I watched the debate, and I thought the only winner was Trump. I've been favoring Bloomberg for months, even before he entered the race, but he gave a very depressing performance. He was one of the best mayors New York City ever had, but the media and his opponents have managed to reduce that record down to "stop-n-frisk," and "buying the election." If he can't give a better effort than the did tonight, and the others continue to savage him, all his money won't be enough to save him. I still think he's the candidate Trump would least like to face. None of the others distinguished themselves. Biden was always my second choice, but now he comes off as Dead Man Walking; I tended to be surprised every time they called on him, forgetting he was even there. Sanders came off the best, I suppose, but his policies are borderline insane. If he's nominated, I can easily see him losing all 50 states, doing worse than McGovern. (He might carry DC). I can't stand Warren, and her policies are only slightly less lunatic than Sanders's. She might win a couple of states, but she might not--look at her poor showing in New Hampshire, her neighboring state. I would probably vote for either of them simply because they're not Trump, but I'd hate myself for doing it. And neither of them would have strong enough coattails to win control of Congress, so if by some act of a malicious god they became president, their administration would be utterly ineffectual. Buttigieg and Klobuchar struck me as minor leaguers; I can't get enthusiastic about either one. Again, the only thing in their favor is that they're not Trump. Only slightly facetiously, I'd say the candidate who came off best by far, was Andrew Yang, who did a very credible job as a talking-head commentator on CNN.