(Photos by EMMANUEL DUNAND/AFP/Getty Images)
MANCHESTER, N.H. – The Swamp is live-blogging the ABC News/Facebook debates tonight at St. Anselm College, just three days before the New Hampshire primary.
Up first are the Republicans at 7 p.m. EST (6 p.m. Chicago). When they clear the stage, after about 90 minutes, it's the Democratic candidates turn.
Your comments are encouraged.
-Jason George + Jim Tankersley
~
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Updated: 10:51 p.m.
From George & Tankersley:
Charles Gibson, temporarily playing the role of Captain Obvious, just launched the final question of the debate by saying "It's been a very interesting evening."
And then some.
For example: As we type, the local affiliate for ABC – who excluded presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich from the debate – is using Kucinich as a political commentator to judge the debate and explain his positions.
Not surprisingly, he thinks he's more qualified than any of the 9 who actually debated.
"There's myself and all the rest," he says.
Most interesting, perhaps, will be the reaction from New Hampshire primary voters across the spectrum in the coming days. Topping our list of questions for viewers here – and across the country – is this: Who looked presidential tonight?
Whose command of issues, responses under fire and, perhaps most of all, overall demeanor, projected Oval Office readiness? Who looked out of their league? Who looks like a winner, in Tuesday and/or in November, and who looks destined to share a stool with Mike Gravel?
We leave it to you. The comments are open.
Good night from the Granite State.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Updated: 10:43 p.m.
from George:
Gibson asks a fantastic (albeit process) question: In all the past debates what answer did you give that you wish you could take back?
CLINTON: - Avoids really answering
RICHARDSON: "I made a lot of them." He picks the time during a previous debate when he said Whizzer White was his favorite Supreme Court justice, as he later learned White did not support Roe v. Wade.
"That wasn't a good one."
EDWARDS: - The time he commented, a "horrendous mistake," on Clinton's pink coat during a previous debate. "And I want you to know I think you look fantastic tonight," he said to Clinton who smiled, laughed and said "Thank you."
OBAMA: - Avoids really answering.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Updated: 10:33 p.m.
From Tankersley:
Say this about Edwards – he's managed to work most of his stump speech, including attacks on corporate profits and even a "real American" anecdote – into his debate answers tonight.
From George:
No doubt. All the Dems have pulled much more from their stump speeches than the Republicans did, leading to much less spontaneity on this side.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Updated: 10:26 p.m.
From George:
Gravel back!
After nearly 15 minutes of disappearing at his "Alternative Debate" (and leaving a paused television and an empty stool), Gravel has returned without explanation.
"Let's get going here!" He urges the camera guy as he sits down.
He's back watching the televised debate from which he was excluded.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Updated: 10:19 p.m.
From Tankersley:
Seriously, if we didn't know better, we'd say Edwards and Obama were set to announce they're combining campaigns - or at least grabbing a beer together after the debate.
In a recent exchange:
*Obama touted his lobbying reform bill in the Senate, which includes a ban on lobbyists buying meals for members of Congress. "Good idea," Edwards said.
* Charles Gibson pressed Obama about that bill, saying it was his understanding lobbyists could still buy meals if members of Congress were standing up. When Obama stammered on his answer, Edwards jumped in and bailed him out.
* During the exchange, Obama and Edwards appeared to pat each other on the arm several times.
* An annoyed Clinton broke it up by asking for "a reality check" on some of Edwards' and Obama's claims.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Updated: 10:14 p.m.
From George:
Gravel has left his stool at his "Alternative Debate."
Occasionally someone flashes a peace sign in front of the camera.
Oh so strange.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Updated: 10:10 p.m.
The commercials during the first break during the Democrats:
Bank of America
Edwards: Starts off with charge that corporate greed is destroying middle class (doubt Bank of America would like that lead out.) Goes on to talk about how lobbyists killed healthcare. Good intentions won't change a thing. Corporate greed won’t be stopped without a fight. Same ad as before.
