LOS ANGELES — Pete Buttigieg and Elizabeth Warren traded shots over campaign fundraising. Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden sparred over their records on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. And Amy Klobuchar drew contrasts with most everyone, especially Buttigieg, whose resume she dismissed as too flimsy for the presidency.

The Democratic candidates — including Tom Steyer and Andrew Yang — roared into the debate Thursday night eager to draw contrasts as they look for a rare opportunity to capture national attention and change the direction of the race just weeks before voting starts. Did it work? We asked four POLITICO reporters — Christopher Cadelago, Natasha Korecki, Holly Otterbein and David Siders — to tell us their biggest takeaways from the showdown.

Who had the best night? Who had the worst?

Siders: If Klobuchar ends up mattering in February — and that’s an open question, given her current standing in the polls — this debate will be remembered as the turning point. It wasn’t just that she unloaded on Buttigieg. It was that she managed to unload on him while also pitting the South Bend, Ind., mayor against every other Democrat on stage and casting herself as a unifying, above-it-all figure.

“I did not come here to listen to this argument,” she said when Buttigieg and Warren were quarreling. “I came here to make a case for progress. And I have never even been to a wine cave. I have been to the Wind Cave in South Dakota, which I suggest you do.”

Buttigieg had the worst night. Yes, he got some jabs in at Washington. (He’s not from there!) But it’s just not great for a Democrat when the phrase “billionaires in wine caves” gets played on national TV in reference to one of your campaign events.

Korecki: Klobuchar was the breakout star tonight. She gave solid, compelling answers and conveyed herself as the sensible pick among her Democratic challengers.

But I really think Biden had his best debate of the campaign. That’s a big win for him, given the timing here, as he’s ticking up in the polls and feeling some momentum. The only major scrap he got involved in had to do with health care, and he vigorously defended his stance against Medicare for All. That left Biden to appear as a leader, staying out of the fray that enveloped Buttigieg, Warren and Klobuchar for a time.

Buttigieg was on his heels more than we’ve seen him in the past. While he had answers ready, Warren needled him on his donors, and Klobuchar forced Buttigieg to answer questions about his experience.

Cadelago: Elizabeth Warren is back.

Warren had her strongest debate since the summer, ably torquing the opening question — about the House voting to impeach Donald Trump — into an answer about why she’s running for president. The way she sees it, Warren argued at the opening, “we've now seen the impact of corruption.” That moment and others were reminiscent of the earlier debates where she sketched out a clear vision in the opening minutes without interruption and without being challenged by her opponents. She wasn’t the main target Thursday, and she was better for it.

“Oh, they’re just wrong,” Warren zinged when asked about top economists who say taxes of this magnitude would stifle growth and investment. Later, when moderator Tim Alberta of POLITICO prefaced a question by reminding Warren she would be the oldest president ever inaugurated, she had a quick retort: “I'd also be the youngest woman ever inaugurated.”

The loser? It’s still unclear why Tom Steyer is running for president, after jumping in the race late.

Otterbein: Buttgieg probably had the worst night: He was forced to defend his high-dollar donors on the debate stage. While he technically defended himself ably — and accused Warren of hypocrisy on the issue — I don’t think that’s a good place for him to be. Now millions of viewers know about his fundraiser in the “wine cave” and that he effectively defended it.

I think the conventional wisdom that Klobuchar had the best night is right. Sanders and Biden had decent nights as well, benefiting in part from Warren and Buttigieg fighting.

What was the most surprising moment?

Otterbein: Sanders made the most aggressive case yet against Biden on a debate stage this year. He took him to task for his wealthy donors, a “status-quo” health care plan and voting for the Iraq War. It was especially interesting that he purposefully brought Biden into a debate between Warren and Buttigieg about campaign finance: In doing so, he took on someone who was not as effective at defending himself as Buttigieg.

The reason: Sanders’ campaign believes that he has the most to gain from Biden falling. Another surprising moment: The moderate Klobuchar defending Warren and Sanders for getting stuff done in the Senate was another surprise — but the twist, of course, is that she largely did it as a way to bash Buttigieg.

Korecki: The “wine cave” pile-on aimed at Buttigieg was not only the most surprising (when Warren first brought it up) but it was by far the most entertaining. “The mayor just recently had a fundraiser that was held in a wine cave full of crystals and served $900 a bottle wine. Think about who comes to that. He had promised that every fundraiser he would do would be open door, but this one was closed-door.” Warren said to Buttigieg.

