Political Machine

Obama Should Reach Out to Ron Paul

Tommy Christopher — 2008-06-10T13:41:00+00:00

Filed under: Barack Obama, Featured Stories, Ron Paul, Debates, 2008 President

I wrote a story the other day advising John McCain to pick Ron Paul as his VP, a genius idea that he has no chance of actually listening to. The main reason I thought of it was that Paul has so frequently humiliated McCain (and the GOP also-rans) during the debates. Why not use that weapon against his Democratic opponent?

Of course, this led me to an even greater stroke of genius, because it actually has a chance at success. I floated the idea on yesterday's Obama conference call. Here's the abridged exchange:

Tommy Christopher: Ron Paul performed very well in debates against John McCain on the economy, particularly in the Florida debate from January, where he asked McCain a question and Senator McCain's response was likened to that of Miss Teen South Carolina. Will you be reviewing those performances in anticipation of debates, and do you see any role for Ron Paul in Senator Obama's campaign, or administration?

Austan Goolsbee: If Ron Paul's supporters care about fiscal responsibility, when they read John McCain's tax plan their heads may explode.

They didn't really answer my question, and kind of bitched at me for not being laser-like in my narrow adherence to their topic (Obama's Economic Plan). God, I miss Howard Wolfson.

Ben Smith over at Politico dug it, but probably more for the entertainment value. It's never a good sign when people laugh while you're being serious. Ron Paul could be a big help to Barack Obama. Hell, he already has.

The main suggestion I would make to Obama, and the easiest to accomplish, is to study Ron Paul's performances in the debates. I added the rest of the question to give it that memorable "crazy factor," so later that day, when they saw Senator Obama, one of them would say, "B-Dawg, you'll never guess what some dude from AOL suggested..."

"Don't call me B-Dawg."

Like an NFL team reviewing game films before a clutch cargo matchup, Obama can augment his already formidable debating arsenal by studying Dr. Paul's humiliation of McCain in Florida, and whatever it was that Paul did to Giuliani to make him cry "Uncle!" as he dropped out of the race.

As it happens, Obama and Ron Paul have similar assets when it comes to debating. They both have an uncanny ability to resist oversimplified, straw-man arguments and loaded questions.

In Obama's case, he takes your point and throws it back at you over your head. When McCain grandstanded and challenged Obama to a photo-op in Iraq, Obama suggested McCain take a tour of America, get to know those folks.

Ron Paul, on the other hand, goes the other way, throwing it in the dirt and daring you to come up with it. When Rudy Giuliani childishly demanded an apology from Paul during a debate, he, instead, got a quick, sober and credible analysis of US foreign policy blowback. It was wasted on the hooting debate crowd, but independent voters, the real brass ring in this election, were doubtless impressed.

A mix-and-match of these approaches could be very effective against McCain in the upcoming debates. Regardless, Barack Obama should try to participate in as many of these as possible.

Aside from this, though, Ron Paul's and Barack Obama's supporters have more in common than you might at first think, so the idea that they would partner in some way is not that outlandish. Both candidates are opposed to the Iraq war, and both seek an end to politics as usual. For Obama, reaching across the aisle to a true conservative would shore up his post-partisan image.

Given the gulf between the two on certain issues, it might be tough to find the right appointment for Paul, but unless it has already been promised to John Edwards, why not Attorney General? Protecting the Constitution is a hallmark of Ron Paul's political life, and the next administration would benefit greatly from having a truly independent Justice Department.

Would Ron Paul consider such a move? That's tough to say, but all indications are that he would not. Although he has not endorsed McCain, he has vociferously eschewed an independent run, or any suggestion that he is anything but a Republican.

On the other hand, if Obama was sincere in offering Dr. Paul some real influence in his administration, perhaps Paul could be persuaded that he would do more good ushering in a purer era in politics than in standing with his wayward comrades in the GOP.

In any case, the presence of Ron Paul in the Republican primary race has already benefited Obama. By continuing to show McCain up in primaries, most recently garnering 24% of the vote in Idaho, Ron Paul has reminded people that there are principles that are greater than Party. By highlighting McCain's support for the war and ineptitude on the economy, he has teed up the presumptive GOP nominee for Obama. All Barack has to do now is swing.

From the Florida GOP Debate:

REP. PAUL: My -- my question is for Senator McCain.

This is an economic question that I wanted to ask. It has to do with the President's Working Group on Financial Markets.

I'd like to know what your opinion is of this and whether you would keep it in place, what their role would be, or you would get rid of this group. And if you kept the group, would you make sure we would see some sunlight and know what they're doing and how they're being involved in our markets?

SEN. MCCAIN: Well, obviously we'd like to see more sunshine.

But I as president, as every other president, rely primarily on my secretary of the Treasury, on my Council of Economic Advisers, on the head of that. I would rely on the circle that I have developed over many years of people like Jack Kemp, Phil Gramm, Warren Rudman, Pete Peterson and the Concord group. I have a process of leadership, Ron, that is sort of an inclusive one that I have developed, a circle of acquaintances and people that are supporters and friends of mine who I have worked with for many, many years.

REP. PAUL: So you'd get rid of the group?

SEN. MCCAIN: You remember back in 1982 when Phil Gramm -- Phil Gramm and Warren Rudman and Gramm-Latta and all of those people got the first real tax cuts done, the real -- first real restraints in taxes. I was there. You were there. And I rely on those people to a much larger degree than any, quote, "formal" organization, although the secretary of Treasury is obviously one of the key and important posts that I would have.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

McCain Can't Wait to Debate

Christopher Weber — 2008-06-04T11:38:00+00:00

Filed under: Barack Obama, John McCain, Debates, 2008 President

After last night's stinker of a speech, John McCain is realizing he's certainly not going to win the election on the strength of his rhetoric. He wants to engage his opponent one on one (though in these days of HD he could be risking a dangerous Kennedy/Nixon type contrast). Today McCain called for more debates or joint forums this fall.

McCain adviser Mark McKinnon floated the prospect last month of the two candidates campaigning in the same states together and holding joint forums without a moderator. Obama said at the time that he would be open to such a prospect.

That could be interesting. It's hard to imagine McCain having the upper hand in those kinds of settings. Both candidates seem equally suited for such engagement.

But then this morning McCain went even further, suggesting that he and Obama criss-cross the country together, stopping in the same states to spar, away from any "big media-run productions." He wants a town hall every week until the Democratic convention. AND McCain even suggested the two men travel on the same plane! It would be a good way to go green and cut down on expenses, he said. Can't wait to see what Obama says to that.

