To the editor: In Saturday’s Democratic Party primary debate, the moment most revelatory of the respective candidates’ characters occurred when Hillary Clinton was asked, “Should corporate America love Hillary Clinton?” Her coy and evasive response — “Everybody should” — revealed her risk-averse, calculating and dissembling nature. (“A more prickly Democratic debate erupts in early-voting New Hampshire,” Dec. 19)

Trading candor for laughs and applause, she revealed the trait most responsible for public mistrust of her motives and sincerity.

In contrast, when asked whether corporate America would love a President Sanders, the Vermont senator forthrightly replied, “They ain’t going to like me, and Wall Street is going to like me even less.”

Coy or candid, the choice before Democratic voters should now be clear.


Michael Weinberg, Pasadena

..

To the editor: This article says about the debate, “From the beginning it was colored with tension from the controversy over the Sanders campaign’s unauthorized access to proprietary Clinton files on a joint voter database maintained by the Democratic National Committee.”

I watched the debate, and what I saw — not imagined or inferred — were two rivals dispensing in the first minutes of a two-hour event with a brouhaha caused by a database vendor. Sanders apologized without hesitation and Clinton accepted his apology graciously and without making a fuss.


The debate proceeded in a spirited and well-informed manner. It was hardly “colored with tension” from the computer files error.

As a psychologist, I have always been skeptical of the assertion by journalists that they are objective unless they have written an editorial. The Times usually gets this right, but not this time.

Gerald C. Davison, Los Angeles

..


To the editor: What was billed to be the battle of the heirs — Jeb Bush versus Hillary Clinton — is now beginning to look like a bad game of musical chairs.

It appears that Donald Trump and Sanders have excellent chances to win both the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary in their respective parties. Should this occur, and these two go on to win their party’s nomination, the ensuing presidential race might be called “David versus Goliath.”

There is such distaste for politicians in the nation today that this scenario is not altogether unlikely on the Republican side. For the Democrats, they can hardly wait for Sanders to “give them lots of free stuff.”

While this general-election matchup is not likely, the very idea that it could happen is turning the political world on its ear, and that in itself may turn out to be a good thing.


The last thing we need in Washington is more of the same, and with either Trump or Sanders in the Oval Office, we needn’t worry about that.

Henry A. Lowenstein, New York City

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion and Facebook