Live-Blogging from Democratic Debate by Rick Klein
Email10:08 pm: SO — now that was entertaining. Fascinating that the debate in Nevada could be so dull and this one was so interesting. Obviously, it speaks to the importance of South Carolina for all of them — but it also speaks to the raw nerves and high stakes of this campaign. There were plenty of things that could change the narrative this evening, including the aggressive Obama, equally aggressive Clinton, and an Edwards who was as willing to take on Obama as he was Clinton.
Mostly though we saw very different arguments (made mostly eloquently) from the candidates: Clinton showed herself as tested and experienced, Obama as fresh and ready to remake politics, and Edwards was the fighter — not giving up on this race, not by a longshot (which, sorry to say, he is).
That’s it for tonight, guys. I’ll post a wrap a little bit later tonight to the Political Radar at ABCNews.com. Thank YOU all for your kind words below (and even the unkind ones). As always, it’s been a pleasure (even though it sounds like I missed a heck of a Georgetown-Syracuse basketball game). And read The Note tomorrow for more.
9:59 pm: A friend suggests a novel debate winner: John McCain.
9:59 pm: This Obama closing line is strong, too: "We’ve got to overcome the politics of fear in this country."
9:56 pm: Clearly the Edwards folks think that this McCain’s strong on campaign-finance reform storyline sells for him. I’m not sure that’s what makes McCain a potential force in a general election.
9:55 pm: Clinton summarizes her rationale, again, and well: "I’ve been there, I’ve done that. They’ve been after me for 16 years, and much to their dismay, I’m still here."
9:52 pm: Obama said that he’s a "proud Christian." That was not an accident, and it was no mere description of his religious beliefs. He’s pushing back like never before agianst those scurrilous Muslim rumors.
9:48 pm: This has been two debates, no question. They cleared the air early, with all the nasty and even personal stuff, and then they got to a version of substance — good, clearly presented closing arguments. There are indeed choices in the Democratic race, and it’s not about who "wins" such forums or hurls the funniest insults.
9:43 pm: Obama talks about how Democrats need to "redraw the political map." The good thing about them taking seats is that we’re now hearing sober, rational discussions of why the contenders are actually running for president.
9:41 pm: "This campaign is not about our spouses," Clinton said. (Keep in mind that Bill Clinton is essentially moving to South Carolina this week, while Hillary Clinton heads to Feb. 5 states.)
9:39 pm: It’s interesting to me that, as the debate nears its end, Sen. Clinton is rolling out her big-tent Democrats-rock lines again. Almost like a reward for viewers who have stuck with the whole debate — the die-hard Democrats, seeing her the way she looked back at the early debates, where she could rise above the field.
9:31 pm: GREAT QUESTION from Joe Johns — was Bill Clinton our first black president? Obama gave a really smart answer — leavened with some humor ("Bill’s dancing abilities") — offering just enough praise for a popular ex-president. (Sen. Clinton: "I’m sure that can be arranged.")
9:28 pm: John Edwards mentions his fight with Bill O’Reilly, thereby guaranteeing mention by Bill O’Reilly’s television program. A good feud for the candidate who loves to battle with Ann Coulter.
9:27 pm: "People want to move beyond our divisions," Obama said. It took almost 90 minutes for him to get to his core message. Though this was weird, wasn’t it: Obama says we’ve got "an African-American, and a woman, and . . . John." How’s that for divisions?
9:25 pm: A quick thought on format for the second half — I think Clinton is probably the happiest to be seated. She’s still a wonk at heart, and this is the way to get policy details across.
9:20 pm: ABC’s Sunlen Miller offers this observation: "It’s a good thing they put Obama in the middle, since he’s taking it from both sides." Yes, literally.
9:19 pm: Sort of odd to see them in chairs now, after all that. I wish we could take blood-pressure readings right now.
9:10 pm: Now we discuss the issues? Even the audience had to laugh at that one. At the (rough) midway point: Obama came to play, but Clinton came to play pro ball. And so far, John Edwards is probably winning on points and tone — taking Obama off his game, but pushing his message effectively even from the sidelines of the main event.
9:08 pm: Easiest word on voices/demeanor: Intense. It works for all three. Obama seems a bit angry when he’s being attacked. John Edwards seems most comfortable on stage. Hillary Clinton looks like the pro she is — coolly delivering the rejoinders she’s prepared.
9:04 pm: This remains an odd argument, that Iraqis are responding to the Democratic presidential primary. Anyone seen any evidence of that, or is it just a hunch — one that coincides with political necessities?
9 pm: On health care, Clinton: "I’m not running for president to put band-aids on our problems." Obama tries to turn down the heat on this discussion, but when it’s two against one, it’s hard to regain control. (And why can’t Obama said "Massachusetts" when he lived there for three years?)
8:58 pm: This debate over healthcare — wow, they have gone around and around and around on this subject. But Obama can never make the same claim, about universality, that Edwards and Clinton can. That was a choice. He can defend that choice, and he does so well. But it doesn’t fit in a soundbite.
8:55 pm: How about this Edwards playbook? He is going Clinton’s dirty work now, saying Obama’s healthcare plan isn’t universal. This is new in terms of strategy and messaging.
8:53 pm: OK, I can almost draw a breath again… We haven’t seen anything like this — in terms of intensity of the clashes, but also in the personal level of the attacks. Walmart and Rezko, oh my!
8:49 pm: This is knocking Obama off his game — he’s trying to get back into a groove, and honestly he’s doing as well as can be expected. But this is some rough-and-tumble politics.
8:47 pm: So much for "pacts." Hillary Clinton is loving this exchange — Edwards knows he needs a big showing in South Carolina, and he’s taking it DIRECTLY at Obama on the "present" votes. "What if I had just not shown up to vote on things that are important to this country?" Edwards said. Obama is forced into the defensive.
8:46 pm: This is Obama’s frustration: "I don’t enjoy spending the week or two weeks or the past month answering criticisms that are not accurate." Strikes me as the type of answer that gets him sympathy among people who are already supporting him, but not necessarily something that convinces people to come to his side.
8:43 pm: Serious boos when Clinton says Obama won’t take responsibility. The fact that she’s going there tells me that she’s far more serious about South Carolina than her campaign is letting on — and that her campaign is very serious about sowing doubts about whether Obama can be trusted.
8:42 pm: Edwards just tweaked Obama — that’s a new dynamic.
8:41 pm: Clinton: "If we’re going to be hurling these charges against each other, I’m used to [it.]" That may be the most direct insinuation we’ve heard from Clinton suggesting that Republicans would eat him alive.
8:40 pm: I can’t believe Clinton is still saying that she is glad the bankruptcy bill she voted FOR did not become law. She said that at the last debate. Why is that a good answer?
8:39 pm: Obama tries to rise above: "We do need to trust our leaders and what they say." "Consistency matters. Truthfulness during campaigns makes a difference."
