Maybe things are looking up! Even the ultra-conservative Washington Examiner is now attacking Trump.

Unless ANY of the candidates on the list are electable over Trump, we're hopelessly lost.

To claim that an old white man should be nominated simply because he's the most electable is to say that he resembles Trump enough to lure a sufficient number of Trump supporters. But I find it hard to believe that there will be enough Trump supporters in existence to matter after what Trump has, and continues to, put us through. We shouldn't need to accept such a compromise. If it's not true that ANY of the Democratic candidates on the list are electable then our nation has hopelessly lost its way and we might as well give up.

Speaking as an old white man myself I favor a candidate who is the "Anti-Trump", and by that I mean as opposite to Trump as possible, including not an old white man. We need a young, female, liberal, intelligent, knowledgeable, honest, altruistic, amiable, and rational candidate to face and defeat the old, male, right-wing, idiotic, ignorant, dishonest, insensitive, crude, and irrational incumbent. Electing such a polar opposite is necessary to help us convince the rest of the world that America's inexplicable insanity was only temporary and we have finally come to our senses.

Some Utterly Fascinating Information

The smallest 25 states in the continental United States collectively have a total area less than the area of Greenland.

Nancy Pelosi's speech was 10 times better when watching it on Fox News!

Just knowing that Fox News watchers were seeing and hearing it made it so much better!

Now Fox News is trying their best to change the subject, with the ironic chyron "Great Distractor" still on their screen, so back to MSNBC...

Trump argues that they need the census question "for districting."

Joe Biden is the big guy in the old west saloon brawl.

The probably unspoken, almost instinctive, group strategy is to gang up on Biden and get him out of the way first, then concentrate on battling each other afterward. And I predict that's exactly how this is going to play out.

The moderators need to stop interrupting!

All of the candidates had portions of their messages rendered unintelligible by moderators talking over them to say that their time was up. That has to stop.

Perhaps some sort of clock visible to the candidates can be arranged to warn them that their microphones will go dead when their time expires, or even more sophisticated, allot each candidate an equal share of time for the entire debate and let them portion that time the way time is budgeted by chess opponents using a chess clock.

But however it's done, let the candidates themselves take responsibility for fitting their messages into the time allotted to them. It serves the interest of no one on our side to truncate sentences and turn them into unclear fragments.

Is Fox News finally ready to acknowledge that Trump lies about everything?

My main concern is how well a candidate understands politics and world affairs. How does yours rate?

How would you rate your favorite candidate on a scale of 1 to 10, where Rachel Maddow = 10 and Trump = 0?

Never wrestle a pig in its own sty because you'll get covered with pigshit and the pig will love it.

I admire Elizabeth Warren for her stance on Fox News. I think appearing on that network is a losing strategy because most of their viewers are forever lost in the Fox fantasy world, and even those few sheep who might be persuaded will be herded back into the fold by the lies that are certain to follow any "town hall" broadcast.

I'd be interested in knowing which other Democratic candidates have appeared or plan to appear on that network. Is there a list somewhere?