

                  Nope. Not at all what I meant – in any sense.

                  I said income taxes should be progressive – not punitative. A 90% tax is an asinine proposition. But so is a 15% tax on investment income when most wage earners put the earned income tax rate at something close to 25% as a median.

                  And, yes, truly wealthy people would tell you there really isn’t anywhere to put money at the rate it comes in. This is really a thing not understood by most wage-earners – which is probably a good thing or we might see a real popular uprising.

                5. Doug Ross

                  ” there just isn’t much to do with it but hoard it. ”

                  That’s why you’re probably not a billionaire. People like Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, and Warren Buffett aren’t Scrooge McDuck, swimming in a vault of cash. They spend their money, they donate their money, they invest their money in new businesses, they buy property and pay huge amounts of property tax, they buy art, they sponsor cultural events, they buy things like yachts and fancy cars that (surprise!) means a bunch of people are employed to create and design and sell those things… The amount of downstream impact of the money spent by most billionaires is incalculable. This is so basic to understand it baffles me how people don’t get it. Rich people create all sorts of jobs and opportunity for other people…

                  What kind of country would we have if we could magically set everyone’s salary to the average? It would be a cookie cutter world of mediocrity.

                6. Doug Ross

                  Mark.. Do you think the employees of the Washington Post are happy Jeff Bezos doesn’t hoard his money? How about the engineers at SpaceX who get paid by Elon Musk? Would it be fair to say there are thousands of people who appreciate that Bill Gates is spending a large portion of his wealth to eradicate diseases around the world?

                7. Barry

                  “Do you think the employees of the Washington Post are happy Jeff Bezos doesn’t hoard his money?”

                  The Post is not a charity. It makes Bezos even more money.

          3. Doug Ross

            Democrats like their millionaires like Joe Biden – who get rich and live the high life on political influence and campaign donations.

            From a Daily Beast article on the fundraising woes and excessive spending of the Biden campaign:

            “Biden’s team spent more than $923,000 on private jets during the third quarter of 2019, according to recently filed Federal Election Commission data. The expenses, all made to the company EJCR, LLC Dba Advanced Aviation Team, represented a major chunk of change—accounting for roughly one out of every 16 dollars the campaign raised.

            “During the third quarter period, the Biden campaign spent more than $20,000 at the Carlyle Hotel in New York City; more than $14,000 at the Coronado Island Marriott in San Diego; more than $4,400 at the Hotel Jerome Auberge in Aspen; more than $10,5000 at the W Hotel in Los Angeles, and more than $3,000 at the Sun Valley Resort in Sun Valley, Idaho.”

            Working man Joe. Champion of the little people — i.e. the guy who brings him his filet mignon to the penthouse suite.

            Reply
            1. Mark Stewart

              Doug, seems as though maybe you didn’t take into account the difference between overnight stays and event venue rentals in this diatribe…

              Reply
              1. David T

                Having stayed at the Hotel Jerome in Aspen… once (and not paid for by me), That $4400 bill is likely a one night stay if he stayed in a suite. I guess all of the lesser priced (which would be almost all of them in Aspen) were all booked and it was the only room available in town.

                Reply
              2. Doug Ross

                Yeah, because those are the only venues available in those typical average American cities… These were all trips to pimp out Joe to big money donors. You go where the money is… and there’s no hint of any expected quid pro quo there.

                Nice to see Joe’s concern for the climate crisis doesn’t extend to his air travel. Joe don’t do coach. (Meanwhile, I saw Bernie Sander in the Charlotte airport about a month ago by himself, carrying his own bag).

                Reply
              1. David T

                Filet mgnon is overrated. Also anyone that puts anything on a steak or ordered cooked more than medium-rare should be horse whipped.

                Reply
                1. Doug Ross

                  “Also anyone that puts anything on a steak or ordered cooked more than medium-rare should be horse whipped.”

                  On that we are in 100% agreement. A steak is a steak because it tastes like steak. I want my steak to go “Moo!” when I cut into it.

                2. Brad Warthen Post author

                  Ummm… that horse-whipping business doesn’t sound very libertarian to me…

                  Seriously, this is a hard thing to communicate across the divide.