8:38 pm: Louise — it’s the advantage of the crowd, and that’s an excellent point.
8:35 pm: David — I’d just note, that CNN is sponsoring this debate, and they control all usage rights — it is not ABC’s debate. ABC gave a huge chunk of prime time TV to its debates two weekends ago, in New Hampshire — and I’m proud to say that’s far more than any other network. In the meantime, keep reading the blog.
8:34 pm: Edwards is talking race, discrimination, legacy of slavery… Edwards needs game-changers, and this dynamic, with all this fighting, keeps his window open just a sliver.
8:32 pm: A friend points out that I’m already eating my words from 7:57. Glad nobody took me up on that bet.
8:28 pm: Edwards wants in on this — but Wolf is right to see this play out. "We’re just getting warmed up," Clinton said. Obama: "I can’t tell who I’m running against sometimes." Wow — we are seeing IT ALL on the table. So much of the past six months or so have been building to this clash — it isn’t pretty, but it’s good it came out. AND THEN HILLARY CLINTON MENTIONED "YOUR CONTRIBUTOR REZKO." What else you got, punk?
Edwards gets to take the high road — "are there three people in this debate, not two?" "This kind of squabbling, how many children is this going to get health care." Edwards is LOVING this dynamic. "Lord knows you let them go on forever," he said.
8:26 pm: Now it’s getting dirty — it’s all out there. Obama’s getting heated here — he’s got to watch himself. But he’s rightfully angry at how his words are being misconstrued. AND THIS — "You were a corporate lawyer sitting on the board of Walmart." HELLO. Yowsers.
8:25 pm: And Clinton piles on on the war. "After having given that speech, by the next year, the speech was off your Website." With every word Sen. Obama is looking angrier and angrier.
8:24 pm: And Sen. Clinton isn’t backing down — keeping up on this claim (a real stretch) that Obama claims Republicans had all the good ideas. Pretty clearly not what he said — and now I really want to see how Obama reacts — he looks like he’s steaming.
8:22 pm: Obama didn’t need much baiting to take this on — saying that Clinton is part of the "typical politics we’ve seen in Washington," by saying things that are "not factually accurate." He is going right after Sen. Clinton and President Clinton about things he says were misconstrued — again, he is going here by choice, not by prodding. "That’s the kind of campaign we should all try to run."
8:20 pm: Obama with the first line that assumes she wins — "In a year’s time, I’ll be enforcing them."
8:16 pm: Interesting that we’re getting another early mention of trade. I feel like we’re back in Iowa.
8:14 pm: John Edwards comes out most forcefully against the president’s stimulus package — and it’s what Dr. King would want, too. He goes after trade as well — finding a distinction off the bat.
8:13 pm: ABC’s Sunlen Miller: "Obama first to go on the offensive against another candidate – attacking Clinton for not having tax rebates in her economic stimulus plan from the start."
8:11 pm: Obama: "George Bush has made it worse." He mentions MLK and he gets applause with an anti-war line, then mentions South Carolina’s "corridor of shame." It’s a first answer that touches all the bases — big sweep and gritty local politics.
8:09 pm: Sen. Clinton is happy the debate is starting with (and the campaign is turning on) the economy. She’s comfortable talking with this stuff. And if her first response is an indication, she doesn’t sound sick today. She does, however, look tan. AND she gets to be the first to mention MLK — Obama follows immediately by talking about Dr. King.
8:04 pm: Why do the candidates always pretend to be surprised by the people they see in the hall? They know who’s going to be there — it’s such a little sham.
8:01 pm: Judging from the applause — this is an Obama crowd. Surprise.
7:57 pm: Just about game time — remember, this is one of those three-person debates that are so promising in format. I’m betting against big fireworks, but I’m not a good better, just FYI.
7:45 pm: We were just told that there will be "no rules" for the second half of the debate. That means — no lights, no time limits, and TOGA!
7:27: This is "America’s beach playground," according to an early speaker who’s getting the crowd going. All I know is it’s freezing out — so much for thawing out in the "first in the South" primary. Rep. James Clyburn, D-S.C., just admitted that his state failed us: "We promised you beach weather."
7:04 pm: Scott — I do think you’re on to something. There’s a tremendous amount of spin that goes on surrounding the expectations game, and it will be part of the post-Florida spin now that only Obama had ads reach Florida eyeballs.
6:45 pm: Rob — my point was questioning whether a national advertising campaign breaks a pledge not to campaign in individual states. If it does, the burden is placed on candidates to make sure their message does NOT reach people in certain states? I don’t think that was the spirit of the pledge. Look — surely the Obama campaign is glad to get its message out in Florida. But if they are spending money in Florida (even indirectly) it’s wasted: Mark my words, the national media will ignore the Democratic results in Florida, since it’s not a real contest. And this is a blip that doesn’t seem likely to add up to anything significant.
6:17 pm ET: So the Clinton camp is blasting the Obama camp for what they say is breaking the candidates’ pledge to not campaign in Florida, pledges issued because Florida broke the DNC’s rules keeping the pre-2/5 window open. The culprit? A buy on national cable stations, which — of course — includes outlets like CNN, which — of course — has viewers in Florida. I don’t know — is this a terrible offense, to try to reach a national audience? This is not a targeted Florida-only ad. Seems like the Clinton campaign is eager to stir up some mischief.
5:24 pm ET: Word from the Clinton campaign is that their candidate is feeling under the weather — a major cold. She was pretty bundled up on the platform at the MLK event in Columbia — she was doing some serious shivering. We’ll see what it means for tonight…
Rick Klein from ABC’s The Note here, in Myrtle Beach, S.C. I’ll be back online to blog during the debate, starting at 8 pm ET. In the meantime, with the backdrop of this Obama-Clintons (plural) spat, there’s a lot of speculation about this being a far more aggressive debate than we’ve seen. Maybe — but I wouldn’t count on it. First off, this debate is sponsored by the Congressional Black Caucus, on MLK Day — being too aggressive, in a battle with race as subtext, may be unseemly. And second, the Clinton campaign is sending signals that South Carolina isn’t crucial to them; they’ve seen the polls, and Sen. Clinton is dropping in for the debate and then leaving South Carolina until mid-week. That doesn’t suggest to me that Clinton wants or needs to mix it up tonight. And John Edwards is desperate to get back in the conversation — but attack mode won’t get him there.
The big question will be whether Obama jumps at opportunities to defend himself — defense as offense.
In any event, be part of the conversation in the comments below, and check back early and often…
Sen. DeMint: GOP Race Could Go Until Convention 
Obama Avoids Questions on Contraception Rule
What Obama needs to say is this: “where is Bill? He’s been speaking a great deal for you lately and I feel like I should be having this dabate with him”.