Right now there are only three sanctioned debates, the first coming September 26 in Mississippi.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Ducking Debates?

Greg McNeilly — 2008-04-24T22:27:00+00:00

Filed under: Debates, 2008 President

Hillary Clinton's campaign has stepped up its push to have more debates. After the last debate, in Pennsylvania, where Obama was widely seen as a weak performer, Barack's campaign is refusing to continue the dialogue. Obama's campaign has already shut down a North Carolina debate with CBS. Clinton renews her challenge for a debate this coming week as well as after, signaling for two debates in Oregon.

There have only been four debates with only Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

The inexperienced of Obama has been more obvious in his one-one-one exchanges with Clinton. Unaccustomed to time restraints, speaking with a teleprompter and engaging in a dialogs (versus his typical monologue), debates are not Obama's strong suit.

From his tight scripting of press availabilities to his aversion to debates is a serious shortcoming. It shows a candidate not ready for prime time. It also shows a candidate who is lacking the confidence in his own ideas,unwilling to engage in a regular give-and-take over ideas. Given the quality of political discourse these days, voters are best served with more debates, not less. And America will be led best by a leader willing to engage in a regular, unscripted dialog of ideas and not by those who prefer to only preach at us.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Obama Takes Shot at Tuzla

Caleb Howe — 2008-04-19T23:30:00+00:00

Filed under: Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Debates, 2008 President

Senator Obama, like many politicians before him, promised to bring us a "new kind of politics." Since that first gleaming promise, a number of missteps and mischaracterizations have left some of us wondering exactly what is new about the campaign's politics.

The Democratic debate this week has prompted a lot of frustration among supporters of the Senator's campaign, charging everything from irrelevance to downright partisan hackery. Senator Obama, in a controversial appearance in North Carolina on Thursday, called the debate the "roll-out of the Republican campaign against me in November."

His supporters, his campaign, and the Senator himself have had harsh words this week, suggesting that the debate was an unjust hit job. They felt these types of "gotcha" politics are nasty, negative, and not necessary.

It seems, however, that such criticism does not apply to campaign conference calls. ABC's Political Radar reports that the Obama camp went for the jugular this week on Hillary's Tuzla moment, holding a new kind of conference call during which they actually rolled out three Bosnian war veterans to discuss the ways in which Senator Clinton had dishonored them.

During the call with reporters, which classified Senator Clinton as having poor character, no honor and failing in leadership, Senator Obama's campaign showed an eagerness for "gotcha" politics that would put George Stephanopoulos to shame. Although pro-Obama blogs and leading Democratic blogs like Dailykos are rending garments and wailing lamentations following the debate, it seems the Obama campaign didn't actually find the ABC questioning of Senator Clinton all that unfair.

The Clinton campaign responded immediately on their own conference call. Communications Director Howard Wolfson noted, "Boy when the Obama campaign decides to go negative, they really go negative!" Wolfson also pointed out that during Wednesday's debate Senator Obama made a point of the fact that his campaign had only discussed the Tuzla moment when asked about it by reporters.

The Obama campaign has spent several days outraged over so-called "gotcha" politics. They suggest such things aren't of interest to Democratic voters, that these issues don't speak to character. When it comes to Tuzla, however, the Obama campaign is ready to open fire. Of course, that's how sniper fire works ... from behind cover.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

ObamaNation's Abomination

Faye Anderson — 2008-04-18T17:50:00+00:00

Filed under: Hillary Clinton, Democrats, Barack Obama, Debates, Media

Politics ain't beanbag. That's the message Bill Clinton sent Barack Obama:

When I watched that debate last night, I got kinda tickled. After the [debate], her opponents, oh, the people working were saying, "Oh this is so negative, why are they doing this." Well they've been beatin' up on her for 15 months. I didn't hear her whining when he said she was untruthful in Iowa or called her the senator from Punjab.

And, you know, they said some pretty rough things about me, too. But you know, this is a contact sport. If you don't want to play, keep your uniform off.

Obama's supporters are bitter because the gloves finally came off in this week's presidential debate. While both Hillary Clinton and Obama were worked over by the moderators, Obama was badly bruised.

Moveon.org is circulating a petition to try to shut off scrutiny and criticism. It's ABC News today, but it could be a citizen journalist tomorrow.

Obama and his supporters should quit moaning and groaning over some tough questions. If they can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

ABC Hunted Down Flag Pin Lady

Tommy Christopher — 2008-04-18T16:25:00+00:00

Filed under: Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Featured Stories, Debates, Media

ABC has been the subject of much criticism due to the tone of Wednesday night's debate, particularly for the grilling given to Barack Obama at the spatula of former Clinton aide George Stephanopoulos. New revelations, broken by TPM, show that ABC's conduct may have sunk to a level unprecedented in mainstream journalism:

Well, it turns out TPM Reader JL did give it some thought. And he came up with something very interesting (see JL's post at the DrexelDems blog). He did a little googling and found out Nash is pretty popular with the traveling press now in Pennsylvania. It turns out McCabe was featured in an April 4th story in the Times which begins like this ...
Ask whom she might vote for in the coming presidential primary election and Nash McCabe, 52, seems almost relieved to be able to unpack the dossier she has been collecting in her head.

It is not about whom she likes, but more a bill of particulars about why she cannot vote for Senator Barack Obama of Illinois.

McCabe goes on to discuss her concerns about Senator Obama's pin-wearing habits.

The article goes on to say that ABC News specifically tracked her down for the debate, according to McClatchy, although ABC failed to disclose this, or anything else about Ms. Nash, during the debate. As far as the audience knew, she was just a random voter.

If this is not a crime, it certainly is a travesty. How far does this scandal go?

Update: See end of story for updates from ABC News, the Obama Campaign, and the Clinton campaign as they occur.

The debate on ABC was already on shaky ethical grounds, given Stephanopoulos' relationship with Hillary Clinton. CNN had the good sense, earlier this year, to take Clinton loyalists James Carville and Paul Begala off the air until after the election.

Additionally, the moderators took the opportunity to inject stories into the debate that they could never have reported as news, not because of a lack of factual basis, but for a lack of news value. The fact that Barack Obama has crossed paths with Wiliam Ayers would get you laughed out of a creative writing course at the Learning Annex, let alone journalism school, but ABC pushes it into the spotlight just by asking about it, and using the rationale that it's news because people are talking about it? So, the question is news?

But to seek out a person whom they know is against Barack Obama, to ask a question worthy of Joseph McCarthy, without disclosing that foreknowledge? Unconscionable. It violates every tenet of journalistic sourcing, and it may run deeper than that.

The McClatchy piece doesn't say how McCabe came to the attention of ABC, nor exactly how they tracked her down. This needs to be investigated. Giving Stephanopoulos the benefit of the doubt before was a stretch. Now, this raises all kinds of questions. Who gave the order to find McCabe? Who knew about it and when? What does this news say about the integrity of the rest of the debate?

I have contacted both campaigns for comment on this story, and am awaiting a response.

Update: The Obama campaign has no comment at this time. I am waiting to hear from the Clinton campaign and ABC News spokesman Jeff Schneider. The Washington Post has an earlier statement:

Asked about Nash's involvement in the debate, ABC News spokesman Jeffrey Schneider said today: "We looked for questions from voters who had taken issue with the candidates' responses or lack of response to issues that were important to the voters. One citizen made clear that Clinton had lost his vote over her explanation of her trip to Bosnia."

In McCabe's case, Schneider said, she "pointedly asked Obama his feelings about the flag. These questions were representative of what we heard again and again from voters regarding the importance of credibility and electability as central issues in this campaign."

Update: 4pm- I just got off the phone with ABC News spokesman Jeff Schneider, who graciously took the time to fill me in the best he could. I asked him how ABC News came to know about Nash McCabe. "We read about her in the New York Times."

I asked if he knew who specifically had pointed her out, and he explained that it was part of the editorial process, and that it could have been anyone.

. I also asked if any of the other videotaped questioners had been selected this way, and he said he would have to check on that. Fair enough. Ms. Nash's provenance is much easier to establish now that she's a news story.

I also asked about the William Ayers question, and he said, "This is a question that the candidate has refused to discuss on the campaign trail. . Also, the notion that Sean Hannity put this question in George's ear is utterly absurd. We have asked him about it a number of times, Jake Tapper blogged about it on April 10."

I let him know what my concerns about both questions were, and I thanked him for taking so much time to talk with me.

Update: 7:05 pm - As of this hour, the Clinton campaign has not responded to my request for comment. I won't print the questions they didn't answer, because I don't want any inference drawn from their silence. This is the point I'm trying to make. The mere fact that someone is asking a question does not make it a news story.

I went back and looked at Jake Tapper's blog entry for April 10, to see for myself if it passed journalistic muster. Mind you, it's not required to, as it is a blog entry and not a news story, but to make the leap to the debate on ABC, to be mentioned in the same breath as the Bosnia SniperGate story, it certainly must. The emphasis is mine:

The proverbial Republican attack machine is chugging along on this -- see THIS CLIP from last night's "Hannity & Colmes" on Fox News, featuring Karl Rove making much hay out of this connection, however tenuous, and Ayres speaking at the University of North Dakota saying he doesn't regret anything he did against the government.

There is a tendency in the Obama campaign to not take these types of stories seriously. That is a "perfect world" approach to politics. In a perfect world, some might argue, we would be debating policy in Iraq, the economy and health care. We wouldn't have discussions about whether Al Gore claimed he invented the internet, or George W. Bush got a DUI in the 1970s, we wouldn't talk about Swift Boat Vet for truth claims that contradict official Naval records.

But that's not the world we live in. Yes, the mainstream media is complicit in that, but there are other forces at play. Paid TV ads, the internet, cable news, talk radio -- sources of information, and misinformation that have an impact on the electorate, necessitating that the mainstream media cover stories having an influence on the election even if they did not originate in the mainstream media. We of course are obligated to fact check them and deal with them responsibly and the mainstream media does not always rise to the challenge.

If only, Jake Tapper, there was some member of the mainstream media around to deal with it responsibly, then you wouldn't have to stand by helplessly and watch Obama fumble it so badly.

The story he tells is actually not about Obama and Ayers, you see, it's about how the Republicans and Fox are going to talk about Ayers. By that reasoning, if you get enough people to wonder if Obama kidnapped the Lindbergh baby, it's game on!

This is what I'm talking about. Like I said in my Captain Ed story, the "new media" often involves a transference of responsibility, usually from blogger to reporter, but in this case, from ABC News to "concerned voters." They're not reporting the Ayres story, but some guy wants to know about it. What can they do?

As far as the flag pin goes, if this is really still an open question with voters, is this the most responsible way to handle it? To have an outspoken critic of Obama ask him if he believes in the flag, on videotape? If so, I wonder how they, and the Clinton campaign, will feel during the general election when a voter asks Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, during a debate, why they don't think abortion is murder?

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

The Debate We Deserve

Brandon Barker — 2008-04-18T11:30:00+00:00

Filed under: Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Debates, LOLection

As the dust settles on Wednesday's live ABC debate between Democratic candidates Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, and moderated by Charlie Gibson and Debbie Gibson, the bad reviews are coming fast. However, as sincere (and correct) as they may be, they are missing the point: This is the 2008 LOLection(R), people. Brace yourselves for some serious unrelenting silliness.

For those who need a little more explanation, here is a brief, multiple-choice question to illustrate the point:

Q: Which question would you most like to ask the next President of the United States?

A. Is it possible to pay off the national debt without raising capital gains taxes?

B. Would you delay a troop-pullout in Iraq based on a general's advice?

C. What is up with the pregnant transvestite that was on Oprah?

If you answered "C," you are most likely going to decide the next president of the United States. Which is totally cool.

For those who still don't understand, or who didn't even read this post and went right to the video, here you go:

B. Brandon Barker is the author of the novel Operation EMU.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Focus Group: Dem Crossovers for McCain

Dave — 2008-04-17T22:33:00+00:00

Filed under: Debates, 2008 President

Frank Luntz's focus group (tip to redstate) has some bad news for Democrats. There were a lot of hands going up when Luntz asked this group of Dems if they would consider voting for McCain:

Before McCain and the rest of the GOP goes all giddy we should remember that when this thing gets settled (and it will get settled) it will be full on attack versus McCain from all quarters. There may be some leaners, but they usually snap back after the heat of the primary is over. In other words, I wouldn't bet my campaign on crossovers were I McCain. And that goes double if they work out a Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama VP deal.

But McCain should also enjoy the vacation while it lasts.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

In A League Of Their Own

Faye Anderson — 2008-04-17T22:19:00+00:00

Filed under: Democrats, Debates

The reviews are in: last night's Democratic debate was the worst ever. With debate moderators stuck on stupid and bitter mudslinging, one media critic, Marty Kaplan, wants the League of Women Voters to step in:

Would someone please get the networks out of the presidential debate business?

