He would have been better off speaking less.

I don't think the 3 minutes were the problem.

He is too smart a guy to have come in without absolutely compelling answers to the obvious questions that were going to be coming up. He didn't prepare.

That said, most people don't watch the debates so I'm certainly not writing him off. I think Liz did well. She landed punches but she didn't knock him out as everyone here is saying.

Each candidate has had bad debates. I hope this was his. I hope he takes the next one more seriously because I still believe that on paper he's the one with the broadest appeal outside DU, and we really need his money in our post Citizens United world. He's still in it, especially because none of the others has risen above the rest in all these months.

could have given more detailed answers if he was allowed the time.

I don't think a loss in one debate is a be all and end all. But he needs to get his act together if he's going to go any farther.

While Andrew Yang was clearly inexperienced when it comes to debating against long-time career politicians who are much better at it, Bloomberg was obviously rusty from not having debated in a setting like this for years. We saw the same problem with Biden earlier in the campaign. Not sure if Bloomberg is just rusty or just that bad at debating, but part of the reason he got less speaking time (much like Yang back when he was a thing) is because he didn't adequately interject himself into the conversation like the others so frequently do.

in my 50 years in Academia. Now my friends and family complain about my interrupting them.

more time and he would have fallen further.

Looked like he just wanted to be done and get out of there.

to deal with any of his considerable "baggage". His attitude---which he made quite evident---was "How dare you bring up unpleasant facts!"

His pitiful performance was due to either ignorance or arrogance and we don't need any more of either.