                  I love the taste of steak, when it’s done right. I really do. But I like the taste of it MORE with ketchup. In fact, when I’m eating a particularly flavorful steak and don’t have ketchup, I feel like I’m missing out, that a great steak is being wasted — because it would be even more awesome with the ketchup…

                  By the way, I’m slightly different from Trump on this. He likes his well-done. I prefer medium-well…

    1. Bill

      A soundscape recorded by Robert Fripp in 2000 at Winter Garden (World Trade Center, NY). The soundscape was released for free nine months later, following the September 11th Attacks.

      Reply
  5. Bill

    LSD Day
    The day of celebration for the drug LSD. Many people wait in anticipation for this day to trip however they want Acid or Shrooms. The origins for this day come from within the day itself.
    December 12th at 4 P.M.
    L is the 12th letter in the alphabet therefore December
    S is the 19th letter of the alphabet therefore the 19th day
    D is the 4th letter so take a dose at 4PM.
    https://osoosoband.bandcamp.com/track/basking-in-the-glow

    Reply
      1. David T

        I was getting more at the L being the 12rh letter which is December, S being the 19th letter being December 19th and D being the 4th letter which would be 4:00 am not 4:00 pm.

        Reply
  6. Doug Ross

    Oh course. Because you’re all about taking other people’s money to pay for what you want. Newsflash: that doesn’t make you a hero.

    Do you dispute the fact that the top 1% pay more than the bottom 90%?

    Billionaires like Gates create jobs that generate billions in taxes, donate generously, and spawn entire industries. We need more of them.

    Reply
    1. bud

      Speaking Bill Gates. He was paling around with Jeffery Epstein AFTER his run it over underage sexual trysts. Not a good look for the crooked founder of Microsoft.

      Reply
    2. Barry

      “Do you dispute the fact that the top 1% pay more than the bottom 90%?”

      I don’t dispute that this repeated line is irrelevant in terms of public policy discussions on what is the right amount for them to pay.

      Reply
      1. Doug Ross

        I’m fine with the rich paying all of the taxes as long as we cut spending to half of what it is now. Then we both will be satisfied.

        Reply
  7. bud

    Winners and losers from last nights debate:
    Winners:
    Pete Buttigieg – Even more solid than in other debates. I can see myself pulling the lever for Mayor Pete.
    Julian Castro – A kinder, gentler version of the former mayor of San Antonio.
    Bernie Sanders – Same ole Bernie. Importantly he looked pretty robust.
    Amy Klobuchar – Her delivery was a bit shaky but her answers were spot on.
    Joe Biden – Not a great performance by any means but mostly competent which is what he needed.
    Kamala Harris – Pretty decent night overall. No real standout moment though.
    Cory Booker – Not his best but he came across as a uniter which is what we need right now.

    Losers:
    Andrew Yang – Wonky style is endearing. Perhaps not presidential though
    Beto O’Rourke – Lost the exchange with Major Pete. Should not have picked a fight with a war veteran about courage.
    Tom Steyer – A billionaire trying to come across as an ordinary guy just doesn’t work. He looked out of place. Stick with making commercials.
    Elizabeth Warren – Answer the damn question! Will middle class taxes go up under your plan. The more she dodges this the worse she looks. I’m profoundly disappointed with this obfuscation. Also got pummeled on wealth tax idea. Bad night for the senator from Massachusetts.
    Tulsi Gabbard – The new Marianne Williamson! She really looked like a crackpot last night.

    Reply
      1. Brad Warthen Post author

        I’ll say this for her, though: She’s more rational on abortion than most of the rest:

        I agree with Hillary Clinton on one thing, disagree with her on many others, but when she said abortion should be safe, legal, and rare, I think she’s correct. We see how the consequences of laws that you’re referring to can often lead to a dangerous place, as we’ve seen them as they’re passed in other countries, where a woman who has a miscarriage past that six weeks could be imprisoned because abortion would be illegal at that point.

        I do, however, think that there should be some restrictions in place. I support codifying Roe v. Wade while making sure that, during the third trimester, abortion is not an option unless the life or severe health consequences of a woman are at risk….

        Reply
      2. Barry

        “Tulsi a crackpot?”

        That’s a nice word for her. She is a non issue, rightfully so. She sounds like Putin’s best friend, except for Trump.

        Reply
  8. Mark Stewart

    I would like to see alll the loosers on Bud’s list retire from the field post-haste. Pretty sure Warren will not ever get that she is not going to win votes – myopic is her even more than shrill.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *