In First Two Democratic Debates, Two Separate Missions and Bernie Sanders

The opening two Democratic primary debates of the presidential campaign season present dueling goals for the 20 candidates who will grace a Miami stage over two consecutive nights.

For those polling at the top of the pack and who will stand in the center of the stages – namely former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts – the most important objective is to do no harm. Neither needs to outright win their respective debate. But they could risk frittering away their momentum if they lose it with an overreaction to a rattling attack or a self-made headline-shattering mishap.

For nearly everyone else – still introducing themselves to most of the country and idling in single-digit support – the stakes are arguably higher. With millions of eyeballs trained on the pair of two-hour primetime broadcasts, it's more imperative for the lower-tier candidates to make a splash in the miniscule amount of time they are likely to be allotted. They also have less to lose and more incentive to take a gamble.

"The worst thing for a candidate here is to have no impact at all, which is a very possible thing," says Erik Smith, a Democratic consultant who produced the 2016 debates for the Democratic National Committee. "These are the only opportunities a lot of these candidates have to break out. … It's the backbenchers throwing bombs that could disrupt this thing."

And then there's the independent Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who has already telegraphed a clash with Biden, at a time his second-place standing looks increasingly precarious given Warren's ascendance. Sanders could show himself to be an aggressor against Biden's "middle of the road" posture, but as the sole avowed democratic socialist in the race, he may also find himself to be an enticing target, especially for the handful of moderate candidates who are warning against the party's leftward lurch.

The Democratic National Committee has divided the first debate into two nights to accommodate the unusually large field, interspersing higher and lower polling candidates. On Wednesday night, Warren will be the highest profile candidate on the stage, standing between Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey and former Rep. Beto O'Rourke of Texas, two campaigns featuring charismatic candidates who have yet to experience a surge.

Accompanying them will be Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julian Castro, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii, Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, Rep. Tim Ryan of Ohio, former Rep. John Delaney of Maryland and New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio.

On Thursday evening, the predominant storyline will revolve around Biden and Sanders, who will be standing next to each other, with South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg flanking Biden's other side in a stark generational contrast. Joining them are Sen. Kamala Harris of California, businessman Andrew Yang, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, former Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper, Sen. Michael Bennet of Colorado, Rep. Eric Swalwell of California and author Marianne Williamson.

The two-night format presents unique challenges for how candidates will decide to use their time, which campaigns have estimated will total only about six to seven minutes per person, once factoring in question time for the five NBC moderators. The safest route is to stick to one's own plans and accomplishments or formulate an answer with an attack on President Donald Trump. But it'll be harder to stand out that way, since most candidates will be tempted to employ the tactic while facing moderators looking to prod for contrasts between them.

As Democratic strategists Ron Klain and John Neffinger wrote in a 2018 debate prep memo, "Staying above the fray, just getting my own message out and pretending like my opponent isn't there are NOT viable debate strategies. … Debates today are pugilistic encounters: There is no playing for a tie."

Having put up sterling performances during his 2008 run and as President Barack Obama's running mate, Biden easily boasts the most extensive debate experience. But allies are expecting his time on stage will largely be an exercise in flyspecking his nearly 50-year public record.

"I think he just needs to bring a big fly swatter," says Larry Rasky, the communications director for Biden's 2008 run. "I expect he will be a target."

"The target's going to be Trump," argues Dave Hamrick, who managed Martin O'Malley's 2016 presidential bid. "But if there are any Democrats who are going to invite contrast it's going to be Biden and Sanders. I think it's less likely people are going to go after Warren."

There's a risk though, Hamrick warns, in lobbing a criticism that looks pre-manufactured or gratuitous, especially at a time when many Democrats are skittish that intraparty fighting could lift Trump's chances at reelection.

"You look for organic ways for a contrast," Hamrick says, "but it can really backfire if you're landing a sidewinder missile against another Democrat and it falls flat. It if seems like a staged attack against another Democrat, you could get a lot of blowback for it."

The topics are fairly predictable. Given the debate is set in Florida, climate change, immigration and "Medicare for All" are all likely to be brought up in some form or another. Racially tinged controversies that have enveloped Biden and more recently Buttigieg are also likely to arise.

Some candidates are hoping to raise particular issues no matter where the conversation veers. Delaney, for instance, who says he's pleased to share a stage with Warren, is planning to raise red flags about Medicare for All.

"I think Medicare for All is bad policy, and if we run on it we will lose the election," he says.

Swalwell, scheduled for the second night, is looking for an opportunity to talk about his assault weapons buyback plan in order to elevate the issue of gun control.

"I'm not going to try to be extra up there," he says. "I'm just trying to be me."

But strictly being oneself likely won't be enough to burst through the coverage wall that is structured to surround the front-runners even if they fail to make news or a mistake.

"I think people below 3 percent are going to take risks and swing. They have to," says Howard Dean, a 2004 presidential candidate. "I do believe a couple people are going to move into the top tier. It always happens."

That's a guess. But there are a series of known knowns going into debates. Ninety percent of what candidates will say, they've said before – but millions of non-political obsessives will still be hearing it for the first time. Reporters, facing tight evening deadlines, will begin writing their stories in the first hour, so the initial impressions and moments matter most.

More people will see and read coverage of the debate than devote the time to watch the full programs themselves, making the ensuing media narrative more important than the event's entirety. And someone will complain about being cheated out of time.

Then in a month, most of what is said will be forgotten – unless it's so memorable it's been etched it into debate hall of fame history. (Think: "I'm paying for this microphone" or "Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy.")

And in this particular case, the participants in Thursday's debate hold the advantage of timing. Barring a seismic incident, Wednesday's storyline will quickly give way to what's most present in people's minds.

"What are you talking about Friday, Saturday and Sunday?" Smith asks. "You're probably talking about what happened on Thursday."