What happened in Vegas

The Democrats have traditionally enjoyed a weird ritual of eating their young, and last night in Vegas was no exception. The real issue for them is which candidate is best equipped to defeat Donald Trump. Trump is vulnerable. He runs as an impeached president who has abused the powers of his office with an arrogance smacking of “l’état, c’est moi.”

Trump should be easy to beat in the general election. He has hollowed out our State Department, demeaned our intelligence community, the FBI and our civil servants. He has undermined constitutional values of judicial independence, and shredded our justice system, ignoring post-Watergate norms of an independent Justice Department to the extent that the attorney general protests that he cannot do his job, all the while  professing to be the nation’s “chief law enforcement officer.” The only issue for Democrats should be who can best do the job.

Last night’s primary debate pitted front-runner Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) against five other candidates in a donnybrook reminiscent of a bar room brawl. Bernie is another George McGovern. He admittedly can’t win unless there is a huge voter turnout. The necessary turnout would be so unprecedented it must include every socialist on the face of the electoral map.

Sanders, who won’t release his medical records after a recent heart attack, came across as an angry old man hectoring his opponents with a polarizing vision for a country impossible to obtain. He offers the voters a “chicken in every pot,” free tuitions, “Medicare for All” and other social goodies at the expense of the rich whom he would soak mightily to fund his extravagant programs. He “gaslighted” the misdeeds of his supporters, who trashed an otherwise friendly culinary workers union that didn’t like his health care plan or who lied about Bloomberg’s medical history. No apologies, no acceptance of responsibility, only techniques of denial and counterattack — that smacked of Donald Trump.

Everyone piled on former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, the latecomer to the debate stage. Polls show that he or former Vice President Joe Biden are the only candidates who might defeat Trump head-to-head. Perhaps that is why Trump tried early on last July to smear Biden with an investigation into his son’s activities on the board of a Ukrainian energy company. If Biden becomes the nominee, Trump will smear him with Ukraine, as unfair as that is. 

But that’s a big ‘if.” An early frontrunner, Biden’s star is fading. He is clearly past his use-by date. Last night, he was all but silent on the stage. He lacked forcefulness. When he spoke, it was in soft-boiled generalities. His funding is dwindling. His candidacy is on life support. We will see if he can get past South Carolina.

Bloomberg is the only candidate, quite obviously, with the experience, vision and financial capacity to defeat Trump. He is the only candidate of whom Trump seems truly afraid. But Bloomberg threatens the political class on the stage. He is attractive to moderate Republicans and independents who don’t like Trump. They are not.

It was a rude welcoming for Bloomberg last night. He hadn’t debated anyone for a decade, and his responses to the invective shoveled by his attackers seemed wooden and anything but convincing. Attacked for being a billionaire, he did say in a moment of eloquence that he was spending his fortune to get rid of Trump for the sake of the country and the sake of his children. He didn’t get a chance to elaborate further on his commendable record on climate change and gun safety. 

Bloomberg was anything but charismatic. He largely held his own against the often vicious onslaughts of candidates who haven’t a prayer of winning the nomination, much less standing up to Donald Trump. Perhaps the process will make him a better debater the next time around.

There was a cogent answer to his refusal to open the non-disclosure agreements with the women who brought harassment or discrimination claims against his company decades ago. First, he was New York City’s mayor when much of it happened. He owned the company but did not manage it. Second, the company settled the women’s cases, paid them an undisclosed amount in recompense for their having been wronged. The women agreed with the company to bury the terms of settlement in non-disclosure agreements. This is a standard way to settle such a lawsuit. If the women wanted a public airing of their grievances, they could have refused the money and chanced going to court. But they did not. Case closed.

When it came to stop-and-frisk, Bloomberg also had a good defense but failed to use it effectively. He omitted to mention that stop-and-frisk is an investigative tool upheld by the Supreme Court. The police are entitled under the Constitution to stop people on “reasonable suspicion.” There isn’t a police department in the world, much less the country, that doesn’t stop people. Stop-and-frisk is much less intrusive than arrest.

Unless the police find contraband or an illegal handgun, the suspect is free to go without mugging, fingerprinting or manacling. When Bloomberg or his police commissioner spoke in black churches in the old days, they were cheered. Blacks knew that getting guns off the street lowered the crime rate and saved black lives. In any event, Bloomberg apologized for using the procedure in a way that singled out minorities for the encounters. Like the women’s issue, stop-and-frisk is what lawyers call a “stale and ancient claim.” It should be closed.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) understands that she must move to the center if she is to reverse her sagging polling numbers. Pete Buttigieg is sharp on his feet, a man with all the answers. But he was the least experienced candidate on the stage. Indeed, his personality seems to project callowness and inexperience. A two-term mayor of a Midwestern city of 102,000, he hardly compares to Bloomberg’s record as a three-term mayor of our largest city of eight million.

The bottom line is that what happened last night in Vegas is likely to stay in Vegas. The debate is unlikely to move the needle in Nevada or anywhere else for that matter. These are still early days, despite the media proclaiming that Bernie has a commanding lead. True, Bernie is polling is at 28 percent. His base is fervent and committed. But 75 percent of Democratic voters have their doubts about him. 

The issue is, who in the center is best equipped to defeat Trump? The strident Warren, who never met a regulation she didn’t like? The forgetful Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.)? The callow Pete Buttigieg? The tarnished Joe Biden? Or the seasoned Michael Bloomberg?

Instead of coalescing behind one candidate because Bernie’s nomination assures Trump’s election, the candidates with no clear path to victory attacked one another in hopes of gaining a few points in the polls, going on to the next primary or raking in a few more dollars in contributions from special interests. They ignore that if Trump is re-elected, nothing they want will be possible for four years or perhaps even a generation. If they get behind a candidate who will capture the center, they have a chance to reverse the country’s political dysfunction. Their remaining in the race is both selfish and narcissistic. 

Sadly, if I were to pick a winner last night based on the debate alone, it would be Donald Trump, who left the table, his pockets stuffed with chips and his enemies in total disarray. Divide and rule — a time-honored recipe for success.

James D. Zirin, a retired partner of the Chicago-headquartered law firm of Sidley Austin, is the author of the recently published book, “Plaintiff in Chief — A Portrait of Donald Trump in 3,500 Lawsuits.” He is a former assistant United States attorney for the Southern District of New York.