Kucinich: Not allowed in the debates tonight, Kucinich made it on the air by paying for it. He said, "I’m a real Democrat." "The kind who talks about getting out of Iraq now."
Clinton: "This election isn’t about choosing change over experience. Change only comes with experience."
Obama: "Time for change has come." Don't think it's the same change Clinton is talking about.
Martha Stewart promo: Interesting, and a bit ironic, that an ad from Stewart, about "New Recipes for a New Year," ran during this commercial break. As a New Yorker and a convicted felon, Stewart can not vote in the upcoming presidential election.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Updated: 10:07 p.m.
From Tankersley:
Oh snap!
On the heels of greeting a question about her likeability with the line "That hurts my feelings," Clinton just implicitly compared Obama to George W. Bush.
Obama, meanwhile, was just asked about the Republican criticisms of him earlier. His response: "I have to admit, I was going back and forth between the Republicans and football."
In case you're missing the late game to watch this debate, it's Jacksonville 21, Pittsburgh 7 in the third quarter.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Updated: 10 p.m.
From George:
Gibson asks: "We started surge early this year. You all opposed it. There are real signs it has worked. Are any of you ready to say that the surge has worked?"
The answers were long, but interesting, and he's some highlights:
CLINTON:
"The purpose behind the surge was to create the space and time for political reconciliation and for the Iraqi government to do only what it can do."
"We have the greatest military in the world – we send in more of our troops they will be able to dampen down the violence."
"I think George Bush doesn’t intend to bring them home but I’ve certainly said as president I will in 60 days; I’d start that withdrawal. "
RICHARDSON:
"This is why I’m running for president because until we end this war we cannot talk about the issues that need to be dealt with here."
"You can’t have change until you end the war and that means bringing our troops home!"
OBAMA:
"The bar of success has become so low that we’ve lost (sight of) long term national interests."
"Given how wonderfully our troops perform if we placed 30k more troops in there then we’d see an improvement in the security situation."
"The surge reduced that violence and we now 2 years later where we started 2 yrs ago at enormous cost to the American people."
"What we can’t do is continue to ignore the enormous strains this has placed on the American taxpayer and the anti American flames this is fanning."
Gibson changes the question a bit for Edwards. "You talked about timetable to get troops out by 2010. If generals came to you and said you’re wrong you’ll send iraq back into chaos we had [would you still] stick with it?"
EDWARDS:
"It is the responsibility of the president as commander in chief to make policy decisions," he says adding that he would listen to his 'non-civilian' military though.
"I will pull 40-50k troops out very quickly" (all out within 9-10 months)
"If my military leadership says we need more time…. Of course I’d be listening to what they have to say but I’d end combat missions in Iraq in my first year and there’d be no permanent bases."
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Updated: 9:55 p.m.
From Tankersley:
Halftime scorecard for the Dems:
Hillary Clinton has previewed what appears to be her new line of "sharp contrasts" she will level at Obama before Tuesday's primary – allegations that he has flipped positions on several key issues, including his health care plan and Senate campaign promises to oppose Iraq funding and the Patriot Act. (It's notable that Clinton herself voted for the Patriot Act twice, for the war and multiple times for war funding.)
Obama has played defense much of the evening, starting in the Republican debate, when he wasn't on stage but was nevertheless opened up to GOP criticism by a direct question. He's answered some of Clinton's charges, particularly on health care, but didn't directly respond to the Patriot Act and war funding attacks.
Edwards told crowds earlier today that the race is really down to two "change" candidates, himself and Obama, and pointedly excluding Clinton, who leads him in New Hampshire polls. In the debate he seems to be trying to make that analysis come true, for the most part laying off – and sometimes defending – Obama and attacking Clinton. Apparently his hope is to knock the long-time national Democratic frontrunner into irrelevance sooner rather than later, then worry about Obama if the race were truly to come down to the two of them.