“Would you like to take this time now
and go over my record Hillary so we can clear up any troubling details for you? Afterall, if we did it now, it would save you the trouble of later mis-quoting and/or purposefully mis-leading the Amer. people.”
That is what he should say.
Posted by: Patrick | January 21, 2008, 5:02 pm 5:02 pm
I would ask Mrs. Clinton why Bill got so chummy with bush daddy 41 and then decides he should attack Obama for praising republicans. Looks like Bill was blowing kisses to daddy 41 to get a boat ride…Hillary…any response to that????? I would also ask if the sandy berger document destruction was actually to help bushbaby and nobody in the MAINSCREAM arena has thought of that yet???? Hillary…a reply please
Posted by: daddyblue | January 21, 2008, 5:20 pm 5:20 pm
If you throw a dog like Bill Clinton out into a crowd of 50 women, 48 will claw their way to be the woman who takes him home. Just watch the parade of women coming to defend the man. Bill has disrespected his wife, his family and his country and proved himself to be a liar and a cheat. Still women rally to defend him and Hillary for standing by her man. This whole rally proves to me, we as women do not qualify for the WH leadership role. Hillary has proven she will let a man crap all over her and still rally to defend him. This is a woman I do not want my grand daughter to “respect”. To be worthy of a strong position, a woman was make strong choices. Allowing a man to disrespect you and coming back for more proves she is not a woman strong enough to make strong choices. If a woman cannot stand strong alone, she is not worthy of power to rule a nation. They are masters of dirty tricks and have the marketing strategies of Hollywood to orchestrate their ambush. Manipulation is a difficult road to travel and the Clintons know how to manipulate
Posted by: cjvwise1 | January 21, 2008, 5:33 pm 5:33 pm
Obama needs to come out Slinging now! The clintons have been trash talking him since day 1.Well Obama I think its time you tell America about all the troubles the Clintons have been in! Time to take the gloves off wouldnt you say? Remind America who voted to send there Son’s and Daughter’s off to die in Iraq, I think it was Hillary! Remind America who tried and failed at a Nation wide Health Care Plan, I think it was Hillary! We Americans with enough sence to know, who tried bringing up race in this election, I think it was Hillary! We Americans know who tried blocking people from voting in Nevada! All you people mostly the older women make me ashamed to call you a American for Voting for Hillary when she has Voted for the War In Iraq.Its Time for the people who are against hillary’s Republican Style Tactics to show up in force and say no for voting for He
Posted by: Listen Up | January 21, 2008, 6:04 pm 6:04 pm
What Obama “actually” said abour Reagan is absolutely factual and can not be denied, whethere one agrees with what Reagan did or not. Bill Clinton, being his usual sly self is twisting Obama’s words to malign him (and anyone that stands in their way). It only results in reminding us just how fundamentally dishonest are the Clintons.
Posted by: dennis | January 21, 2008, 6:18 pm 6:18 pm
Do you believe that giving people payday loans against next year’s tax returns is a sound strategy for stimulus or perhaps an investment into fuel cell tech, committing to converting 3 million homes and 2 million cars, would up manufacturing, jobs, and bring the cost of the product down to less than an AC unit so that it can be more widely used is a better plan? Hydrogen can now be manufactured on site, as needed, with a pellet of an aluminum/gallium alloy and water. We get off oil and coal, clean the environment, reduce financial burdens on the middle class and create a whole new major industry, sounds like the economy will be stimulated to me.
Posted by: Louis | January 21, 2008, 6:19 pm 6:19 pm
I just had the most amazing thought – what if all this ugliness was just a gimick? What if in the end Hill and O will kiss, make up, and unite to kick the republican’s #####? Huge differences and then POW – they are together? See how we can unite? See how we can put aside our differences? That sure would be a freight train that the Repos would have a hard time stopping.
Posted by: 2009 Where Are You | January 21, 2008, 6:30 pm 6:30 pm
Rick,
1. I dont think you would have made the same comment if the Obama camp was complaining about the Hillary camp not keeping their pledge, right ??
2. It seems that you feel it is worse for the Hillary camp to complain than it is for the Obama camp to keep their pledge, right ??
3. Now back to Obama, do you think it was Obama intentionally ignoring his pledge here, or do you think he just is not experienced & capable to keep his pledges ?? Or maybe you just don’t feel pledges are important to keep ??
Lastly, of course, i don’t like whiners either, but I also don’t like to someone break pledges so easily (no matter if it was intentional or accidental), and of course, I am pretty sure his reply will be done in a way to avoid saying anything specific about what he did, maybe waiting a couple days first, and then of course find something else to complain back as a distraction. He claims he is a person of change, but to me he is definitely a politician too.
Posted by: rob | January 21, 2008, 6:44 pm 6:44 pm
Obama is part of the Washington establishment!!!The only one not part of the Washington scene is John Edwards.Obama can not beat Rommney or McCain
Posted by: Al | January 21, 2008, 6:48 pm 6:48 pm
How a candidate reacts underpressure is a Characteristic we should observe and compare with All Candidates running. Hilary is Acting Presidential by NOT being there and going other more important places. Edwards is on the spot to ‘Do” sumthing. Obamma is going to have to decide how to ‘defend” his statements, which are public record. And sumhow main tain his a show of staying calm and unflustered.
Posted by: Ed Reynolds | January 21, 2008, 6:53 pm 6:53 pm
Rick -
Don’t you think this is a calculation on the part of the Clinton campaign to try to get the national media to pay attention to Florida? Look at the polls there, they all have Clinton up, some as many as over 30 points. If she loses South Carolina, as expected, there’s a lot of time for Obama to use that to gain momentum going into February 5th. A “win” in Florida on January 29th blunts Obama’s momentum and gives Clinton the push she needs going into February 5th. And the only way to do that is to try to make sure the national media covers that primary.
If she starts holding events there and makes this a big enough deal, and the national media starts treating Florida as a real race, that’s very damaging to Obama, and very beneficial to Clinton because of her big advantage there right now. I mean, just just last the Clinton campaign, allegedly, was looking into holding events in Florida. Don’t you think they were just looking for an excuse to go in? Am I missing something?
Posted by: Scott | January 21, 2008, 6:56 pm 6:56 pm
Why bother with the debate. It’s a done deal. Hilliary/Obama ’08. Quit whining already! I just hope Bill will shut up and let whoever the President is the chance to do their job.
Posted by: rw3 | January 21, 2008, 7:06 pm 7:06 pm
Scott,
I am actually not for either one yet, but come on….
If there are really Obama ads running in florida, than it was the Obama camp running these ads in florida FIRST and break THEIR pledge not to. Now you are trying to make this into another Hillary conspiracy ??
Posted by: rob | January 21, 2008, 7:10 pm 7:10 pm
Rick,
To be honest, i really dont understand what you mean about national media will ignore florida ??
