• Commentary
  • Research
  • Experts
  • Events
Carnegie China logoCarnegie lettermark logo
{
  "authors": [
    "Aaron David Miller"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "",
  "programs": [],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "North America",
    "United States"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Political Reform"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media

Four Key Debate Questions Answered

The Democratic primary debate in South Carolina answered several key questions that may have a bearing on the elections to come.

Link Copied
By Aaron David Miller
Published on Feb 25, 2020

Source: CNN

Before Tuesday's debate -- best described as a political circus with the moderators all but losing control -- I identified four main questions that needed to be answered. And to the extent these contests matter now that Americans are actually voting, they may have a bearing on what is to come.

The first is a simple matter of arithmetic -- mainly subtraction. Now that there are actual votes and delegates distributed, how do the candidates who do not have a particularly good night and who lagged behind in Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada justify staying in race? Tom Steyer and Mike Bloomberg have deep pockets and can ride it out even though their road may lead nowhere. But what about Amy Klobuchar and Elizabeth Warren, and even Pete Buttigieg? They all had strong performances, but will they have any momentum coming out of South Carolina and into Super Tuesday?

Second, what kind of night did Bloomberg have? Not bad compared to his last performance. He did make a compelling point on the logic of electability and scored points on his record in New York City. (Nonetheless, Warren came for him a second time.) But Bloomberg just doesn't project empathy, his rhetorical skills are terrible, he has no sense of humor and his efforts to bond and relate on a personal level largely fall flat.

Third, did Joe Biden have the much-needed debate of his life? Not exactly. But his interventions were strong and confident. He projected strength, experience and comfort being on the debate stage in a way we have not seen before.

Fourth, and perhaps most important, was Bernie Sanders hurt? He was hammered -- and was hit hard especially by Buttigieg and Warren. But he survived. The attacks on Bloomberg deflected much of the heat. Where Sanders disappointed was his failure to explain what his democratic socialism really means -- and to separate it from his past positive comments on Cuba and Nicaragua.

This article was originally published by CNN.

About the Author

Aaron David Miller

Senior Fellow, American Statecraft Program

Aaron David Miller is a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, focusing on U.S. foreign policy.

    Recent Work

  • Q&A
    Iran Wanted to Survive the War. Now What?

      Suzanne Maloney, Aaron David Miller, Karim Sadjadpour

  • Q&A
    “China Doesn’t Do Anything for Free”

      Aaron David Miller, David Rennie

Aaron David Miller
Senior Fellow, American Statecraft Program
Aaron David Miller
Political ReformNorth AmericaUnited States

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie China

  • Commentary
    Emissary
    Trump and Xi Are Angling for Three Years of Stability

    But their "principal to principal" model will only be as effective as the political strength of each leader back home.

      • Damien Ma

      Damien Ma

  • Commentary
    China Sells Stability Amid American Volatility

    U.S. unpredictability has allowed China to capitalize on its positioning as the “responsible great power”. Paradoxically, the more China wins the perception game, the more likely expectations will rise for Beijing to deliver not just words but to demonstrate with its deeds.

      Chong Ja Ian

  • Commentary
    When It Comes to Superpower Geopolitics, Malaysia Is Staunchly Nonpartisan

    For Malaysia, the conjunction that works is “and” not “or” when it comes to the United States and China.

      Elina Noor

  • Commentary
    Today’s Rare Earths Conflict Echoes the 1973 Oil Crisis — But It’s Not the Same

    Regulation, not embargo, allows Beijing to shape how other countries and firms adapt to its terms.

      Alvin Camba

  • Trump and Xi on a red background
    Commentary
    Emissary
    China Is Determined to Hold Firm Against Trump’s Pressure

    Beijing believes that Washington is overestimating its own leverage and its ability to handle the trade war’s impacts. 

      • Sheena Chestnut Greitens

      Rick Waters, Sheena Chestnut Greitens

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie China
Carnegie China logo, white
Keck Seng Tower133 Cecil Street #10-01ASingapore, 069535Phone: +65 9650 7648
  • Research
  • About
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie China
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.