The networks and the national press love their gotchas, their -gates, their "controversies," their heat. They, alas, are not the grownups in the political process. The grownups are the voters, who -- lamely, in the mind of the political class -- are troubled by the war, the economy and boring stuff like that. Stuff that networks think make for lousy television.

I don't blame news producers for doing what they think their job is, which is scoring brag-worthy Nielsens. I don't blame political talking heads for being infatuated with the narratives that they themselves create and market. Blaming them would be like blaming babies for banging their spoons on their highchairs, or addicts for wanting their fix.

I'm a longtime Leaguer. The League withdrew from the presidential debate business in 1988 because "the demands of the two campaign organizations would perpetrate a fraud on the American voter."

Twenty years later, the media are perpetrating a fraud on American voters who want information about Hillary Clinton's and Barack Obama's proposed solutions to get the country back on track.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Post Debate: Was That the Worst Debate Ever?

Denise Williams — 2008-04-17T01:27:00+00:00

Filed under: Featured Stories, Debates, Scandal, Media

It took me a bit to realize that what I saw tonight was the total meltdown of media moderation of a debate.

For 51 minutes tonight we heard nothing of substance. I know some readers will disagree here - some were very happy Williams Ayers was brought up and to hear about Reverend Wright just one more time. And somehow wearing a lapel pin or not wearing one is worthy of political discourse for this country in trying times. You know, you and we can go back and forth on these issues daily here and on other blogs and media. This debate was watched by millions - not just in this country, but around the world.

The only person who won tonight was Sean Hannity. This may make some happy, but for most of us it's a disaster. This has nothing to do with who I support for President. I sorely miss the League of Women Voters.

A quick quote from TPM Josh Marshall says all that needs to be said:

Looking around other sites, I guess I'm not the only one that thought this debate was unmitigated travesty.

I'll have more later today. But on a lighter note, on my way out of the spin room tonight I saw a small group on the corner holding Ron Paul signs. I went over and had a brief chat with this really nice group of kids. I asked them if they were the future of the Republican Party and the gave me an emphatic "YES". They expect to one day replace the neo-cons and paleo-cons that they feel are choking the life out of the party and erase the false choices of the two-party system. They raised my spirits and I'm glad I met them.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Debate: Live Coverage

Denise Williams — 2008-04-16T20:02:00+00:00

Filed under: Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Breaking News, Debates, 2008 President

Well, all..I'm heading to the spin room to try and ask some campaign surrogates some questions. When I get home later, I'll do a post debate wrap up. Thanks to Tommy for keeping the comments section going! Oh, and Howard Fineman from Newsweek is a REALLY nice guy!

9:30 - Hillary does not support federal gun laws. What works in New York may not work in Montana. I'll have to check on this, but I believe she supoort federal gun bans once. George looks a little sceptical, too.

Affirmative action. Hillary says "let's affirmatively invest in our children". Ok. Sounds good.

I just noted in the comments that this rooms full of journalists seems asleep. Since this is my first debate in a press room, this could be normal. I'll find out. But check out the comments over at ABC News if you get a chance - nobody there seems too damn thrilled with this debate either.

9:10 - Still on the economy. Hillary favors investing in infrastructure and green projects. She would not increase the capitol gains tax. Here's a purple Dem elephant for you for the commercial break:

8:50 - Yay, issues! Clinton will start taking troops out of Iraq in 60 days. Obama will not listen to the people on the ground like Bush. Well, maybe for tactics.

Obama bolsters his appeal to Jews by making sure that he mentions that Iran will never get away with doing anything bad to Israel. Hillary: Me too, me too! She will not have the Iranians in her White House, but she will engage diplomatically.

Economy: Shows video of McCain saying "audicity" and HOPE in little finger quotes. Hillary likes that. Middle class tax cuts? Nah, but Obama might do something to offset the payroll tax.

8:35 - Obama begs and pleads to bring the debate back to important issues again. Oh! Another Latrobe person! This one wants to know why Obama doesn't wear a flag pin! Hey Charlie, George! Hello?? Healthcare? Iraq? Our shredded Constitution - we're in the Constitution Center for crack's sake!

Ayers...Here we go Katherine! I hope you're there. I told you they were gonna go with the Ayers question...

Seriously though, Obama mentions that he's also friends with Tom Coburn who advocated for the death penalty for abortions. Should that be held against him as well. Why is Hillary backing this up? BILL pardoned some Weather Underground, didn't he? Yes! Obama brings that up. I just raised a fist in the air. I think some people near me are Hillary supporters - they're glaring at me.

8:50 - Yay, issues! Clinton will start taking troops out of Iraq in 60 days. Obama will not listen to the people on the ground like Bush. Well, maybe for tactics.

Economy: Shows video of McCain saying "audicity" and HOPE in little finger quotes. Hillary likes that. Middle class tax cuts? Nah, but Obama might do something to offset the payroll tax.

Ayers...Here we go Katherine! I hope you're there. I told you they were gonna go with the Ayers question...

8:10 - Charlie asks the "bitter" question. Obama understands how some would be offended. It's not the first time he effed up and won't be the last! He clarifies. People, when feeling down fall back on constants.

Hillary's grandad was a poor mountaineer from Scranton. Or something. In any event, she understands that type of life better than Barry. She's asked if she thinks Obama can beat McCain. She admits that Obama can win, but she's better because of what she's been through. Obama thinks he's way better.

Barack remembers the time that Hillary was called elitist - after the Tammy Wynette - baking cookies thing. Now she does shots.

Charlie asks why Obama didn't know what Rev. Wright was all about. Obama dices and slices saying "I said I didn't see the ones circulating on You Tube." Next question, please! Hillary is asked why she said Wright would never be her pastor, after all he did good things. 22 minutes in and all we've had has been Bitter and Wright. Sounds like a folk duo. Friend Paddy informs me that everyone is probably now changing to Deal or No Deal. I'm bored.

George wants to know who loves America more - Barry or Wright. Is Wright as patriotic? I'm going downstairs and slapping both of them. Enough!

Hillary - are you the Queen of Tuzla? Do you pack an AK-47? No, she says - just not as accurate as usual.

8:00 - Obama gets to give his opening statement first. Hillary looks on lovingly. He talks about a man in Latrobe, PA that can't find a job and worries about the gas money to go find another - doesn't indicate whether he loaned the poor guy any.. Did they close the Rolling Rock plant?

Hillary speaks to the fact that government is not standing up for them. Promises all things to all people in the world.

First question concerns about disparate constituencies between the two. Mario Cuomo wants them to pledge to run together. Hmmmm, no one wants to answer. Ok- Obama bites. But it's too premature to pick a running mate. More promises about stuff and McSame is the Bush II. Hillary promises to make sure a Democrat gets to the White House. Close ranks and unify! Hah! Have you seen our comments section lately??

Chesea is looking pretty and looks like she's going to cry.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Debate: Hillary Supporters Outnumber Obama's

Denise Williams — 2008-04-16T19:19:00+00:00

Filed under: Debates, Media, Stephen Colbert

Outside of Philadelphia's National Constitution Center tonight, throngs of Hillary supporters completely overwhelm the tiny effort by Obama supporters. If I had to guess I would say the ratio is 50:1. I'm very suprised at such a poor showing here in Philadelphia where Obama is expected to make most of his gains in the state's primary on Tuesday. One thing though - the poor guy with the megaphone shouting himself hoarse yelling "Yes We Can!" probably wishes Obama's catch phrase and Hill-ar-y didn't have the same amount of syllables.

Great push by the Clinton organization! Credit where credit is due.

In other pre-debate news, George Stephanopolous and Charlie Gibson reported live for ABC Evening News. Below are George and Charlie. Both touted the new polls out today - and declared that Hillary had to be very disappointed. George would not answer when I asked if he would question Obama on Ayers. Just a sly smile...

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Debate: Stephanopolous Gets Ideas From Hannity

Denise Williams — 2008-04-16T16:05:00+00:00

Filed under: Featured Stories, Debates, Media

Hello from the site of tonight's ABC Debate between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. We're having a gorgeous day here today in Philly and I wandered around the site of the debate - the National Constitution Center - a little before I came in.

Clinton supporters are out in droves across the street. There were only two lone Obama supporters trying to get the attention of the cars and Ride the Ducks vehicles among the din of Hillary screamers. I'll check later if the Obama people got off their butts and got out here.

For some pre-debate coverage, my friend Paddy pointed me to a story at Daily Kos about George Stephanopolous' pre-debate prep. Apparently he was on Sean Hannity's radio program yesterday and Sean wants some questions answered!

When Hannity asked about the first question below about Ayers and whether George had plans to ask such a question, George replied, "Well, I'm taking notes now Sean." It did actually sound like he was pausing to take notes. And Hannity continued to feed him more:

1.Ask Obama about his relationship with Ayers and WeatherUnderground and Axelrod's comments, "They're friendly"

2.Ask Obama why he attended the Million Man March

So you Ayers afficianados out there may get your wish! These televised debates this cycle have broken all kinds of records and you may just get to hear your favorite question asked and answered in front of a huge television audience. I'll keep my fingers crossed for you! :-)

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Yep, Another Dem Debate

Denise Williams — 2008-04-16T00:10:00+00:00

Filed under: Democrats, Debates, Media

It's almost over, gang. Just two more Democratic debates between Hillary and Barack before the convention. Wednesday night, ABC News is hosting a debate that will televised from the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia at 8:00 pm EDT. Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopolous will moderate.

I'll be live-blogging from the spin room starting around 7:00 pm Wednesday. It will be a different kind of live-blog as I chase media types around the room trying to get them on record on anything for our readers.

I don't expect I'll get anywhere near the candidates, but if you have any suggestions for questions that I can ask other media people or the candidate surrogates, leave them in the comments section and I'll give it my best shot!

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Democratic Debate: Obama Wins Fixed Fight

Tommy Christopher — 2008-02-27T00:28:00+00:00

Filed under: Hillary Clinton, Democrats, Barack Obama, Debates

At tonight's Democratic Presidential debate, possibly the last one, Hillary Clinton needed a knockout against Barack Obama to reverse the downward momentum of her campaign. She ended up fending off the moderators more than her opponent. In between, she failed to deliver on the radiant promise of the last debate, while also landing a few blows.

Once again an obviously scripted joke fell flatter than Mike Huckabee's globe, but this time, she had a real point there. Brian Williams, and particularly Tim Russert, gave Hillary a George Foreman-style grilling, while Obama received only a quick saute.

However, even absent the moderating inequity, Hillary's performance did little to change the perception that her campaign is flagging. After the jump, a quick look at some key moments, including an extraordinary commercial break.
Hillary set the tone early by complaining anew about Obama's healthcare mailer and his criticism of her positions on NAFTA, which is fine, except she characterized as "attacks" what were merely legitimate policy differences. Obama scored here by pointing out Clinton's own campaign tactics and saying he wasn't going to "whine" about them.

The healthcare question was remarkable in that the candidates went 4 or 5 rounds on that issue alone. Hillary tried to score by prolonging the question, saying, "This is too important...", but the moment was a replay from the last debate, lacking spontaneity. Although she is stronger on the substance of this issue, Obama countered effectively, and she came off a little bit desperate.

Then came the awkward SNL line. It was obviously crafted in advance, to be dropped in at the appropriate moment. She picked on the fact that she was being asked the questions first, a pretty weak point, and the crowd reacted with murmurs and a muted jeer or two.

Ironically, the line would have scored big had she waited a minute, as Tim Russert launched into a blistering critique of her statements on NAFTA. She countered effectively by explaining, very naturally, the nuances and context of her NAFTA record, and Russert went back at her not once, not twice, but three times.

This is Russert's MO, to eschew substance in favor of "Gotcha!" word games. Both candidates felt the sting of Russert's wet noodles, but Hillary was clearly on the wrong end of that scale. These were her strongest moments, where she most often shied away from scripted talking points and just worked on her feet.

A great example was Russert waving Hillary's "Economic Blueprint", and trying to get her to backpedal on job creation in the context of net job losses in New York State. She correctly pointed out that her predictions for the state were predicated on a Gore presidency and a national Democratic agenda.

She missed the opportunity again to modulate her comments on Obama's readiness as Commander in Chief, or to take ownership of it, again deflecting to her own bona fides.

Russert is also a serial interrupter, but clearly used the tactic more sharply and frequently on Clinton. Perhaps the SNL comment unleashed a peevishness in the moderators. He then began to engage in silly foreign policy hypotheticals, and both candidates affected a reasoned tone that underscored the absurdity of asking a Presidential candidate, "Pop quiz, Hotshot..."

At one point, Hillary tried to respond to Obama, and Brian Williams and she had a near shouting match, as Williams tried to explain the "hard break" to her. It is hard to believe that there is no mechanism to forewarn the candidates, like they have at, I don't know, every comedy club, or that a pro like Hillary wouldn't have known it.

Coming back from the break, Hillary was helped back into her seat by a stagehand, and I could swear I heard her say, "Cut me, Mick, cut me!"

Obama scored big when they played the "Celestial Choir" clip (by "mistake"), and remarked with aplomb, "Sounds good!"

Russert did launch into a couple of ridiculous "Gotcha's" on Obama, along the lines of, "Farrakhan endorsed you, your pastor likes Farrakhan, doesn't that then mean you have Cooties?"

Obama answered well, but Hillary went back at him and forced him to reject Farrakhan's endorsement, an unusual surrender for one of these debates.

These two candidates agree on much of the substance, so much of these debates rest on the perception game. Obama was cool and confident, while Hillary was clearly pressing. The only silver lining here is the possibility that the moderators' unbalanced pressure on Hillary engenders support for her, a thin hope indeed.

Update: TFitz, I saw you on the preview, hope you make it here. I keep missing my regulars. Just know that I do read all of the comments eventually. Thee have just been a lot lately.

Everyone, please keep in mind, this type of debate analysis has only a small part to do with policy issues and debating skill. The substance of these candidates was hammered out long ago, in the first 15 debates. Now, the thing that matters most is where the debate moves the voters. In that context, Obama is the clear winner, as I didn't see the punch from Hillary that would stop Obama in his tracks.

Having said that, I hope that the media and the anti-Hillary voting public do some soul-searching on where this level of hostility comes from. It ain't healthy.

There you are, Tom! Yeah, Hillary really needed to blow Barack out of the water. Still, the moderators' behavior really has me wondering if this could still help her. We'll know more tomorrow, if that becomes the story. It was pretty stark to me. Yourmarketedge, Russert's NAFTA litany was prepared and unprovoked.

Tommy Links

Tommy Christopher Uncut l TomMySpace l TommYoutube

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

The Final Showdown? Dem Debate Preview

Tommy Christopher — 2008-02-26T17:05:00+00:00

Filed under: Hillary Clinton, Democrats, Barack Obama, Debates, 2008 President

Tonight's Democratic Presidential Debate may very well be the last such contest between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. With her leads in "firewall" states shrinking, Hillary may be forced to drop out if she loses either Texas or Ohio March 4.

This debate presents some choices and opportunities for Hillary. After turning up the heat the last few days, she can come out swinging, but she needs nothing short of a knockout to make any difference. Or she can adopt a more apologetic tone, as her recent campaign tactics are bound to come up, and be seen as going out gracefully. A side benefit to plan B is that she positions herself well if Obama should stumble before March 4, or gets photographed punting kittens.

I'm looking for plan A tonight. There could be major fireworks, and it will be interesting to see how Obama handles it.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Obama Wins; Hillary Hits Homer in 9th Inning

Tommy Christopher — 2008-02-22T09:00:00+00:00

Filed under: Democrats, Barack Obama, Debates, 2008 President

My very brief analysis of tonight's Democratic debate in Texas: Hillary Clinton missed several golden opportunities, and Barack Obama held his own. With her lead in Texas narrowing, and her struggle to win delegates increasingly steep, Hillary Clinton needed a knockout, or needed Obama to fall on his face. That didn't happen, so this is a win for Obama.

However, Hillary so badly outclassed Barack on that final question that it makes the earlier missed opportunities that much more glaring. Worst of all was her invocation of the bogus plagiarism charge. After Senator Obama had thoroughly dismantled the argument, she tried to launch a sound bite, saying, "That's not change you can believe in, that's change you can Xerox."

Not only did the crowd boo her, but she wasted a chance to blunt the damage done by a week of negative campaigning by surrogates. She should have repudiated the plagiarism claim, and reinforced her "solutions, not speeches" argument. It would have been a classy move that would have allowed her to capitalize on her later gains.

Her performance on that last question, however, was so superb, and so powerful as the last word in the debate, that she could have gained real ground if not for the missteps. This is what I was talking about when I said, "Let Hillary be Hillary"

Update: Here's the video of that last question. After the jump, a little more analysis the morning after.

Neither candidate really answered the question asked, which was to name a crisis that had tested them. Obama gave a meandering autobiography, and said the whole thing was his test. Hillary made a relaxed crack about weathering crises in the first Clinton era, then spoke very movingly about wounded veterans, and finished by saying that whatever she goes through is nothing compared to the troubles of ordinary Americans. A triumph.

The moments that fell flattest were those that were obviously based on campaign talking points, like bringing up Chris Matthews' ambush of Kirk Watson. It is a shame for Hillary, because Obama scored lots of points against McCain, another area Hillary could have done better on.

Here was Hillary's weakest moment, her "Xerox" comment.

On the question of earmarks, Hillary took a novel approach, but Obama wins the point anyway.

She elects to answer a different question, a popular technique, but a missed opportunity given the strength of Obama's answer. Again, this answer seems to have been crafted by strategists rather than emanating from an authentic place. She needed to address the earmarks specifically, and didn't.

Hillary came off really well in areas where she essentially agreed with Obama, as with the economy. Her answer is relaxed and assured, and she really shines on this one.

In an area where I believe Obama is weaker, he carries the point by effectively countering Hillary's anecdotal flourishes. By the way, where is her Secret Service detail? It sounds like people are constantly grabbing her arm, or clutching her hand, on the campaign trail.

Hillary missed a huge opportunity, almost as huge as the "Xerox" misstep, with this question.

Her silence on the question of Obama's readiness was deafening. She should have started by saying, "Of course I think he's ready, but I'm readier, more qualified." She could have even made a joke about Obama being ready to be "a heartbeat away." Although she didn't say he wasn't ready, which would have been a major blunder, she could have scored major class points here.

It seems clear to me that the thing that tripped her up here was the din of strategists and talking points in her ear. It's a shame, because if she picks up even one of those missed points, I think it tips this debate in her favor.

I hope that, if Hillary doesn't come back to win the nomination, that she ends up on the ticket with Obama. I also hope that the next time she runs for office, she gets rid of her current strategists and hires me. It will be the easiest paycheck I ever earn. "Let Hillary be Hillary."

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Debate Live Wire - Dems Face Off in Texas

Liza Porteus Viana — 2008-02-21T21:30:00+00:00

Filed under: Hillary Clinton, Democrats, Barack Obama, Debates, 2008 President

Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama faced off in Texas tonight for the first of two debates between the Democratic presidential hopefuls before the March 4 primaries in two battleground states.