To me, the media is out to make a story about anything they can. Wasn’t Michigan one of these other events that no one really campaigned in, but after the results were in, i recall reading something in the media about hillary barely beating uncommitted.
My point is that if that pledge was being kept by the other cadidates and keeping them from getting national attention via cable channels, then why is it ok for Obama to do this ??
As far as i can read into this, they all made the pledge, and Obama is the first to break it. If not a big deal then why dont they all get to get together and confirm what their pledge intentions really are and all agree to do or not do it.
Funny, you say it is a small thing, but look how crazy BOTH camps AND the media will re-act to this issue, just like all the other ones.
If you want to discuss conspiracies, then i offer the alternative. This is just another stunt by the Obama camp to take focus away from the real presidential issues….
For me, i dont believe either one. I think they just did not realize they were breaking their pledge, but of course, instead of just admitting that, we need to get side track with all this meaningless stuff.
Posted by: rob | January 21, 2008, 7:28 pm 7:28 pm
hello my friend, rick, keep it real, don’t let me down and not mention edwards. he is one third of this debate- no word of him in your opening paragraphs– thanks
Posted by: lori | January 21, 2008, 8:09 pm 8:09 pm
Rick,
You know the tan is from stage makeup, needed for the bright lights on them. Why must you make it seem something about nothing ??
Posted by: rob | January 21, 2008, 8:14 pm 8:14 pm
Are you joking me that “dance show” is on abc and we have to get the debate from a blog!?? ABC get with it why don’t you let us see the debate for ourselves let us decide. Or did abc’s parent company give to the Clinton machine and now we only get the information that you want us to have?
Posted by: David | January 21, 2008, 8:20 pm 8:20 pm
i agree, david, but i am thankful we do have this blog to get the scoop from, if rick does his job, which i believe he will. thanks rick
Posted by: lori | January 21, 2008, 8:28 pm 8:28 pm
It seems to me, the Obama does not actually most of the questions asked of me, just like not saying how he would pay for it. Instead he trouts his common line “everyone is saying wrong things about me”. At least the other two answer their questions before they atack the other one.
Posted by: rob | January 21, 2008, 8:29 pm 8:29 pm
do hillary and barack personally hate each other?
Posted by: asst regional manager | January 21, 2008, 8:31 pm 8:31 pm
Well if Rick getts to watch it why dont we. Oh yea “we the people” need ou info spoon fed from the media. We ned to be told what to think.
Posted by: David | January 21, 2008, 8:32 pm 8:32 pm
I have never seen such a heated debate…Why was Hillary booed when she mentioned Rezko when Obama was cheered when he mentioned Walmart??!!
Posted by: Louise | January 21, 2008, 8:32 pm 8:32 pm
Barak–hit her record–her lack of authorship of bills of any relevance in her Senate term–and the many bills you authored, and got passed–ethics reform, for one. You get a two-fer that way…she twists in the wind, and you leave the impression that she is not an effective legislator.
Posted by: SteveW | January 21, 2008, 8:33 pm 8:33 pm
OMG! I wsndng where John was? Obama & Clinton are just at it
Posted by: Dolores | January 21, 2008, 8:39 pm 8:39 pm
Edwards did good. And he also hit Hillary with fact. And he also gave Obama credit for calling for the same things he has been calling for. And Edwards, which none can deny has been the first and only one who has talked of a way to do it. He also said that Obama has stated that the cap needs to be lifted. Obama and Edwards does sound like a good ticket to me. Hillary hits below the belt. And according to the Fed. documents, that racketeer donated that money by way through of someone else. There was no way according to the Fed. document that Barac Obama could have known. Yet Hillary keeps hitting below the belt. Haven’t we’ve had enough of her type of politics and hitting below the belt with the Republicans. Enough Already.
Posted by: Angel | January 21, 2008, 8:40 pm 8:40 pm
Here it comes – Barack hit the nail on the head! People have to be able to trust their reps. I am so shocked that Bill CLinton has acted the way he has and twisted the truth
Posted by: Dolores | January 21, 2008, 8:41 pm 8:41 pm
Absolutely right. A rep can not say one thing on the campaign trail and then vote a different way. Here’s Hillary – Barack voted ‘present’ b/c that’s a standard voting tactic. Hillary knows it b/c she does it too!
Posted by: Dolores | January 21, 2008, 8:44 pm 8:44 pm
I’ve watched CNN quite a few times and it’s amazing how they give so much more time to Hillary, but cut off Obama in mid sentence. They are so biased towards Clinton’s favor.
How can Edwards and Obama keep saying they “respect” Hillary? She is, like her husband, so below the belt.
Ripe one: like the Clinton’s take responsibility for much of anything! Rather. they malign anyone who confronts them. Slime.
Posted by: michael | January 21, 2008, 8:45 pm 8:45 pm
Edwards is on fire!!! He just reignited his campaign (a little!!!)
Posted by: Louise | January 21, 2008, 8:48 pm 8:48 pm
Now John is ganging up on Barack. This is just horrible
Posted by: Dolores | January 21, 2008, 8:49 pm 8:49 pm
I do appreciate your effort in covering what you are able to in this medium. However as a network television station there is some responsibility that is inherent in your roll in society. ABC is in running a dance competition that will have no long lasting effects on our society. Right now the markets are crashing around us, we are at war and our domestic policies are failing our nation. Isn’t it time that someone stand up to the special interests (advertising, and large multinational corps) that insist on keeping us in the dark and inundated with constant ads for worthless consumables.
Posted by: David | January 21, 2008, 8:51 pm 8:51 pm
CLinton is discussing her healthcare plan. I still do not understand how a credit will make healthcare affordable Then, it’s not ‘universal’. France’s gov provides universal healthcare for all. There aren’t any credits!
Posted by: Dolores | January 21, 2008, 8:54 pm 8:54 pm
“why not?” What?! Of course we shouldn’t cover illegal immigrants for healthcare! That would be madness. Where would we stop? anyone who comes in? Come on, CNN, why even phrase the question like that to Obama? We want to reduce the deficit we sure aren’t gonna do it if we cover all illegals! What a dumb question….like it should even be debated.
Posted by: michael | January 21, 2008, 8:56 pm 8:56 pm
Barak–it’s one thing tovote ‘present’ as part of a legislative strategy to implement a package you support. It’s another thing to just BE ‘present’…to have a record of authoring virtually no relevant bills–never having gone out on a limb to write and propose legislation to correct some of the problems you see. Talk up your record of legislative action, versus the legislative inaction of Clinton and Edwards.
Posted by: SteveW | January 21, 2008, 8:56 pm 8:56 pm
Edward just accused Obama of taking money from PACs. Obama came right back and set the record straight. He is discussing his healthcare plan. What we need to do is get the private healthcare companies under the fed gov and move to a France model.
