My take (on tonight's debate only):
1️⃣ Warren
2️⃣ Sanders
3️⃣ Harris
4️⃣ O'Rourke
5️⃣ Booker
6️⃣ Castro
7️⃣ Klobuchar
8️⃣ Buttigieg
9️⃣ Steyer
🔟 Biden
1️⃣1️⃣ Yang
1️⃣2️⃣ Gabbard
1️⃣ Warren
2️⃣ Sanders
3️⃣ Harris
4️⃣ O'Rourke
5️⃣ Booker
6️⃣ Castro
7️⃣ Klobuchar
8️⃣ Buttigieg
9️⃣ Steyer
🔟 Biden
1️⃣1️⃣ Yang
1️⃣2️⃣ Gabbard
PS/ Pete came off worse than he has in other debates (and I'm a Mayor Pete fan), and looking at the track record of the analysts who think he did well tonight {*ahem*} convinces me that I'm right. Pete just doesn't do well when he slips into artifice, smugness, and condescension.
PS2/ Some folks will like the new "Feisty Pete." I don't think it's a sustainable look for him. Warren didn't have her best debate *overall*, but showed she can stand on a stage where 11 people are attacking her and *that* is the biggest win anyone had tonight, in longterm terms.
PS3/ I also think there's a big drop-off after 9️⃣, so I'm not seeing Buttigieg as being as far from the top as some assume. I think he did fine; I also think it was his worst debate, in part because I think he *killed* it in all the other debates. So I put him where I did.
PS4/ I don't know, it's a bit suspicious that there's *universal* acclaim for Buttigieg/Klobuchar in the comments to this thread. I've been around Twitter long enough to see that *part* of it is some particular site or campaign sending folks here. Be less obvious about it, y'all!
PS5/ But hey, I respect everyone's opinion! Debate-watching is "one [person's] opinion of moonlight," and I hope folks will post their own lists in the thread below. There are many, many, *many* reasonable grounds for polite disagreement on all this stuff.
NOTE/ To the folks asking about my Yang placement, above: he was way off about election interference, legalizing hard drugs, a number of other things. When Yang is off on something, he tends to be *way* off (IMHO). But he *also* said some really interesting and important things.