The debate, sponsored by CNN, Univision and the Texas Democratic Party, served as a good chance for Clinton - who has lost the last 11 primaries and caucuses in a row to Obama - to try to get back some of her mojo. Obama sputtered a little bit at first but gained momentum the second round, exhibiting that eloquent confidence his supporters know and love. Clinton stayed strong and got in the last word, talking about how her personal struggles show she's a fighter. There weren't too many fireworks, but there was a sparkler here and there.

8:04 p.m.: Clinton - wearing a black pants suit - is "just delighted" to be back in Austin, where she registered voters as a young politico. 350,000 kids in Texas get health care every month, because she helped start the Children's Health Insurance Program - vets do too. A lot's been done, but she still wants to "take on the tough issues that face us now."

8:09: Obama - wearing a black suit with red tie - says he and Clinton have been "friends before this campaign started, we'll be friends after this." Goes through his usual message, adding that, "Washington is a place where good ideas go to die" because of the "stranglehold" lobbyists and special interests have on the agenda and political bickering.

So far, the two are playing nice and not giving each other the evil eye.

8:13: Univision chief Jorge Ramos kicks off Q&A asking whether, as president, they would sit down with the new Cuban president at least once. "I would be ready to reach out and work with a new Cuban government" once it proves it's willing to change, Clinton says. Obama (who has previously said he would meet with leaders of Cuba, Iran, North Korea), says: "I would meet without preconditions, but Senator Clinton is right" in that there should be preparations made, such as freeing political prisoners. "I do think it's important for the United States not just to talk to its friends, but also to talk to its enemies."

Some would call that "diplomacy" - something we could probably use a little bit more of these days.
Both quote JFK about negotiating in fear. Clinton says U.S. needs to open talks with Iran, says "era of preemption and arrogance" of the Bush administration is over. (applause) Obama says meeting with the American president should not be a "privilege that has to be earned" by foreign leaders.

8:22: How do the candidates differ in their plan to manage the nation's economy? Obama says you don't need an economist or the Federal Reserve to tell the American people the economy is trouble, they've "been struggling a long time." End the Bush tax cuts, shut down tax havens, implement good trade standards to prevent toys with lead paint on them from getting into our kids' mouths.

8:26: How will Clinton be ready to tackle the economy differently from Obama on "Day One," if elected? Well, for one, it's time to take focus off those upper tax-bracket citizens and zoom in on the middle class. "The wealthy and the well connected for the past seven years, and I think it's time the rest of America had a president to work for you." CNN moderator Campbell Brown has to cut her off as she tries to forge ahead to end Bush's "war on science" and other issues.

So far, Clinton seems to be on a roll, while Obama isn't showing us everything he's got.

8:30: Would you put a halt to the illegal immigration raids going on in the U.S. if elected? Clinton would unless an "egregious offense" is involved. After all, kids shouldn't be left alone when their illegal immigrant parents are hauled away. Promises to introduce path to legalization within 100 days of taking office. Obama says those who want to stay have to pay back taxes and get to the back of the line. Bush has been "too obsessed with Iraq" to improve relations with Mexico.

8:35: Would you commit to speed up construction of the border fence or halt it? (Both candidates voted in favor of the fence.) "There is a smart way to protect our borders and there is a dumb way to protect our borders," Clinton says, and the way it's going now for sure is the dumb way, putting the fence through universities and peoples' yards. Ditto for Obama, who adds that the U.S. needs to pass the DREAM Act, which would allow illegal immigrant students to pay in-state tuition to state colleges under certain conditions.

8:42: What about English as the national language? Clinton says English should be our "unifying" language but it's "not appropriate" it be made the official language. That somehow discriminates against non-English speakers. Obama says everyone should learn English but American students should learn a second language.

8:46: Commercial break

8:49: Enough of this polite back-and-forth. Does Clinton think Obama is "all hat and no cattle?" Clinton says she offers "solutions" to voters - just look at her 35-year record. She was "somewhat amused" recently when an Obama supporter couldn't think of an accomplishment of his (ka-pow!). "Actions speak louder than words, and I offer that," she says.

8:53: Obama, starting to warm up, fires back in the first interesting moment of the night (he's left-handed, by the way, and there's a fan off-camera somewhere that keeps blowing his notes everywhere). "I have acted a lot" in the last 20 years, passing ethics reform legislation, provide tax breaks to the needy, reform the criminal justice system, he says. Clinton has a "fine record," but her recent theme of "let's get real" seems to insinuate his campaign workers are "somehow delusional" in thinking their man can win. "The thinking is somehow they're being duped," he says, but his string of wins and endorsements of late prove otherwise.

8:56: Time to bring up the whole plagiarism issue we couldn't escape this week. Clinton's camp accused Obama of stealing a governor's words in his speeches without due credit. This for sure is only an issue because Obama's stellar oratorical skills seem to put supporters in some kind of trance. "This is where we start getting into silly season of politics," he says, giving himself a pat on the back for his "pretty good" speeches. Clinton has weird-looking big smile on her face now, which turns into some sort of a grimace before she responds: "It's not change you can believe in, it's change you can Xerox."

9:06: Commercial break

9:10: Clinton is asked a question about Iraq but won't let the previous health care question go that Obama got to answer before commercial. In support of universal health care, Clinton touts some ideas of John Edwards (is that her way of trying to get his endorsement?) Obama: Me too! Me too! I wanna talk about health care more. This goes back and forth several times.

9:15: What does Clinton mean when she says Obama doesn't have experience to be an effective commander-in-chief and effectively deal with Iraq? Clinton doesn't want to talk about him, she wants to talk about her own experience, and about how our embassies are being burnt down around the world. "I am prepared and ready on Day One." But duhhh, Obama wouldn't be running if he didn't think he could wear the commander-in-chief hat, says he will end the "poor planning" carried out by Bush re: Iraq, takes the very expected swipe at Clinton for giving Bush the authorization to invade.

9:21: Is Iraq better off now because of the surge? Clinton says Iraqi government hasn't moved fast enough to get on its own feet and take control of the country while the surge is in force. She wants plan to begin withdrawing troops within 60 days of taking office, stop giving those Iraqis a "blank check." Obama, who opposed the surge, says it will be much easier for the candidate opposed to invading Iraq in the first place face off with John McCain in the general election.

9:26: Commercial break

9:31: We're back. Little bit more about secrecy, earmarks, economy...(yawn)

9:35: What if the delegate-based system produces a different nominee than who the people want? "I think it will sort itself out" and the Democrats will be united heading into their November victory, Clinton says. Obama says he and Clinton have been working their tail off, so the primaries and caucuses and the will of the voters should count. Then veers slightly off topic about how nobody thinks Washington listens to them.