Posted by: Dolores | January 21, 2008, 8:59 pm 8:59 pm
Hillary is talking about her healthcare plan again. I’m sorry, but in practicality her plan is never going to work.
Posted by: Dolores | January 21, 2008, 9:02 pm 9:02 pm
Rick you are so right about Obama’s plan and explanation of same doesn’t fit into a soundbite…Hillary sounded far more convincing on this because she can same the word UNIVERSAL
Posted by: Louise | January 21, 2008, 9:02 pm 9:02 pm
“Whats evolved Hillary is your presentation of my positions”…quote of the night
Posted by: brando | January 21, 2008, 9:03 pm 9:03 pm
I’m shocked. As a perennial Edwards doubter, I am surprised to see him looking more presidential than anyone on the stage in this debate. I suppose that’s the result of his tertiary status – it spares him the insults and lets him focus on the issues.
Does their tendency to devolve into high-school debating tricks mean that _none_ of the candidates (in either party) can handle the executive office?
Posted by: Bill | January 21, 2008, 9:03 pm 9:03 pm
Hillary is “willing to go to the mat.” she can only seem to think in terms of fighting! Doesn’t she get it? We’re sick of all this fighting and old school politics, us vs. them, etc. We so need to move on. Her campaign only thrives when she is in war mode, on the attack!
Posted by: michael | January 21, 2008, 9:03 pm 9:03 pm
I’m getting the impression that Edwards is evaluating who is winning at any one time and siding with them. Very hyena of him. To follow after the killing strike and to keep pushing. It’s really making me think twice about him; not a good strategy. it worked against him and Obama on NH eve attacking Hillary, and now it will work against him and Hillary on MLK day. Edwards can only double team in hopes of getting a second place showing.
Posted by: Jerome | January 21, 2008, 9:04 pm 9:04 pm
The Clinton plan for health care includes mandates. People hate mandates. It is the way she can claim ‘universal’ coverage. There are healthy people who may not choose at tiis time to have insurance, but Clinton says they must be included, or else the rates will be higher for unhealthy people. Someone should ask her about that, because it would resonate with voters tired of mandated taxes, fees, etc., and it would resonate with people not likely to approve of giving huge insurance corporations a free boost.
Posted by: SteveW | January 21, 2008, 9:04 pm 9:04 pm
just lovely – let’s manadate the poor to pay for their insurance! Thanks Hillary. I was torn between where my vote was going to go to. Hillary, you’ve lost my vote, but not just mine. The rest of my family that was planning on voting for you has decided to give the vote to Obama. We’re all here in Chicago!
Posted by: Dolores | January 21, 2008, 9:04 pm 9:04 pm
rick, give us a sense of their voices and demeanor
Posted by: lori | January 21, 2008, 9:06 pm 9:06 pm
I agree, Jerome. I was just thinkig the same thing. Edwards ganged up on Hillary, and it benefited her. Now he is ganging up on Barak. Barak may benefit more than Edwards, as voters hear the name ‘Obama’ more often, as he’s being challenged, and they may see Edwards as an opportunist.
Posted by: SteveW | January 21, 2008, 9:10 pm 9:10 pm
Wow! Clinton is very happy Edwards is still in this race.
Obama’s biggest flaw seems to be delivery to me. He comes off as very flustered by attacks from either side. He looks down at his notes, makes the “eh” “uh” pauses. Clinton and Edwards are talking very definatively. If you didn’t know English, you would know Obama is not doing well in this debate. I knowing English, and this is just one of his worst appearances in my opinion.
The fireworks are in full effect…think we still have a grand finale in store??
Posted by: magilla | January 21, 2008, 9:11 pm 9:11 pm
Rick,
Obama seems angry? You need to support that statement. Folks said the same thing about Hillary when she was the frontrunner after NH and I didn’t agree then. i think this is a bit of projecting…
Posted by: brando | January 21, 2008, 9:13 pm 9:13 pm
I have to agree magilla…I think Obama does look a bit flustered…not very fluid…
Posted by: Louise | January 21, 2008, 9:13 pm 9:13 pm
McCain said the troops might be there for 50-100 years plus, yes, but not in terms of as it is now–fullwar. He meant and said as a base like we have bases in Germany and South Korea. That’s a big difference and makes sense. We can’t just have troops in the US only if we want to have eyes and ears and good intelligence in the world, as well as representing our interests around teh world.
Posted by: dennis | January 21, 2008, 9:13 pm 9:13 pm
Rick,
Maybe it is…. remember the hostages in iran were released as soon as Reagon was sworn in as the new president….
Posted by: rob | January 21, 2008, 9:14 pm 9:14 pm
Oh geez, now “all the rules are going to go away” per Wolf… haven’t seen any rules since the first question was posed! The only thing many will learn from these debates is that Hillary can raise her voice to a “nagging level” when she wants to be heard; Obama has a hard time responding when he is thrown off track; and Edwards can be patient when he wants to listen rather than be in the middle of the schoolyard squabble!
Posted by: Cindy | January 21, 2008, 9:16 pm 9:16 pm
And Obama keeps saying ‘understand this’…it sometimes sounds to me like like he has just begun to understand it himself…I’m sure that’s not how it is but it’s how it comes across…
Posted by: Louise | January 21, 2008, 9:16 pm 9:16 pm
This is helping Obama with the black vote.
America is always jumping on the black man….and he is doing a great job defending it. He will win SC and this election, I promise you that.
Posted by: Lawrence | January 21, 2008, 9:17 pm 9:17 pm
jerome and steve, i can’t see the debate, but maybe that is the purpose that edwards is there for, to make the best point at the time. it must show some of his strength in recognizing the points and alligning with the one he chooses to support??
thanks rick- a great job- but don’t understand the iraqi question in your comments..
Posted by: lori | January 21, 2008, 9:17 pm 9:17 pm
oh, come on….hillary is a pro and obama is losing the debate???
that’s a stretch. you’re completely overstating clinton’s performance over the last hour.
Posted by: ohboy | January 21, 2008, 9:19 pm 9:19 pm
Edwards campaigning for VeeP?
Posted by: Bill | January 21, 2008, 9:20 pm 9:20 pm
Wolfe just asked a dumb question. Can we just stop with race and gender!
Posted by: Dolores | January 21, 2008, 9:20 pm 9:20 pm
I don’t care what ANY of them say. Susan B. Anthony is giggling in her grave. Personally, I like all three of them, but I will vote for Hillary. I cannot croak knowing that I did not support one of my own. The men have really screwed up this country. We have NOTHING to lose.
Posted by: Marty | January 21, 2008, 9:22 pm 9:22 pm
Listen…I’m an Obama guy. You have to admit that in evaluating how handles the questions in terms of delivery, he just hasn’t not had the same hardlined delivery that he typically has in his speeches and that Clinton and Edwards have been displaying. I am talking about all substance aside, Clinton is the pro when it comes to this in debates. On the other hand, I think that Obama has very strong delivery in speeches (where Clinton lacks it in my opinion).
