Round One - The Debate Recap

It's not over 'til it's over - Yogi Berra

Full disclosure. One of my goals with the blog has been to present a perspective that you wouldn't find on another venue, but NOT to be contrarian just to be a jerk. (may be an oxymoron, but whatever). So in this version of the debate recap, I'm going to address tangentially via a stroll thru memory lane the adventures of past presidential candidates and how their paths may have relevance today. So buckle up and read on.

New York, 1987. I was there. New York, 2016. I'm going back. Same city, almost 30 years difference. And what a difference it is. The New York of 1987 was the city of film noir. Dark, seedy, dangerous. I was there for a wedding in Brooklyn. I remember going to Times Square. A giant strip club that smelled of urine. Great. "Kinky Boots"? "Hamilton"? No. When I go there this fall, what do I expect? Disney. Great food. An outdoor farmer's market in Brooklyn. Taking public transportation to and from our midtown hotel. The question is, how this this come about? My answer isn't as granular as "stop and frisk", because frankly, my dear, I don't really know. But I'm confident in my answer: Rudolph Giuliani. You may disagree, but good luck with that. For better or for worse, I think Rudy singularly owns credit for the New York City we get to enjoy today. Did he do everything right? Hell, did he even do everything legally? Beats me. But if you're an "end justifies the means" person, he was the mover that did the shaking. Now he's part of the Trump "brain trust" (I had to put that in there, just 'cause writing "brain trust" and "Trump" in the same sentence is so damn funny). But, liberal friends, if you want a smaller scale version of same, I could almost as easily make the same argument for my hometown mayor, Richard J. Daley. He did a good job too. Impressions matter.

What's my point? If the perception (never mind the reality) that things are really bad, people will vote for change. And important historical note here. Rudy won on his second try versus Mayor Dinkins. Apparently things didn't suck enough in 1989. Perception matters.

Olympian. Rhodes Scholar. Professional athlete. NBA Champion. Presidential loser. In the 2000 campaign, my main man was Bill Bradley, the smartest candidate to run for office in my voting lifetime thus far. He lost in the primary to the man who invented the internet. Look no further for evidence that politics is stupid. No more glaring example on how Hillary can still lose this election. Intelligence may not matter. It hasn't in the past.

Fast forward to today. I continue to think this election will ultimately come down to themes, not details. The answer to the distilled question, "do you think we (America) are headed in the right direction?" will be the driving determinant of the majority of voters. How voters feel as we move into November will determine the outcome of the race. I don't have any doubt it's neck and neck right now.

I called yesterday's debate a draw. Each candidate played to type, and it's my guess that, regardless of spin, it probably didn't move the needle much either way. But I really doubt anyone switched sides.

That's my brief, hope you enjoyed it. Already I've moved onto the next topic, which will be full of intrigue, "what can/should Donald/Hillary do to win more voters that they aren't doing now?" It'll be fun. Thanks for reading!