Richardson's hostage negotiation line was the funniest of the night, but otherwise, his fellow candidates have excluded him from their skirmishes.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Updated: 9:45 p.m.
From George:
Here at The Swamp we sure hate to send you to other Web sites, but we'd be remiss if we didn't encourage readers to check out the Mike Gravel "Alternate Debate."
It's Gravel with a remote control, a Tivo and a mug of something to drink.
He's just sits there on a stool, pauses the tv, yells and starts watching again.
Check it out, but do come back.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Updated: 9:43 p.m.
From Tankersley:
It's boys against girl in the domestic policy debate. Clinton – showing she's learned something from the Republicans whose attacks she likes to note have dogged her for more than a decade – is attacking Obama as a flip-flopper. Obama is fighting back, and Edwards has all-but leapt to his defense, slamming Clinton in the process. Game on.
Richardson, largely left out of the initial fray, summed it up thusly: "I've been in hostage negotiations that were more civil than this."
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Updated: 8:34 p.m.
From George:
On the campaign trail Clinton often wears a green scarf, which aides call her "AFSME scarf," as it's a subtle shout-out to that union, which has endorsed her and also uses an emerald hue on all its logos and signs.
Tonight Clinton is wearing a green blouse in that same shade.
AFSME, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, has 1.4-million-member.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Updated: 8:31 p.m.
From Tankersley:
So let's see – ABC has now told us that social security is running dry, medical premiums are skyrocketing, and there's an up-to-50 percent chance of a nuclear attack on American soil in the next decade. Good times! Thanks for depressing the heck out of our Saturday evening.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Updated: 9:17 p.m.
From George:
Gibson's first question to the Dems: Would you go after Osama bin Laden in Pakistan, even if Pakistan wasn't on board?
OBAMA says he'd go into Pakistan to get Osama bin Laden.
EDWARDS agrees he'd go anywhere to get OBL.
RICHARDSON says "If we had actionable intelligence that is real, and Musharraf is incapable, which he is….then you do take that action."
CLINTON gives the most interesting answer of all, taking a shot at her husband for the time in 1998 he unsuccessfully went after OBL in Sudan without that country's permission.
"We have to be very conscience of the consequences."
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Updated: 9:03 p.m.
From George:
The Democrats are all here now. Actually, it's just some of them: Sen. Barack Obama, Sen. Hillary Clinton, Sen. John Edwards and Gov. Bill Richardson.
Sen. Mike Gravel and Rep. Dennis Kucinich (and minor candidates) were excluded because they didn't meet at least one of ABC's debate criteria: place first through fourth in Iowa, poll 5 percent or higher in one of the last four major New Hampshire surveys, or poll 5 percent or higher in one of the last four major national surveys.
Kucinich filed a complaint with the FEC yesterday, protesting his exclusion, saying ABC was "violating its obligation to operate in the public interest" by booting him.
Gravel has decided to host an "alternative debate." It's supposed to be broadcast here in Manchester on community television and available online. If I can catch some of it I'll blog it here on The Swamp.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Updated: 8:46 p.m.
Debate over. (Dems up next.)
From Tankersley:
The transition moment of the debate – Charles Gibson asking the Democratic candidates to come on stage before the Republicans walk off it – has a strange end-of-a-Little-League-game feel to it, with candidates from both parties forming lines and moving past one another, shaking hands.
From George:
Agreed. When Edwards and McCain hugged, McCain whispered in Edwards' ear.
I wonder what he said?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Updated: 8: 45 p.m.
From George:
Huckabee suggests that the country put "an incentive out there that’s truly something dramatic" to make the United States energy independent.
His idea?
" A billion dollar bonus to someone who can build a car that gets 100 miles to the gallon"
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Updated: 8: 42 p.m.
From Tankersley:
Now here's something you wouldn't have heard from any presidentially minded Republican a year or so ago: Rudy Giuliani just praised France.