Posted by: magill | January 21, 2008, 9:26 pm 9:26 pm
Marty – I guess you want to continue 9% of umemployment, a recession, and oh yeah, keep a $500 billion war! Yes, let’s support our candidate based on gender and not for a candidate that can reform gov and bring this country to the super power it once was.
Posted by: Dolores | January 21, 2008, 9:28 pm 9:28 pm
marty, please get past voting for one of your own, think about the whole picture and come to your decision, who can reach the most people across party lines, who can win in november! edwards- not because he is a white male, because of his message– they are all good people, that is for sure.
Posted by: lori | January 21, 2008, 9:29 pm 9:29 pm
The seating (and the advice at break time) seems to have made them get all friendly….no more fighting it seems…for now….
Posted by: Louise | January 21, 2008, 9:29 pm 9:29 pm
Well tonight is not speech night, so if he cant match up he is going to come off as the loser in this debate, the uh and ah’s makes him sound rather dumb at times.
Posted by: Mac | January 21, 2008, 9:30 pm 9:30 pm
Rick – Interesting point that Sunlen made. I was wondering if candidates hope for a particular position (physical, not policy). I know I would feel much more comfortable on the end than in the middle.
Posted by: magilla | January 21, 2008, 9:31 pm 9:31 pm
So, Marty–Many in the Democratic party would say Margaret Thatcher screwed up England, being aligned with Reagan. Many would say Golda Meir screwed up Israel by continuing its aggressive anti-terrorist policy instead of more actively serching for peace. But you are voting for ‘one of your own’–based on gender??? Not a real on-topic thing to say on MLK day, which is for remembering a dream that America could one day judge people on their merits, rather than on their race or gender.
Posted by: SteveW | January 21, 2008, 9:32 pm 9:32 pm
Magill – you are right! Obama is a great orator, but not good in debates, while Hillary is excellent in debates
Posted by: Dolores | January 21, 2008, 9:32 pm 9:32 pm
obama in this event and previous ones is able to speak as a person beyond canned sound bites and talking points.
and he consistently is able to use humor more than the other candidates.
clinton having her lines memorized means she has a good memory. it doesn’t mean much more than that to me, as a viewer.
it certainly doesn’t mean she “wins” and obama loses.
Posted by: ohboy | January 21, 2008, 9:33 pm 9:33 pm
“Clinton is probably the happiest to be seated. She’s still a wonk at heart”–Great observation, Rick.
BTW, I think Edwards is winning this one by a land slide.
Obama’s answer to Bill being “black” President was out of the part excellent! ..and Hillary’s retort to arrange that.
Posted by: Michael | January 21, 2008, 9:34 pm 9:34 pm
Mac – That was my point exactly. The “I’m an Obama guy” was a disclaimer to give my claim more credibility; not muddy the waters.
?!?!?!?! What did they give these guys during the break?! Does sitting down really calm the nerves that much?!?
Posted by: magilla | January 21, 2008, 9:34 pm 9:34 pm
Ramsterone, yeap, your love of dirty fighting fits perfectly for you choosing the likes of Hillary for your candidate. The Clintons thrive on (and relish) such antics.
Posted by: Dennis | January 21, 2008, 9:38 pm 9:38 pm
A fine point by both Obama and Clinton on the importance of race and gender in examining the nature of our national woes: This is party still has a hearbeat!
Posted by: Bill | January 21, 2008, 9:39 pm 9:39 pm
WOW!!
First half theme: The aggressive dog fight we saw in the lead up to the Nevada debate.
Second half theme: The Nevada debate (sunshine, lollipops, rainbows everywhere!)
Posted by: magilla | January 21, 2008, 9:39 pm 9:39 pm
Hmmm I think I liked the tuff questions better, its just a little too tame at the moment
Posted by: Mac | January 21, 2008, 9:39 pm 9:39 pm
what is a wonk???
hillary is a ‘wonk’ at heart–?
Posted by: lori | January 21, 2008, 9:41 pm 9:41 pm
Obama, why are you whimpping out to the clingins? Please stay strong..
Posted by: skeough | January 21, 2008, 9:44 pm 9:44 pm
Obama, why are you whimpping out to the clingins? Please stay strong..
Posted by: skeough | January 21, 2008, 9:44 pm 9:44 pm
The q was that Hillary found her voice, but that Bubba needs to tone down his. Ouch! It’s true, I am shocked that Bill has been so nasty and lying about Obama’s record
Posted by: Dolores | January 21, 2008, 9:45 pm 9:45 pm
Here is an idea about stopping child poverty…..How about NOT HAVING KIDS IF YOU CAN’T AFFORD THEM!!
Posted by: Mark | January 21, 2008, 9:45 pm 9:45 pm
this is obama’s strongest argument, imo: he can create a strong majority that has been missing.
60% majority, not 50.5%.
[wonk = policy nerd]
Posted by: ohboy | January 21, 2008, 9:46 pm 9:46 pm
Obama is over talking now, the question was if Bill’s voice is louder than Hills, he complained about the very same thing today now he is doing a flip flop, guess he changed his stance from earlier.
Posted by: Mac | January 21, 2008, 9:46 pm 9:46 pm
Wonk=an afficionado, to the point of being nerdy or geeky about it…a policy wonk is one who would sit on the edge of their chair in rapt attention while a city council disusses, in detail, a new animal control ordinance in executive session.
Posted by: SteveW | January 21, 2008, 9:46 pm 9:46 pm
Going back to what Lawrence said earlier: Yes, absolutely, when they teamed up on Obama it will, in a weird way, work to his advantage, come the Primary in SC. It’s like when Hillary got the sympathy vote from women.
Posted by: Michael | January 21, 2008, 9:46 pm 9:46 pm
LORI – a wonk is basically a political nerd
Posted by: Dolores | January 21, 2008, 9:48 pm 9:48 pm
edwards is talking about winning in rural areas. what was so interesting about nevada is that obama won the rural areas over hillary and edwards.
Posted by: ohboy | January 21, 2008, 9:48 pm 9:48 pm
I am sooo tired of the Democrats quick to help people who screw up their own lives and expect the gov’t to bail them out.
Posted by: Mark | January 21, 2008, 9:50 pm 9:50 pm
Did I hear Edwards right? Did he just say that he is the only one who can beat McCain? Where is he getting that idea?
Posted by: Cindy | January 21, 2008, 9:51 pm 9:51 pm
Edwards is the biggest clown in politics. The only reason he didn’t run for Senate again was because he was going to lose HUGE! Just like the Democrats will in Nov.