(Hold it, isn't the writers' strike over? Does that mean I'm missing new episodes of "The Office" and "30 Rock" right now?)

9:38: Candidates are asked to describe a moment of crisis in their lives when they were the most tested. Obama's been raised by a single mom, worked on the South Side of Chicago, helped further civil-rights issues - he's a tested uniter. How does that fare against Clinton's response? "I think everybody here knows I've lived through some crises and some challenging moments in my life." (Loud cheers, applause at how that darn philandering husband of hers brought her world crashing down, yet she's still standing.) How does she keep going every day? Those hits she's taken are nothing to those she says the average American faces just to get by every day, or what that young soldier with half of his face disfigured from a roadside bomb is dealing with.

9:42: Obama and Clinton share a tender moment and shake hands when Clinton says she's "honored" to be here with him. Slightly awkward moment as the candidates get a standing ovation and appear to not know if the debate is over. But it is, and Clinton got the last word. Chelsea comes out to stand with her mom.

No big new political points really scored by either candidate, but the audience loved both of them. Is there a Clinton-Obama or Obama-Clinton ticket in the future?

Meanwhile, a Washington Post-ABC News poll out today shows Clinton and Obama running neck-and-neck in Texas (48-47 percent, respectively) but gives the New York senator a slight lead (50-43 percent) over her opponent in Ohio. Read more analysis of the poll here. A CNN/Opinion Research Poll also shows Clinton and Obama in a statistical dead heat in Texas, where 193 Democratic delegates are up for grabs. Politico offers a good story about the challenges both candidates face in wooing Hispanic voters there.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

For the Love of...! No More Dem Debates!

Denise Williams — 2008-02-07T13:17:00+00:00

Filed under: Democrats, Debates, 2008 President, Media

The Clinton Campaign, pulling just even in delegates, running short on cash and looking for advantages where they can find them - especially if they're cheap now - is pressing the Obama campaign for a few more debates before the convention. Actually one debate a week for the next five weeks starting this weekend is the proposal in an open letter released yesterday by Patti Solis Doyle - Clinton's campaign manager.

It's easy to see why the Clinton camp would want to push in this direction. Hillary is a better debater than Obama and although he has gotten better lately, it's just not his best forum. Debates sponsored by others also gives the campaign access to millions of viewers without spending ad money.

While I was really hoping not to have to sit through Wolfie or Timmeh ask any more inane questions of Clinton and Obama and looking forward to the debates with the two eventual nominees, I suppose one more might cement in voter's minds what the two of them are about. But five? Spare me. There have been 18 of these debates already and while 17 of them included other candidates, the overwhelming focus on all 17 had been Clinton and Obama.

Another issue that would be sure the rile the left and leave us open to derision by the right is the list of possble venues Solis Doyle suggests:

Senator Clinton believes voters should have more than one opportunity to see the candidates discuss the issues and has accepted five debates between now and March 4th from CNN, MSNBC, WJLA, ABC and Fox News. [emphasis mine]

You'll see that the Clinton camp has already accepted all 5 - a position from which she'll be able to pressure Obama to accept or seem scared to debate her. How might Obama react? Well, early indications are that he's considering one such debate in Houston:

[Houston Chronicle]

Presidential hopeful Barack Obama said Wednesday he would agree to meet rival Hillary Rodham Clinton in at least one more Democratic debate, but wouldn't say whether he'll come for one planned Feb. 28 in Houston.

"I'm sure we will accept at least one," the Illinois senator told reporters, responding to a challenge from Clinton, who proposed Tuesday that they meet for four debates before the March 4 primaries in Texas and Ohio.

Clinton, a senator from New York, has accepted invitations to appear on ABC's This Week on Sunday; Fox News in Washington on Monday; CNN from Ohio on Feb. 27; and MSNBC from the George R. Brown Convention Center on Feb. 28, her campaign said.

The Clinton camp kept up the pressure Wednesday, with Howard Wolfson, the Clinton campaign's communications director, pointing to the voter interest in the Clinton-Obama matchup in Los Angeles last week. "These debates keep going up and up in viewership," Wolfson said.

Obama swatted away suggestions that Democrats are that hungry to see the two candidates go at it one-on-one. "I don't think anybody's clamoring for more debates," Obama said. "We've had - what - 18 debates so far."

I think we can handle one more debate between these two to catch up anybody who may have missed the previous 18, but after that - no more, nada, halt. If you haven't gotten yourself out there by now guys, you never will. But can Obama resist the draw of Fox News? I sincerely hope so. I can only see a Fox debate a setup for derision in front of a right-wing crowd.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

The Winner of the Debate: America

Tommy Christopher — 2008-01-31T22:23:00+00:00

Filed under: Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Debates

Well, earlier today, I was all set to deliver a searing blow-by-blow post-game account of a bloody battle over the souls of John Edwards' stranded supporters. As the debate began, it looked like such a battle was going to materialize. But something beautiful happened along the way. The Democratic candidates, Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, found the soul of Democracy.

Greg did a fine play-by-play, and I had planned to offer a detailed analysis, taking copious notes which I perhaps will make use of tomorrow, but the poetry of this moment has grabbed me...

In the early going, both candidates name-checked Senator Edwards, paying tribute to him and crediting him with leadership on key issues. There were some minor political shots here and there, a great deal of policy discussion, and in the end, a display of unity of purpose that nearly brought a tear to the eye of this old reporter.

Look, I know these are politicians, but you can't tell me that you watched that final question, and the warm, chatty embrace of the candidates during the credits, and didn't feel like everything was going to be all right.

There are political points to be explored, and I was surprised by more than a few things in this debate, but for now, I want to hold onto that feeling.

The final question of the debate dealt with the possibility of the two rivals teaming up on the same ticket, eventually. Now, Barack Obama answered first, and the text of his answer was parsed and obtuse, as it would have to be. But in that moment, as he paused here and there to avoid just saying, "Yes", I could see the struggle in his face, as if in an instant he had to decide whether to let go of all of the rancor and bitterness, and he did. Hillary's face lit up, and she heartily agreed with him, and with the notion that their party, and indeed, our nation, must find redemption in each other because it exists nowhere else.

There is a lot of campaign left, and it can't all be kittens and smiles, but for now, I am happy to know that everything is going to be all right.

Tommy Links:

Tommy's Facebook | Tommy's Mom, The Lady of Light | The Specious Report | Tommy's Youtube

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments