A crowd of about 20 came to the Londonderry Democrats’ debate watch party Wednesday, and after some fled the TV room to go find a couch as the spectacle dragged on, those left watching in the parlor barely outnumbered candidates debating on screen.
To them, keeping track of the 10 Democrats answering, avoiding and interrupting onstage seemed exhausting.
Still, the Democrats paying attention in Londonderry saw strengths among the flaws during the first night of back-to-back Democratic debates in Miami. However, Wednesday’s brief TV encounters with presidential hopefuls was found to be no match for the access Granite Staters get in the first-in-the-nation primary state.
“In New Hampshire we’re gifted with being able to walk down the street and bump into candidates,” said Rodney Decormier of Derry. “When you’re standing in the room with someone and listening to them and looking them in the eye, you get a sense of the person, of who they are. It’s only a couple of minutes, but it’s a whole lot more accurate than looking at a TV screen.”
The plan for two nights of debates was meant to give voters an introduction to the record crowd of candidates, which some viewers in Londonderry saw as an impossible task.
Through Wednesday’s first commercial break, Sean Cohen of Derry was optimistic about the show.
“I think it is actually working better than I thought it would,” Cohen said as he sat in a folding chair in the corner of the crowded room. “It’s a good flow of discussion. It hasn’t gotten too crazy yet. It’s even-keeled right now.”
That approval didn’t make it to the next commercial break, when infighting and interruptions had increased in Miami and, according to Cohen, overproduction overpowered thorough discussion.
“Maybe we could’ve had expanded hours or less candidates. … If you want to make it sensible to people, you need a little more breathing room,” Cohen said, referencing the tight focus and interjection of moderators. “The political nerds might like it, but the people watching at home might say, ‘What the hell am I watching?’ ”
Patrick McLaughlin of Chester described himself as a political diehard and said he couldn’t name every debater on the TV. As someone in front of him trolled through Twitter political commentary around the halfway point, he blamed troubles on an overwhelming number of candidates running for president, not the debate itself.
“Given that there are 10 people on the stage, it’s working. But there are too many people on the stage – they aren’t getting enough time.”
Anne Fenn of Londonderry, who thought Beto O’Rourke looked like he was on a high school debate team, shared McLaughlin’s ‘bear-in-mind’ view.
“I think it was a good first debate, but I don’t think they went into a ton of depth. They couldn’t have unless it went on for three hours, four hours,” Fenn said. “In some ways it could be useful to have five or six debaters instead of 10.”
Decormier felt things went well.
“I do think they were effective. I was concerned that there was not going to be enough time for them to express themselves, but I think that was based on the 2015 debates,” Decormier said, adding that he still felt some candidates, like Reps. Tulsi Gabbard and John Delaney, got left out.
Jackie Wood, Secretary of the Rockingham County Democrats, said she couldn’t hear when the candidates interrupted one another. She pointed out that there are trade-offs when it comes to debate size.
“Somebody was saying if it was four days people wouldn’t tune in,” Wood said. “I think there were too many on the stage because they didn’t get time to express themselves.”
Wood, a Democrat official, listed off the candidates she’s already come across in person. Delaney, O’Rourke, Sen. Cory Booker and Sen. Elizabeth Warren, nearly half of Wednesday’s TV debaters made the list. She preferred seeing them in person.
“A debate versus an interaction? There’s no comparison,” Wood said.