For the record, he noted the country gets 80 percent of its power from nuclear plants. Giuliani wants America to expand its nuclear power to help wean it from foreign oil.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Updated: 8:39 p.m.
From George:
Q: How do you differ from Obama? (partial answers)
ROMNEY: healthcare: “That’ll break the bank” “If you think healthcare’s expensive now just wait till it’s free”
“This is a time where America wants change. Washington is broken. That was the message coming out of Iowa.”
THOMPSON: Obama “adopted the position of every major liberal group in this country.”
“His positions are very liberal positions.”
MCCAIN: “Senator Obama does not have the national security background to lead this nation”
GIULIANI: "First of all he’s never run a city never run a state never run a business."
"I do think he’s embraced change but change is a concept – is it change for good or change for bad?"
“He really doesn’t have the experience either from the security point of view."
HUCKABEE: "I can go thru a whole litany of things that would be dramatically different."
However, "He’s a likable person who has excited people about wanting to vote who haven't voted in the past."
PAUL: "Barack spoke out against the war before it started and he respects civil liberties and I respect him for that."
"It’s the youthfulness of the ideas that bring the young people to us."
"I talk more about economic issues."
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Updated: 8:30 p.m.
From Tribune reporter Jim Tankersley:
A quick elaboration on the quintet of ads that just blitzed the debate commercial break in New Hampshire. Three were positive, biographic spots: Mike Huckabee touting a tax cut he pushed as Arkansas governor, Ron Paul trumpeting his military record and calling himself the choice of American troops in this election and John McCain declaring himself more ready than ever to lead as president.
One was a body slam, delivered to McCain by Mitt Romney. In it, "regular people" from New Hampshire praise McCain's military service but criticize him on taxes and illegal immigration. (One of the people claims McCain supported "amnesty" for illegal immigrants; shortly after the break, Romney flatly said of his attack ads on McCain's immigration plan, "I don't call it amnesty." Technically that's true – it was someone else, not Romney, uttering the word "amnesty" in the ad.)
The real sore thumb that stuck out was Edwards, who ended the GOP string with a quick indictment of corporate profits and "insane" gas prices, vowing "Corporate greed won't be stopped without a president who fights for you." The message was particularly jarring in light of Romney's defense of pharmaceutical companies a few minutes earlier.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Updated: 8:25 p.m.
From George:
Since the debates began 85 minutes ago, reporters have been receiving emails from the prolific and pointed "Romney Press Shop," which handles public relations for the former governor.
While no other candidates have sent such press releases about the ongoing debates, the Romney shop has sent five reinforcing what the governor says on the stage.
The subject lines of those emails:
"STRAIGHT TALK DETOUR: Sen. McCain: "I Think We Can Set Up A Program Where Amnesty Is Extended""
"ROMNEY RECORD: Reforming The Immigration System"
"STRAIGHT TALK DETOUR: Sen. McCain Won't Face The Truth: He Support Benefits For Illegals"
"NO LAUGHING MATTER: Huckabee Did Not Support The Surge"
"NO LAUGHING MATTER: Flashback: Huckabee's Playground Diplomacy"
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Updated: 8:15 p.m.
From George:
The first question from Spradling challenges Senator McCain on his “path to citizenship” and whether he had changed his immigration platform over the last few debates.
“I want to say again this is a national security issue,” answered McCain, “we need to secure our borders.”
McCain pledged to deport the "2 million illegal immigrants" in this country who have committed crimes, but with regard to the otherwise law-abiding illegal residents, “these are God’s children.”
“Let me just say,” he clarified, “I never supported amnesty.”
Romney calls it a form of amnesty.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Updated: 8:07 p.m.
From George:
Continuing on healthcare, Romney says: "Here’s my view: if somebody can afford insurance and decides not to buy it and then gets sick they ought to pay their own way."
"Either buy the insurance or pay your own way, don’t be free riders."
Huckabee highlights the need for preventative care.
