Become part of the movement for unbiased, accessible election information. Donate today.
Milwaukee, Wis. PBS Democratic debate (February 11, 2016)
Ballotpedia's scope changes periodically, and this article type is no longer actively created or maintained. If you would like to help our coverage grow, consider donating to Ballotpedia.
This article focuses exclusively on the sixth Democratic debate hosted by PBS on February 11, 2016. Click here to access Ballotpedia's full 2015-2016 presidential debate coverage. A schedule for Democratic primary debates can be found below.
Ballotpedia's coverage of the sixth Democratic debate—which took place February 11, 2016—includes an overview of the event's basic information, a debate preview, statistics and post-debate analysis. Polling data was used to determine which candidates participated in the debate. More information on participants and rules for inclusion can be found in the "Basic Information" tab below.
Basic Information
Date: February 11, 2016
Time: 9:00 pm EDT
Location: Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Venue: University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
Sponsors: PBS
Moderators: Gwen Ifill and Judy Woodruff
Participants
|
|
Ballotpedia's Insiders Poll
Clinton Questions Sanders’ Vision
February 12, 2016
By James A. Barnes
Hillary Clinton shook off her lopsided loss to Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders in the New Hampshire primary and gave another commanding performance in the Democratic presidential debate in Milwaukee, hosted by PBS. In a survey of more than 100 Democratic and Republican Party political insiders, more than 60 percent of the Democrats said she was the "biggest winner" of the debate.
Among the 76 Democratic Insiders—party strategists, pollsters, media consultants, activists, lobbyists and allied interest group operatives—who responded to the survey, many cited her experience and command of the issues as reasons for her success. Sanders’s strength has been what it always has been in this race: he offers a more compelling and inspirational agenda for the liberal base of the Democratic Party. Last night, Clinton sought to raise doubts about Sanders’ vision.
Clinton spent much of the early stages of the campaign trying to co-opt Sanders’ strength among the liberal wing of the party, as when she came out against the Trans Pacific Partnership trade deal that she had lauded as Secretary of State. But in last night’s debate, she repeatedly questioned the domestic plans Sanders has proposed. “Hillary began highlighting how Sanders lives in the far, far-left of the party,” said one Democratic Insider. Another echoed, “She dismantled the magic kingdom Bernie is selling to voters.” And a third predicted, “Her Johnny-one-note critique will stick, and his foreign policy weakness is glaring.” This survey was conducted anonymously to encourage candor from the Insiders.
Party insiders, who as a group have been drawn to her candidacy, in part because of her extensive knowledge of public policy and her experience in government, praised her for her competence. “The two were pretty even when it came to domestic issues, but Secretary Clinton showed her true colors and expertise in foreign policy,” observed one Democratic Insider. “It set her apart and made her the winner.” Another Democrat observed, “Hillary is so much better informed; Bernie, same old slogans about Wall Street.” A third Democrat said, “She looked by far the most presidential.” One Insider who thought Clinton won the encounter assessed it this way: “Again, this debate came down to rhetoric vs. reality. Senator Sanders has the edge on rhetoric but he can't avoid the brick wall of reality. His numbers don't add up; his foreign policy reads more like a Cold War history lesson than a grasp of today’s challenges.”
Clinton is not known for being inspirational, but last night one Democratic Insider declared, “Secretary Clinton's closing was one of the best I've seen by a presidential candidate. It was a clear, concise statement on why she wants to be president.”
Clinton also repeatedly portrayed Sanders’ expansive proposals as undermining the accomplishments of the President Barack Obama. And towards the end of the debate, Clinton pivoted off a question about presidential leadership and blasted Sanders for raising questions about the president’s. “She was in command of the facts and pointed out the differences between Obama and Sanders,” noted one Insider.
Democrats who thought Sanders prevailed in Milwaukee said that his campaign themes resonate deeper with the base of the party. “Hillary is always good tactically [but] Bernie always controls the ground of these debates,” said one Democratic Insider who thought Sanders won the debate. “Insiders will love HRC tonight, but Bernie was better at talking to the base,” said another. “Like the GOP debates, I suspect observers & activists will see it differently.”
Sanders is an unconventional politician who is becoming a better candidate under the bright lights of the debate stage, “This guy is quick, resilient and Hillary’s negatives are showing,” judged one Democratic Insider. “She held her powder and than became shrill,” asserted another. That was perhaps a reference to Clinton’s attack on Sanders for questioning President Obama’s leadership, an attack that Sanders called a “low blow.”
