The 8 takeaways from Sunday’s Democratic CNN debate

Odds are, if you were watching TV on Sunday night, you were watching “Madam Secretary” on CBS, and not the real-life madam secretary, Hillary Clinton, debating Bernie Sanders on CNN.

But that’s what you’ve got SlashPolitics for! We recap so you don’t have to. Herewith, the eight takeaways from Sunday’s Democratic debate on CNN.

1. No one referred in any way to the size of any part of their anatomy. Thank God. That alone made this debate much better than the last Republican contest.

2. But seriously, you can actually learn things during these debates! Who knew? But I now know more about the Export-Import Bank than I did before I watched. Accidental or not, CNN did a public service!

3. If you had to pick only one: Sanders may have finally found his parry to Clinton’s thrust that he’s a “one-issue” candidate constantly harping about income inequality and the disappearing of the middle class. After saying the recklessness and greed of Wall Street instigated the worst economic crisis in modern American history, Sanders added, “And I will be damned if it was the working people of this country who have to bail out the crooks of Wall Street,” he said.

Bad news, however: That’s precisely what happened.

Still, Sanders has realized that owning it — which is his style anyway — is the way to go. After Clinton repeated the “one-issue” line, he replied, “Well, I guess so. My one issue is trying to rebuild the middle class.” The crowd seemed to like that one.

4. An exception to anti-corporate rhetoric? Clinton, however, had a good line of her own, asking why it was that Sanders voted for blanket immunity for gun manufacturers when in every other instance he’s skeptical of big corporations and their nefariousness. “You talk about corporate greed. The gun manufacturers sell guns to make as much money as they can make,” Clinton said to raucous applause.

Sanders, however, has a defensible position on this issue. Holding gun makers and sellers responsible for the actions of crazy people, criminals and murderers — assuming manufacturers and retailers had no constructive knowledge of the crimes planned in advance — seems like a bizarre legal theory. (According to Sanders, it could end all gun manufacturing in the United States.) On the other hand, allowing plaintiffs to explore that theory in courts — rather than being barred at the courthouse door by blanket immunity — isn’t such an outlandish idea, either.

One last point: Clinton had a quick line about how people are too quick to grab for guns to solve problems these days. She’s absolutely right about that. But the format of the debate didn’t allow for a follow-up for her to expand on the idea, or suggest how to salve the anger that too often ends in gunfire in America. If we’re going to have guns — and we sure have a lot of them — we need to talk about that more.

5. To frack or not to frack. When it came to the question of fracking, Clinton outlined an elaborate series of conditions that would have to be met before she’d support the practice. States and local communities would have to agree. The release of toxic gases would not be allowed. Companies that frack would have to tell us precisely what chemicals they’re using. The rules are so tight, Clinton said, there are very few areas where fracking could actually take place.

“My answer is a lot shorter,” Sanders replied. “No, I do not support fracking.” And when moderator Anderson Cooper pressed Sanders to ask if Democratic governors who support fracking are wrong, Sanders was even more brief: “Yes.”

There you have it.

6. Somebody in America always takes offense. Sanders uncorked a line about increased mental health funding, saying that the Republican debate is proof of why we need it. The audience laughed. Clinton laughed. But not everyone laughed: A group called the Ruderman Family Foundation was not happy.

“When millions of Americans deal with issues of mental health it was highly inappropriate for Senator Bernie Sanders to use a real disability as a joke in last night’s Democratic presidential debate,” said Jay Ruderman, President of the Ruderman Family Foundation. “He should issue an immediate apology to Americans with mental health disabilities.”

I’ve long argued against saying or implying that your political opponents suffer from mental deficiencies. (My commitment to that philosophy has been sorely tested during the 2016 race, believe me.) For one, only professionals should diagnose mental disease or defect. For another, it relieves really awful people of responsibility for believing (or saying they believe) really awful things.

But I will admit: I did laugh, too.

7. God help us! This being CNN, an effort had to be made to show the red-blooded Americans of real America that godless heathen liberal journalists respect religious people, too. And a very nice lady was allowed to ask Sanders if God was still relevant and Clinton to whom (?!) and for whom she prays.

It’s a question that Republicans seem more at ease answering than Democrats. Sanders replied with a paean to the Golden Rule of Sermon on the Mount fame. Clinton said she prays often, and would have learned the habit during her White House years if she hadn’t already developed it.

But nobody said, “madam, you seem like a very nice, very sincere person, but I think matters of faith are best kept personal. I’m not applying to be your pastor, after all, I’m running to be your president. If I’m fortunate enough to be trusted with your vote, I will swear an oath to protect and defend the Constitution, not the texts of any religion. And I believe that while faith helps to imbue America with its unique character, the more it is conjoined with politics, the more dangerous things become, both for church and state. I know this doesn’t answer your question directly, but it’s the best answer I have.”

Why doesn’t anybody say that? Well, voting for an atheist (or someone who declines to engage in the rhetoric of religion on the campaign trail) is almost as anathema to Americans as voting for a socialist. Still, maybe someday we’ll hear that answer.

8. Check that male privilege! Sanders got a few genuine boos when he interrupted a Clinton interruption by telling her “I’m talking” or “let me finish” or “you’ll get your turn.” Even if it was his turn, that’s something that will hurt you with women voters. Yes, debates are sometimes frustrating, and yes, there are sometimes interruptions, filibusters and rule violations. But Cooper did a fairly good job of making sure both candidates had their time to speak, and Sanders would have been much better off to suppress his frustration.

But still, it was a minor bump compared to the off-the-cliff-in-the-clown-car show that was the last two Republican debates. And again, no body part measurements. So, success!