"The issue is not just insurance – the whole model of healthcare system is upside down. We don’t have a healthcare system; we have a disease-care system," he says before launching into another metaphor.
"What we have in America is a healthcare maze."
"No wonder we have a system that needs major, major repair."
When talk turns to pharmaceutical companies Romney stands up for them.
"Don't turn the pharmaceutical companies into the big bad guys," he said.
McCain ever quick: "Well they are."
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Updated: 8:05 p.m.
From George:
The first commercial break was hardly a break from politics here in Manchester:
On the TV there were five ads and five of them were from candidates. Those candidates: Romney, McCain, Huckabee, Paul and Edwards.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Updated: 7:50 p.m.
From George:
Gibson's second of three topics is healthcare.
Giuliani takes issue with question about needing universal healthcare.
"The reality is that will all its infirmities, we have the best health care in the world," he said.
All the candidates raise their hands and say they agree.
"Some people in New Hampshire have been to Canada," McCain says. I don't think they want that system."
Romney adds: "We don’t need Hillary care or socialized medicine."
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
7:47 p.m.
From George:
The first bit of applause breaks out – forbidden at these debates – when Paul says the country has gotten too far from its original values.
"You can't give lip service to the Constitution without obeying it," he said.
Huckabee and Thompson both express their love for the document too.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Updated: 7:33 p.m.
From George:
Ron Paul pipes up and wonders rhetorically why America was attacked on 9/11.
"They're not attacking Canada or Switzerland," he points out.
Romney jumps in: "We're the strongest nation in the world!"
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Updated: 7:28 p.m.
From George:
Charlie Gibson's first question was about Bush's foreign policy record, and he went straight to
Gov. Huckabee and asked him about when he recently wrote in "Foreign Affairs" and called Bush's approach an "arrogant bunker mentality."
Huckabee said he didn't mean all of that policy, just some parts likes like former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's original use of low troop numbers in Iraq.
"We don't go to war with the army he have, we go to war with the army we need," he said.
Sen. Fred Thompson jumped in and said it sounded like Huckabee was changing his answer. "I don't think our foreign policy has been arrogant. Presidents make mistakes," he said.
Giuliani spoke next and said Bush did well after 9/11.
"I think the president got the big decision of his foreign policy right," he said.
"Mistakes have also been made particularly in the time after the capture of Saddam Hussein."
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Updated 7:09 p.m.
From George:
The Republican candidates were just seated on the stage. Those appearing tonight are Mayor Rudy Giuliani, Gov. Mike Huckabee, Rep. Ron Paul, Sen. John McCain, Sen. Fred Thompson and Gov. Mitt Romney.
Congressman Duncan Hunter was excluded because he didn't meet at least one of ABC's debate criteria: place first through fourth in Iowa, poll 5 percent or higher in one of the last four major New Hampshire surveys, or poll 5 percent or higher in one of the last four major national surveys.
The 90-minute debate will be divided into two parts, according to ABC, who is co-hosting the affair with St. Anselm College. The first half will find the candidates talking about three issues, selected by ABC's Charles Gibson. The second half will look more what you're used to with a standard question-answer format.
Gibson and Scott Spradling, political director for ABC's affiliate here, WMUR-TV, will be the moderators. There won't be any lights or buzzers, so hopefully the two questioners practiced their 'Excuse me, [Candidate].'
+++++++++++++++++++++
• 
• 
• 
Comments
The debate is just starting. Charlie Gibson introduced all the ABC correspondents who will take part in covering it. I am struck by the fact that almost all of the reporters and moderators are white. I wonder if it would bring more depth and dimension to the debate if there were some reporters of color.
Posted by: Tom P | January 5, 2008 7:17 PM
While I don't agree with Ron Paul on a lot of issues, I think he is dead on regarding the consequences of our foreign policy. Given the reaction by the other candidates just now, it makes me think Paul is speaking truth to power.