Posted by: Mark | January 21, 2008, 9:53 pm 9:53 pm
Rick–re:9:48 pm. I wish it were so, that this is not about a winner, or a home-run sound bite. But this is America, after all. We haven’t realized the dream of the guy whose name is attatched to this debate.
Posted by: SteveW | January 21, 2008, 9:53 pm 9:53 pm
Hey, I’m a conservative white evangelcial and I’m all for Obama and waht he is saying right now. He is absolutely right. We need to not so easily demonize the other side, whichever side that is. We need to reach across. If Hill got the nomination, she can not win if she doesn’t reach out to more voters beyond the Dem base, as Obama can easily do.
Posted by: Michael | January 21, 2008, 9:56 pm 9:56 pm
I think Rick and this blog deserve kudos for running coverage that added perspective to those of us that could watch the debate, and a sense of being there for those of us that could not. Thanks, Rick.
Posted by: SteveW | January 21, 2008, 9:57 pm 9:57 pm
One has to admit all three are good choices. But when the dust settles, we should vote what our own gut-instinct tells us. Come November, I think I will enjoy a ticket of Edward and Obama to come against McCain. Although I have to admit Hillary does have a lot of fire in her to get things rolling. But Edwards does not owe any lobbyist. And I have to admit that Obama has been cleared with the Federal documents of any involvement of what Hillary claimed against him. Just rolling it in my head. I like the idea of Obama and Edwards on a ticket. Don’t care which is head runner, just need them both.
Posted by: Angel | January 21, 2008, 10:00 pm 10:00 pm
I agree with SteveW. Thanks Rick for allowing us to hear your insight and also get insight from others on this blog.
Posted by: Cindy | January 21, 2008, 10:01 pm 10:01 pm
Barak reminds me of Bush in the way he studdards. It’s like he is making stuff up as he goes along. I hope we dont have to deal with that for another 4 years!
Posted by: Danw -tx | January 21, 2008, 10:01 pm 10:01 pm
All 3 of these democrat candidates are a joke.
Posted by: Mark | January 21, 2008, 10:01 pm 10:01 pm
Obama’s JFK line was a good one…about not being afraid to negotiate…
Hard to call a winner on this debate I think….
Posted by: Louise | January 21, 2008, 10:03 pm 10:03 pm
Edwards is a joke he needs to sit this one out, or maybe look at his poll numbers and wake up
Posted by: Mac | January 21, 2008, 10:03 pm 10:03 pm
Totally disappointing. CNN ignored the most important issue,, Illegal Immigration. This is the 3rd debate that the lib media has presented and given the Democrats a 100% pass on this most important issue of 94% of Americans. Shame on CNN – you and the caucus failed America with your inept leadership and debate bickering of non-issues.
Posted by: Bill | January 21, 2008, 10:04 pm 10:04 pm
Now I know that Hillary just didn’t do what she did. To claim that Edwards has anything to do with Lobbyists. Or to come up with claims against Obama about Lobbyists.
Posted by: Angel | January 21, 2008, 10:05 pm 10:05 pm
Obama should learn to answer a question straight-on instead of avoiding them. He is Teflon-Obama.
Posted by: mmc | January 21, 2008, 10:06 pm 10:06 pm
I find it funny how the Democrats refuse to admit the war in Iraq is becoming more and more successful every day
Posted by: Mark | January 21, 2008, 10:06 pm 10:06 pm
Cannot say who won this debate. There was too much squabbling and not enough substance. It is hard to determine who would be best, unless you are looking for the bully on the playground.
Posted by: Cindy | January 21, 2008, 10:08 pm 10:08 pm
it’s been fun, rick. thanks for being there. i hope we can keep that window cracked a little longer for edwards, not back to same old, same old with the obama said/hillary said and no mention of john– that is a shame looks like it already started with cnn headlines…
Posted by: lori | January 21, 2008, 10:08 pm 10:08 pm
I remember that at one of the last debates the men huddled off to the right of the stage with their backs to Hillary. I couldn’t believe it.
Posted by: Suzannaquanashawn | January 21, 2008, 10:09 pm 10:09 pm
ahh, mark, now i get it, you are repub, and that’s why the name calling on edwards– he is your biggest fear–you know the repubs can beat the others– that explains everything you say
Posted by: lori | January 21, 2008, 10:11 pm 10:11 pm
Fear Edwards??? Are you kidding?? He was destroyed in every debate he had with Dick Cheney in 2004 and looked stupid.
Posted by: Mark | January 21, 2008, 10:15 pm 10:15 pm
Of course, you can always vote for a Republican. They are responsible for our economic crises with the outsourcing of jobs and government incentives for big buisness to send American jobs overseas while creating a loss of jobs in our country. Contributing to the loss of job security, loss of medical insurance in households loss of income loss of homes. Good choice. NOT!
Posted by: Angel | January 21, 2008, 10:15 pm 10:15 pm
Excellent debate! All of the candidates did well, but John Edwards stood out as a person of great stature and integrity.
Also, Edwards seems to genuinely care about the lives of average Americans.
Posted by: tessablue | January 21, 2008, 10:16 pm 10:16 pm
I appreciated John Edwards’ presence and prickling of the other candidates. I really noticed Obama taking on what he has characterized as “distortions” from the CLintons. Admittedly, it has to be hard taking on the former President and Mrs. Clinton. But he’s made the switch and he’s pushing back. He looked assured and ready to me.
Posted by: Terri | January 21, 2008, 10:20 pm 10:20 pm
Hey Mark – no one is expecting anything from gov, especially our soldiers who are lucky to make it back from the Iraq war with some of their limbs! You’re right those Democrats are so quick to help those that deserve it especially when they pay 30% in taxes.
Posted by: Dolores | January 21, 2008, 10:20 pm 10:20 pm
Edwards is a guy who gets $400 haircuts and lives in a 28,000 sq foot home is worried about the poor? That’s the phoniest thing I have heard.
Posted by: Mark | January 21, 2008, 10:20 pm 10:20 pm
Have to agree with Mark there, that has to be the phoniest thing in this game
Posted by: Mac | January 21, 2008, 10:24 pm 10:24 pm
ok one last, anyone who brings up the haircut and big home is trying to spin edwards as a phony because if the people knew the truth,– that he means and feels what he says, –as any warm blooded level headed and open hearted can tell–, edwards would be the front runner and the thought scares the repubs to death. sweet dreams mark and mac
Posted by: lori | January 21, 2008, 10:31 pm 10:31 pm
Hillary, Bill and now Edwards teaming up against Obama. But he keeps on impressing.
Thanks Obama (our next President) for creating something in this country to feel good about.
Posted by: Den | January 21, 2008, 10:32 pm 10:32 pm
Oh Mac! careful with what you post, it might hunt you in the future. Agreeing with small-minded folks can make you one too!
OK so long now!