Among those Democratic Insiders who said that debate was a draw, one said,” Agnostic Bernie is the best southern preacher I've seen. His rhythm and cadence and gestures are entertaining as they are effective.” But another Democratic Insider who thought that Clinton won the debate noted Sanders’ occasional arm-waving gestures and joked, “Bernie may soon say he is absolutely a better composer than Bach.”
Republican Insiders saw the debate a bit differently from their Democratic counterparts. Among the 49 who responded to this survey, a solid plurality thought Sanders had won. “Passion is still on his side,” said one GOP Insider. Another reasoned, “She did not score any damaging hits, so he wins.”
But another GOP Insider wondered, “Does anyone think Bernie out classes Hillary in this format?”
After judging the debate a draw, one Republican influential observed, “Both think the country is broken but somehow also believe the guy in charge for the last seven years is terrific?”
James A. Barnes is a senior writer for Ballotpedia and co-author of the 2016 edition of the Almanac of American Politics. He has conducted elite opinion surveys for National Journal, CNN and the on-line polling firm, YouGov.
Debate Commentary
The columns below were authored by guest columnists and members of Ballotpedia's senior writing staff. The opinions and views belong to the authors.
Sanders Tugs at Democrats’ Heartstrings
February 12, 2016
By Karlyn Bowman
Karlyn Bowman, a widely respected analyst of public opinion, is a senior fellow and research coordinator at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank in Washington, D.C.
The 2016 Democratic primary contest is being fought on Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders’ turf. Even as former Secretary of state Hillary Clinton tried to challenge Bernie Sanders’ plans for free health care and free college as unrealistic, it was clear from last night’s PBS debate in Milwaukee that he has pulled her to the left.
The primary process tends to pull both parties to their extremes. Then the candidates scramble for the all-important center ground in politics. The role, scope and size of government will be a general election issue in 2016—it usually is. And while the discussion of a larger role for government last night clearly excited Democrats, it is an open question whether crucial independent voters are in the same place as the Democratic candidates are.
Moderator Judy Woodruff was smart to raise the issue of how much government is enough to Bernie Sanders early in the debate, and it kept coming back throughout the evening. Clinton’s hammered away at the cost of his policies, saying they don’t add up and would raise the cost of government by 40 percent. Her policies, however, by her own admission last night have a $100 billion price tag. That’s expensive, and while Democrats cheer, independents will have doubts.
The debate last night was also about the minority vote in Nevada (minorities may account for 35 percent of the Democratic electorate there) and [South Carolina]] (African Americans could be 55 percent of the voters in the primary) and upcoming other Southern states as well. For this reason, Hillary Clinton clung to Barack Obama who remains popular among minorities. To this, Bernie Sanders reminded her that she had run against him in 2008. The discussion of criminal justice reform, an issue on which there appears to be growing bipartisan support, is especially important in the black community. Clinton is a master debater and her skills were evident again last night, but Bernie Sanders clearly pulls on many Democrats’ heartstrings.
Clinton’s Complexity, Sanders’ Simplicity and a Mansnapping Moment
February 12, 2016
By David Kusnet
David Kusnet is a former chief speechwriter for former President Bill Clinton. He is the senior writer and a principal at the Podesta Group, a government relations and public relations firm in Washington, D.C.
Bernie Sanders is a simple sentence: He’ll lead a “political revolution” against “a rigged economy and a corrupt political system.” In a year when Americans are angry about the economy and cynical about politicians, Sanders’ sentence is a surefire applause line.
Of necessity, Hillary Clinton’s appeal is a complex sentence, whose elements she has mixed and matched over two presidential campaigns, two administrations and almost 25 years on the national stage during, which the Democratic Party has shifted from self-conscious centrism to full-throated progressivism.
If she has a “relationship status” with Democratic primary voters and the wider electorate, “it’s complicated.” Simplicity clarifies a candidate’s appeal but sometimes narrows it. Complexity can confuse voters but also allows a candidate to cultivate different constituencies with differing concerns.
In last night’s debate, as she began to do in her concession speech in New Hampshire, Clinton made the most of her complexity to appeal to the diverse Democratic voters in Nevada and South Carolina, while presenting herself as a potential president who could get results in domestic policy and function effectively in foreign policy.
When I worked for Bill Clinton, he would use the word “plus” to describe how he would encompass and transcend narrow concerns. (For instance, “populism-plus” meant embracing economic equality and economic growth.)
Last night, beginning with her opening statement, Hillary Clinton presented herself as “Sanders-plus” in two ways: First, she shares her rival’s concerns about economic inequality, stagnant wages and campaign financing and can “make progress” on all these fronts. And, second, she wants to “go further” by knocking down the barriers of discrimination by race, gender, and immigration status.