Posted by: Toni L. | January 5, 2008 7:34 PM
Who won the ABC Republican Debate in New Hampshire?
http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=1450
.
Posted by: PollM | January 5, 2008 7:50 PM
Since the Repubs have so many nondescript candidates, let's play a game.
I like to call this:
Getting To Know Your Wingnut Prez Candidates (Jeopardy style).
From the internet (s):
Republican Candidates for $200, Alex.
The clue: This candidate said he would be more liberal than Ted Kennedy on gay rights and abortion during a 1994 debate.
Who is Mitt Romney?
Yes.
Republican candidates for $400.
As mayor, this candidate secretly used taxpayer money to provide free security, chauffer, and dog-walking services to his mistress, then tried to cover it up by sloshing the money around in obscure city accounts and lying about it on national TV.
Who is Rudy Giuliani?
Correct. Pick again.
Republican candidates for $600, please.
[Zippy Zap!] It's an audio Daily Double! How much would you like to wager?
Three thousand dollars.
Here's your audio clue: "Anybody seen mah golf cart? Ah need tuh get back to the hotel and lie down for a spell."
Who is Fred Thompson?
[Ding Ding!] Yes! Well done.
Republican Candidates for $800.
John McCain thought he was being hilarious when he sang "Bomb Bomb Bomb, Bomb Bomb Iran," a takeoff on this Beach Boys song.
What is "Barbara Ann"?
Right.
Finish up the category for a thousand, please.
The clue: All of the 2008 GOP presidential candidates have avoided mentioning the name of this famous Republican politician lest they embarrass themselves by being linked to his disastrous record.
Who is George W. Bush?
Correct. And that finishes the category. Stay tuned for Final Jeopardy. The category: "Dear God, Please Let Alan Keyes Win the Nomination." The clue is coming up right after this message from Head-On with Bacon Grease: apply directly to a Republican's forehead, then release the hounds.
Posted by: John E | January 5, 2008 8:00 PM
Mitt Romney - read George Bush and that's a real scary thought
Mike Huckabee - not what he seems -talk to folks in Arkansas
John McCain - one angry man, maybe a little too old and a little to anxious to stay in Iraq
Rudy - Knows nothing except 9/11 . Likes to scare people,
Posted by: 1360 | January 5, 2008 8:53 PM
All I can hope for is Ron Paul, Ron Paul, Ron Paul. I hope that name is on the minds of those in New Hampshire. He is smart, striaght forward, and not smarmy, more than I can say for other candidates, dem or rep.
Posted by: Lauren | January 5, 2008 8:54 PM
Ron Paul is the only true Republican on the stage. He is staking out traditional Republican positions on foreign policy and domestic spending. But he is being dismissed and attacked en masse by the other candidates. Charlie Gibson is doing a miserable job of "moderating" this debate, as he allows the others to constantly interrupt Mr. Paul, and consistently lets them talk beyond their alloted time.
Posted by: Tom Edwards | January 5, 2008 9:09 PM
In case you missed the Republican debate, here in a nutshell is what L.Ron Paul had to say.
"Everything is our fault"
"Inflation causes Global Warming"
"Return to the Gold Standard will fix health care"
Feel free to mix and match the above.
Posted by: Tom O'Connor | January 5, 2008 9:12 PM
To all the democratic and republicans. How does it feel knowing that Barack Obama will be the next president???
President Obama has a nice ring to it. Kool!!!
Posted by: Dave (the blaster) Alvin | January 5, 2008 9:39 PM
i can't wait til President Paul gets into office.
Posted by: DELYNN | January 5, 2008 10:38 PM
It would have sent a powerful message to the country if even one of the big three Democrats in the race would have refused to participate because of the exclusion of Mr. Kucinich. Are they for an open debate of the issues or more afraid that his positions would sound better than theirs?