Then Klobuchar jumped in with some Minnesota-adjacent commentary, touting her visit to the Wind Cave in South Dakota.

Siders: I probably shouldn’t have been, but I was surprised by how often candidates were still mentioning their websites and otherwise offering basic resume material. And I think that’s significant: We’re now in December, less than two months before the Iowa caucuses, and candidates still see an opening with voters who have not been watching months of debates. That suggests there’s a lot of room for the race to change before the Iowa caucuses on Feb. 3.

Cadelago: Sanders defended his health care plan and slapped down Biden over his Iraq War vote. He also flashed his sense of humor. But Sanders had a cringey moment when he was asked about former President Barack Obama’s recent remarks that women make better leaders. After being reminded that he was the oldest candidate on stage, Sanders interjected: “And I'm white as well!”

Did we learn something new about the candidates?

Cadelago: Amy Klobuchar has more fight left. Over and over, she threw herself into the action. “I don't think we have bigger fish to fry than picking a president of the United States,” she said when Pete Buttigieg said he was going to respond to her allegedly denigrating his experience, but claimed he held off in the moment because “we have bigger fish to fry.”

Korecki: We learned that Warren sees Buttigieg as a threat, given that she carried onto the debate stage their ongoing feud over fundraising purity. Warren had dared Buttigieg to release his bundlers and clients from McKinsey, he had done both. But she hit him on his private fundraisers anyway Thursday night.

Siders: Bernie Sanders is funny. Under-rated funny. “She hurt my feelings!” he joked once, when Klobuchar referenced him. Otterbein tells me he’s been making more jokes since his heart attack.

Otterbein: It’s true! Meanwhile, as Chris pointed out above, this debate demonstrated that there’s a limit to Buttigieg’s rhetorical strengths. He capably engaged with some attacks, but he was not able to deflect them all now that so much attention is focused on him.

How will this debate change the Democratic primary?

Otterbein: It’ll cause reporters and pundits to take another look at Klobuchar. The question is: Will that lead to voters to do the same? Or will they be turned off by her attacks on other Democrats? Also, the fact that the debate stage had fewer candidates and a few spicer back-and-forths than usual should help — at least a little — make the race clearer to voters.

Siders: The debate offered something of a reset for the candidates behind Biden and Sanders. Warren had been fading some but turned in a forceful performance. Klobuchar signaled an understanding that she needs to tear into Buttigieg in Iowa to have any chance of surpassing him in the moderate lane. And Buttigieg? He has a pile-on on his hands.

Heading into the debate, there was lots of grousing about the calendar — that President Donald Trump’s impeachment and the holidays would swallow up anything that happened. But I think it was more significant than I might have guessed beforehand.

Cadelago: Given her strong ground operation, this debate could be looked back upon as the moment when Warren got her mojo back, after being knocked back on her heels over Medicare for All and the big health care debate in the early fall.

It took until the second hour, but this was the first debate when the gloves truly came off. Who best showed they could best deliver and take a hit?

Korecki: This factor could keep Klobuchar in the fight and in a decent position leading right into the Feb. 3 Iowa caucuses. After her last strong debate performance, she raked in fundraising dollars and her numbers in Iowa got a bump, and it’s likely to happen again.

But this debate also reinforced Biden’s standing. Recall this past summer, when people were counting the former vice president out because of some shaky debate performances. He’s now shown he can deliver a reputable performance on stage at the same time that he’s stabilized his campaign.

Cadelago: Pete Buttigieg showed he could take a punch and return one. But like the others whose turns in the barrel came before, it’s hard to look great when you’re getting hit on both sides.

Otterbein: Klobuchar landed the strongest hit against Buttigieg on the issue of experience. And Buttigieg was probably the best at parrying attacks, tough as they were.

Warren did not do enough to respond to Buttigieg’s argument that she was a hypocrite for critiquing him for having wealthy donors.

Siders: Klobuchar showed she can deliver a hit and maintain an above-the-fray disposition at the same time. That is significant in a presidential debate. And if it doesn’t work out, it’s a quality the Democratic nominee will be looking for in a running mate.

Article originally published on POLITICO Magazine

Read More