More on the Democrats' debate

This is from Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo, a liberal blog, on Sunday night's debate.   I agree with what he says.: 

*     *     *

"One of my big questions going into tonight was whether Clinton would really bring her recent kind of hard-charging, aggressive . . . attacks on Sanders into the debate hall. Mostly she didn't. She hit hard at a few points at the beginning. But her critiques, especially on health care were more subtle and refined and sounded less desperate than recent headlines generated by her campaign.

"On the other side of the equation, I think she's somewhat defused by Sanders himself. He simply doesn't have that kind of brass knuckle politics in him. Even when he gets his hackles up a bit, every response from him is inherently defusing. There's less charge in the air, less animus after he speaks than before. . . . 
 
"I thought Hillary Clinton did very well in this debate. She was quick on her feet, deeply knowledgeable. She shows herself as unflappable. Several times I heard her answering questions in ways that were subtle, knowledgeable and showed a tendency not to go for the political answer but to highlight complexities in highly politicized questions which are often ignored. I was impressed.

"But Sanders did well too. His words and his very manner communicate a fundamental decency and impatience with bullshit which is deeply appealing. If you believe the country needs deep and even radical reform, particularly on economic policy, he is your guy. . . .  [W]hile his message is radical and he speaks about "revolutionary" change there's little in the man that seems impulsive, hasty or trigger happy. There's a certain temperamental caution which balances that deep-seated belief that only thorough-going change can address the nation problems."

*   *   * 

I'm finding it really hard to make up my mind, and I have plenty of time yet.   Our primary isn't until March and, being a progressive in Georgia, my vote isn't going to sway the results.   I may vote for Sanders to show support for his goals and his spirit of progressive change, knowing that Clinton will win the Georgia Democratic primary and that she might be the more effective chief executive and commander in chief.

Perhaps the place for Sanders is right where he is, and doing just what he is doing in this primary -- pulling the pragmatic liberal to the left -- and then being the loyal opposition to the president from his enhanced position of power in the senate.

Ralph