Posted by: Jay | January 5, 2008 10:49 PM
Obama is certainly the ultimate con man, but remains nothing more than a novelty candidate of little substance and experience. The media has used him to add interest and controversy to an otherwise dull campaign season, but he lacks broad support in the party and among American in general to even come close to the nomination. And rightfully so. This scam artist has done absolutely nothing as our U.S. senator except cut deals to enrich himself and his wife. Our next step will be to vote this grifter off of our payroll once the campaign charade is over.
Posted by: Derrick | January 5, 2008 11:24 PM
The most interesting part of the democratic part of the debate was seeing Billary, er, Hillary Clinton get angry after some Edwards comments. Can you say Broom Hilda riding off into the sunset?????
Posted by: bob r | January 5, 2008 11:33 PM
Where was the Huckablonde tonite?
Posted by: Mark | January 5, 2008 11:37 PM
Obama and Edwards make a good pres/vp team. Hillary appears to be finished. Richards is a diplomat.
Posted by: Bob Patrick | January 6, 2008 12:00 AM
Obama + Edwards 2008!
Posted by: zellah-chicago | January 6, 2008 12:10 AM
Obama can barely contain his smugness. His interuption about Hillary being "likeable enough" was childish. And then coming back to it later in the debate was even worse. Civil rights icon Andrew Young and so many others are correct -- Obama is too immature for the presidency.
Posted by: Terry Rogers | January 6, 2008 12:30 AM
Why are the demo debate candidates never asked about illegal immigration like the Repubs are? hmmm
Posted by: Bobby Ray | January 6, 2008 12:37 AM
Those who made comments about Sen. Obama,other than challenging his positions on issues, should keep a low profile until they have achieved in their lives what Sen. Obama has achieved in his.
Posted by: HELENFALK | January 6, 2008 12:47 AM
I live in New Hampshire and here's the take from our living room:
Ron Paul rang every bell for New Hampshire voters.
Mitt held his own.
McCain was snarky.
Giulani had some great answers, but reminds us all of the mob.
Fred is a complete snooze. What do Republicans see in this guy?
Obama held his own.
Edwards looked like Obama's little brother, but his passion is really, really admirable.
Clinton seemed like the strongest, and also the funniest.
Richardson did himself a lot of good, but not enough.
We all thought in general that the Democrats were better than the Republicans.
And we also thought that ABC showed the other networks what a good political forum looks like.
Posted by: Jan | January 6, 2008 1:15 AM
It was interesting to hear the Republicans discuss at length how America's war with Islamic Terrorists is the "transcendental conflict" for the United States in the 21st Century. Although I do not deny the significance of it, I think John Edwards "transcends" all the candidates with his identification of the conflict Americans have been faced with ever since the Nixon years: The Separation of Corporation & State.
As the Right (however wrong) continues to fuel the ridiculous notion that our middle class Americans will receive all the benefits of our great society if it trickles down from the top (the top being our wealthy citizens and mega-corporations), John Edwards openly declares war on the entrenched special interests and corporate greed that fuels the GOP (oh and the Dems, too) and the Washington machine.
As Obama worked to keep himself from dozing off and Hillary tried to keep the steam from blowing out her ears, John Edwards spoke with passion and conviction to be a true agent of change in Washington. He is our one independent and viable candidate who will work tirelessly to fight the forgotten "transcendental conflict" of the 21st Century: The Separation of Corporation & State.
Hopefully he can get the votes of a few Independents and all those Republicans who realize that although the GOP is adamant about the 2nd Amendment, Pro-Life issues, banning gay marriage, "preventing another 9/11", they do nothing when in office to help everyday Americans afford health care, day care, education and earning living wages earned from solid white and blue collar jobs that are protected by unions and kept here in AMERICA ... and not shipped overseas so the megacorporations can make more money ...
