WASHINGTON — Democrats spent more time making the case for their ability to beat President Donald Trump than trying to defeat each other in their fifth debate.
Civil in tone, mostly cautious in approach, the forum on Wednesday did little to reorder the field and may have given encouragement to two new entrants into the race, Mike Bloomberg and Deval Patrick.
Key takeaways:
Impeachment cloud hovers
The impeachment inquiry of President Donald Trump took up much of the oxygen early in the debate.
The questions about impeachment did little to create much separation in a field that universally condemns the Republican president.
The candidates tried mightily to pivot to their agenda. Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren talked about how a major Trump donor became the ambassador at the heart of the Ukraine scandal and reiterated her vow to not award ambassadorships to donors. Former Vice President Joe Biden tried to tout the investigation as a measure of how much Trump fears his candidacy.
Impeachment is potentially perilous to the Democratic candidates for two reasons. A Senate trial may trap a good chunk of the field in Washington just as early states vote in February. It also highlights a challenge for Democrats since Trump entered the presidential race in 2015 — shifting the conversation from Trump’s serial controversies to their own agenda.
Climate crisis gets air
The climate crisis, which Democratic voters cite as a top concern, finally gained at least some attention.
There were flashes of the debate Wednesday night, as billionaire environmental activist Tom Steyer swiped at Biden by suggesting the former vice president wants an inadequate, piecemeal approach to the crisis. Biden hit right back, reminding Steyer that he sponsored climate legislation as a senator in the 1980s while Steyer built his fortune in part on investments in coal.
Buttigieg turned a question about the effects of Trump’s policies on farmers into a call for the U.S. agriculture sector to become a key piece of an emissions-free economy.
But those details seem less important than the overall exchange — or lack thereof. Perhaps it’s the complexities of the policies involved. Or perhaps it’s just the politics. Whatever the case, the remaining field simply doesn’t seem comfortable or willing to push climate policy to the forefront, and debate moderators don’t either.
Gabbard as gadfly
Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard has carved out a distinctive role during the Democratic debates — reliable gadfly.
On Wednesday she kept sniping at her own party, standing by her comments last month that its last presidential nominee, Hillary Clinton, is the “personification of the rot that has sickened the Democratic Party for so long.”
Asked to elaborate, Gabbard said Democrats are “no longer the party that is of, by and for the people, it is a party that continues to be influenced by the foreign policy establishment in Washington, by the military-industrial complex.”
Gabbard’s fondness for slamming Democrats has led some in the party to fear she’s laying the groundwork for a third-party run, something the congresswoman denies. Her criticism Wednesday drew a sharp riposte from Harris, who said Gabbard had been on Fox News “full-time” during President Barack Obama’s administration and noting she met with Trump after the president’s election.
Gabbard dismissively replied that Harris’ response “only makes me guess that she as president will continue the status quo.” She later tangled with Buttigieg, contending he had supported sending U.S. troops to Mexico, a charge that reduced him to disbelieving chuckles.
Gabbard made the stage due to the burst of attention she got after getting into her fight with Clinton. Wednesday’s exchange showed how she can easily stay before the cameras while criticizing her own party.
The Trump campaign was quick to embrace the fight, tweeting out Gabbard’s slamming of her party.