In a definitive moment during the Democratic debate Thursday night, South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren sparred over big-dollar donations and the influence of money in politics. It began when Warren distinguished the way she chose to run her campaign from many other candidates on the stage, noting proudly that she has now taken 100,000 selfies with people. "That's a 100,000 hugs and handshakes and stories," Warren noted.
"Most of the people on this stage run a traditional campaign,” Warren continued. “That means going back and forth from coast to coast to rich people, and people who can put up 5,000 bucks or more in order to have a picture taken, in order to have a conversation, and in order maybe to be considered to be an ambassador," she explained. "Those selfies cost nobody anything," she said, adding that people who can put down $5,000 don't have the same priorities as the folks who are struggling with student loan debt, for instance. "We can't have the people who can put down $5,000 for a check drown out the voices of everyone else.”
Though Warren never name checked Buttigieg, he chose to respond, "I can't help but feel that might have been directed at me." Buttigieg then made the case for needing the help of "everybody" to defeat Donald Trump. "If that means you are a grad student digging deep to go on line to PeteforAmerica.com to chip in ten dollars, that's great. And if you can drop $1,000 dollars without blinking, that's great too. We need everybody's help in this fight. I am not going to turn away anyone who wants to help us defeat Donald Trump," he said.
When Warren was given time to respond, she started by noting that Buttigieg had just recently held a fundraiser in a wine cave where $900 bottles of wine were served.
"Think about who comes to that," Warren said. "He had promised that every fund-raiser he would do would be open-door, but this one was closed-door. We made the decision many years ago that rich people in smoke-filled rooms would not pick the next president of the United States. Billionaires in wine caves should not pick the next president of the United States."
Buttigieg responded, "I’m literally the only person on this stage who is not a millionaire or a billionaire. So this is important. This is the problem with issuing purity tests you cannot yourself pass. If I pledge — if I pledge never to be in the company of a progressive Democratic donor, I couldn’t be up here." Adding that Warren's net worth was "100 times" his own, Buttigieg again made the pitch for needing support from "everybody who is committed to helping beat Donald Trump."
Given a chance to respond, Warren focused back on her campaign. "I do not sell access to my time. I don’t do call time with millionaires and billionaires. I don’t meet behind closed doors with big-dollar donors." Warren said she had taken what should be an "easy step" for everyone on stage in pledging not to make major donors ambassadors if elected president. Sure, she'll accept anyone's donation, but don't expect an ambassadorship.
"I said no, and I asked everybody on this stage to join me," Warren said. "And here’s the problem. If you can’t stand up and take the steps that are relatively easy, can’t stand up to the wealthy and well connected when it is relatively easy, when you are a candidate, then how can the American people believe you're going to stand up to the wealthy and well connected when you are president and it is really hard?"
To be clear, both candidates made pointed remarks, but it will be interesting to see how voters receive this exchange. For Warren, the topic summed up the essence of her campaign—getting money out of politics and making government work for working people rather than the rich and wealthy.
It was among the first of several pretty contentious moments between the Democratic candidates Thursday night. But Warren has been fighting a two-front war for moderates and liberals, needing support from both sides. In Iowa, she appears to have lost some altitude to voters who have mainly moved to Buttigieg.
So this exchange and the differences it highlighted between the two candidates could be decisive for one or both candidates. Their fortunes could easily rise or fall on how voters perceive their styles, their messages, and who they think has a better chance of prevailing in a general election.
Here’s part of the exchange.