Posted by: Dolores | January 21, 2008, 10:34 pm 10:34 pm
Hillary=queen of SPIN
Obama=hope+change
Posted by: Eresha | January 21, 2008, 10:37 pm 10:37 pm
BTW, Rick, I love “The Note”–reading it is always my top prority. There is nothing like it anywhere else: very well, and I might add, cleverly, written, with a good synopsis of the prior day’s events. Please keep it up. Thx.
Posted by: michael | January 21, 2008, 10:37 pm 10:37 pm
I think John Edwards has both shown himself to be the most centrist candidate in terms of being in line with the pulse of the American people in terms of health care, the war in Iraq, and the economy and job. Edwards sounds presidental.
Obama keeps trying to adopt pieces of Edward’s platform, because Obama simply does not have the answsers.
Posted by: Mary | January 21, 2008, 10:45 pm 10:45 pm
Regardless of what people are saying, we ain’t voting a black or woman President. So what do the Democrats have left? An phony trial lawyer who is a clown.
Posted by: Mark | January 21, 2008, 10:47 pm 10:47 pm
The only things I noticed negative about Hillary’s comments were in regard to how she spoke of women in classes. (I don’t remember the actual “cents” amounts) Hillary said WOMEN make 77 cents on the dollar and WOMEN of COLOR make 50 cents on the dollar. Question? are they not all WOMEN is stead of her saying white women vs. black, asian, and latino women. Hillary abreviates the human factor to often. This way of speaking factual information to the American people glosses over the true aspects of communication. We need a straight talker in the White House. The correct wording would have been Caucasian women vs. women of color.
Posted by: Ed | January 21, 2008, 10:50 pm 10:50 pm
Hillary says she wants honest trust worthy people in her white house… Where is Bill going ot live?
Posted by: Lori McGee | January 21, 2008, 11:27 pm 11:27 pm
When she said it’s not about our spouse’s, he should have nailed her! He can’t really expect he will ever meet with Bill. And don’t forget, he would have had a televised audience to pitch how Bill is running things. That was his perfect chance to call into question her competence.
When she mentioned his campagin woes, LORD knows she AND Bill have had enough themselves, he should have stuck back! &&&& he missed some great chances to mop the floor with her.
Oh and far as her not feeling well, please. I don’t believe that. That was just an excuse just in case she did poorly. They would have blamed her performance on that. Man, I will rejoice in voting against her.
Posted by: Mark | Jan 21, 2008 9:53:32 PM,
And Mark you are right. But, it will only be b/c Hillary will be on the ticket. You see some people are stupid enough to believe she can and will win. Funny Huh.
Posted by: Liz | January 21, 2008, 11:28 pm 11:28 pm
If that debate had been b/w Al Sharpton and Clinton, the outcome would have been different. The tone would have surely been different. I don’t mean to be funny or offend but no wonder Blk. Amer. has questions about Obama. I still like him though. Besides, he is just not as negative and dark as Hillary. So it’s really no wonder she didn’t have a problem being so argumentative and extremely unpleasant….John Edwards is looking better but can he go the Distance? I mean does he have what it takes?
Posted by: Karen | January 21, 2008, 11:34 pm 11:34 pm
Clear winner – HILLARY CLINTON will be our next President !
Posted by: Jean | January 22, 2008, 1:02 am 1:02 am
Barack Obama finally took Hillary Clinton on. He finally defended himself against her and her husband’s Republican-style slime machine: the lies, the meanness, the dirty and shameless campaign she and her husband and all their mouthpieces and operatives and surrogates have been waging against him. Finally, Barack stood up for himself. Good for him.
Posted by: Jack | January 22, 2008, 4:08 am 4:08 am
I hate to bust the Obamarama reality show, but anyone with the guts go to google and put in election polls and look at the numbers. The little wimp Wolf Blitzer said after the debate the polls were too close to call on the Dem side nationwide. In reality Hillary has very very large leads in California, Florida, Pennslyvania, New Jersey, and New York, some as large as 25 points. Almost all polls have her up by 7-10 points nationwide. It is disgusting that CNN would not report this correctly just so they can keep their lead story about the annointed Candidate Barrack Hussein Obama on the top of the news…… NO Obama supporters will answer the comments I made about Obama’s slum lord friend, his radical muslim buddy in Kenya, his unwillingness to even use his own true name or his attendance at a church who give people like Farrankhan awards. Barrack Hussein Obama is ashamed of his name, ashamed of his heritage, ashamed of his mother, ashamed of his bi-racial race, ashamed of our flag, and I am ashamed of him.
Posted by: Colonel Ray | January 22, 2008, 5:16 am 5:16 am
i wonder if Edwards put on a show for the public and Hillary’s sake. Pretending to attack Obama. Maybe Edwards was giving Obama a change to defend himself. Who knows. However Edwards is not the one. Obama is not the one. Hillary is the only one who can put us back on track.. greg
Posted by: greg | January 22, 2008, 8:43 am 8:43 am
well said, april, folks wake up! edwards is for real– real heart, real brain, real change–really for us!
Posted by: lori | January 22, 2008, 11:17 am 11:17 am
I would say one thing. Good policies make good politics.Let’s face it. We are in a pre-recession,later,during recession and then, post-recession. We depend of a economy for everything. We need a strong candidate that will use experience,skill and ability to do her/his best to bring up the economy and every policy in all different areas that a government does. Right now we need to vote for a candidate that will do the best for the country.BUT Fresh star,charismatic, good speeches, young,united, etc, etc. All these are okay.However, think hard and be smart and honest, Do you think that right now we need a candidate with these qualifications? Do you remember these qualifications? George Bush,right! and what happened now? bad policies and bad politics, and a country collapsing in recession, soldiers dying, a war that put our economy in recession,lost social program,etc. Who lose? the poor people and everyone else. WE NEED a candidate will do the best for all of us. BE SMART, think with your head and don’t waste your vote.BE SMART, if you don’t like the candidate,but the policies will be okay for our economy. health, education,and any policies that will help our children,grand children,and grand grand children. VOTE SMART.
Gloriab.
Posted by: Gloria B. | January 22, 2008, 12:40 pm 12:40 pm
The two top democratic front-runners need to stop slinging mud at each other and start taking about the real issues that face hard working americans. Obama shouldn’t get offensive when the other Democratic Candidates start critcizing his voting record or other comments that he has made while in the presidential race. The way I see it if he can’t stand the critism now then the republicans are going to have a field day with him if Obama is Indeed the Democratic Nominee.
Posted by: mandy | January 22, 2008, 2:29 pm 2:29 pm
Is there a Hate Crime for Politics, if there isnt there should be, because thats the tactics the Clintons are using towards Obama!
Posted by: Listien Up | January 22, 2008, 10:30 pm 10:30 pm
“defense as offense” – truly great plan!
Posted by: EYP member | September 11, 2008, 7:11 am 7:11 am