In her closing statement, she made the most effective case for her campaign: “I am not a single-issue candidate, and I do not believe we live in a single-issue country.” Linking her pragmatism with her inclusiveness, she suggested that, even if Sanders’ economic populism prevailed, there would still be discrimination against African Americans, women and LGBT people.
In previous Democratic primary campaigns, faltering frontrunners from Walter Mondale to Al Gore have used similar arguments, embracing Democratic constituencies and deconstructing visionary but vague proposals, to bring high-flying insurgents from Gary Hart to Bill Bradley back down to earth.
For his part, Sanders closed not with a roadmap for what he would do as president but with a vision of what “tens of millions of people” could do to “demand that we have a government that represents all of us and not just the one percent, who today have so much economic and political power.”
Listening to Sanders, Clinton and her advisers should have noticed that presidential candidates are better served by talking about what “we” can do together, as John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan did, than concentrating on what “I” have done or will do in the White House, as countless defeated political insiders have done.
But, when Clinton spoke about closing tax loopholes “once I’m in the White House,” Sanders didn’t respond with an argument that presidents need popular movements behind them. Instead, he quickly quipped, “You’re not in the White House yet.”
That simple moment – a man snapping at a woman -- may end up defining the debate to Clinton’s advantage. Some of her social media supporters just might accuse Sanders not of “mansplaining” but “mansnapping.”
Some things are even easier to remember than simple declarative sentences.
Statistics
This article analyzes the central themes of the Democratic presidential debate held on February 11, 2016, in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The transcript prepared by The Washington Post was used to measure candidate participation and audience engagement.[1] Footage from the debate was consulted where there were ambiguities in the text.
To compare the statistics of this debate to those of the previous Democratic debate, see the analysis of the MSNBC Democratic debate in February 2016.
Segments
Including opening and closing statements, the sixth Democratic presidential debate featured 17 unique discussion segments covering the scope of the federal government, race relations and national security. These discussion segments were measured by any shift in the theme of a discussion prompted by one of the moderators: Gwen Ifill and Judy Woodruff. The candidates also fielded questions from Facebook users.
- Opening statements
- Size of federal government and healthcare
- Cost of expanding federal government
- Women's issues
- Historic nature of Hillary Clinton's candidacy
- Incarceration rate of black Americans
- Race relations
- White Americans
- Immigration reform
- Federal assistance for senior citizens
- Campaign finance and Wall Street
- Reducing the size of the federal government
- National security
- Russia and Syria
- Syrian refugee crisis
- Influential leaders on foreign policy
- Closing statements
Ifill noted at the start of the debate, "With Iowa and New Hampshire behind us, we are now broadening the conversation to America's heartland and beyond, including here in Wisconsin."[1] The candidates barely discussed Wisconsin-specific issues, however. Only Clinton named the state in her contribution to the discussion segment on the incarceration rate of black Americans and her closing statement.
A recurring theme of the debate was President Barack Obama and the legacy of his administration. He was invoked in nearly three-fifths of the discussion segments for a total of 26 times. Donald Trump, the only Republican presidential candidate named in the debate, was also mentioned four times.
Overall participation
Participation in a discussion segment was defined as a substantive comment related to the discussion segment's topic. Jokes and attempts to gain permission from a moderator to speak were not considered participatory speech acts. In some instances, candidates who participated in a discussion segment diverted from the prompted topic.
This was the first Democratic debate where each candidate participated in every discussion segment.
Candidate participation by speaking order
This study also calculated the number of times a candidate spoke first, second or third during a discussion segment, whether prompted by a moderator with a question or invitation to rebut or by interjection.
In this debate, Sanders was prompted by a moderator to speak first in approximately 60 percent of the discussion segments. This was a deviation from the preceding four debates where Clinton spoke first as many times as or more than Sanders did.
Audience engagement
Audience engagement was measured by noting applause, cheering, or laughter in The Washington Post's transcript. Footage from the debate was consulted when the text was ambiguous about to whom the audience was responding.
For the fourth debate in a row, Sanders received more positive responses from the live audience than Clinton.
The discussion segment on national security produced the most audience engagement overall.
Candidate speech analysis
|
|
Democratic Debate Schedule
Click the schedule to return back to the top of the page.
See also
- Presidential debates (2015-2016)
- Presidential candidates, 2016
- Presidential election, 2016/Polls
- 2016 presidential candidate ratings and scorecards
- Presidential election, 2016/Straw polls
Footnotes