For all of us who struggle to make ends meet ... to pay off a sub-prime mortgage, our student loans, a health-care plan, day care, gasoline, our utilities, cable ($65/month!) ... Republican, Independent, Green or Democrat ... there is one candidate who will deliver on the social issues he runs on ... of course he'll protect us from the terrorists. That's a given. But he'll also do everything while in that Oval Office to represent YOU. Yes, YOU ... the middle-class, lower middle-class or impoverished individual you are.
Living wages. Unions. Universal Health Care. Tax cuts for the middle class and poor. An end to Cronyism. Energy independence. A stronger military. Preservation of our Environment.
It's simple. Very simple.
JOHN EDWARDS AMERICA!
SEPARATE CORPORATION FROM STATE!
Posted by: Matthew OB | January 6, 2008 1:22 AM
Hillary blew it, but she had little choice as nothing else is working for her (she is debating like it is the year 2000). While watching the debate with 8 other people, the reaction was "what a desperate ...........". She sticks to her same old lines of "poor me" and "everyone is out to get me". No wonder she is so overwhelmingly disliked. She lost even more ground tonight.
Obama did well; maintained his cool, was in control and was balanced with Hillary's scowls and daggers. Richardson was perhaps the most calculated and seemed the most experienced. I was surprised that Edwards had the most passion and energy; he and Obama actually sounded like a team.
Hillary's machine and money will keep her in this thing for a while, but Obama is really starting to separate and increase his lead as the standout from either party. Even Republicans like him.
Posted by: Liz | January 6, 2008 1:24 AM
What Presidential Candidate would you vote for today?
http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=1455
.
Posted by: PollM | January 6, 2008 1:35 AM
The Iowa caucus vote showed that the Democratic Party resoundingly rejected torture; Hillary Clinton got just 29 percent of the caucus vote. Let's hope that trend is continued in New Hampshire, South Carolina and beyond.
As Milan Kundera wrote: "The struggle of man against power is the struggle of memory against forgetting."
See: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/us_world/2007/09/28/2007-09-28_hillary_flipflop_on_torture_inspired_aft.html;
http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/brad-wilmouth/2007/09/30/cnns-kurtz-sees-media-lust-hillary-does-full-ginsburg-flip-flop-tortu;
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0907/Hillary_and_torture_audio_version.html
Torture is as morally wrong as racial segregation and the historic treatment of Native Americans.
The Democratic Party should not be led by someone whose moral compass is so weak that they are incapable of being a strong voice against this abominable practice.
Posted by: Martin Edwin Andersen | January 6, 2008 1:52 AM
Ron Paul is a one trick pony. Keep digging on what that one issue is. Hint (he wants to legalize marijuana). Enuf said. He's just the 21st century version of Timothy Leary.
Posted by: Frank O - Arizona | January 6, 2008 2:11 AM
Senator Clinton was very impressive and presidential. Her performance assured me that she is the one ready to lead our country in these tough times and she earned my vote. I was turned off by Obama and Edwards ganging up on Clinton. Also, Obama and Edwards seemed to offer talk and speeches and nothing accomplished on their record to back them up. All they have proven is that they can deliver a good speech.
Posted by: Kay | January 6, 2008 3:56 AM
I like Hillary for President! She proved tonight that she can take a licking and keep on ticking. We need that kind of spirit in our president. She would probably give at least 200% to the job, and we need that too. I hope she succeeds.
Go Hillary!
Posted by: VAnderson | January 6, 2008 4:00 AM
Derrick,
What parallel universe are you living in? The Land-o-Wishful Thinking?
Senator Obama drew record turnout in Iowa including many Independents and even some Republicans. Barack's support is widespread and inspiring.
Furthermore, observe the legions of young voters supporting Obama and you will see the trend of voting in the future.
Americans have had it with the Dubya and Darth Party of fear, smear, more patriotic than thou, and holier than thou.
If you think for a minute the '06 election was an abberation, stay tuned for next November!
Posted by: Doug Zook | January 6, 2008 6:59 AM
* * * * *
Posted by: HELENFALK | January 6, 2008 12:47 AM
Employing your logic, we would all have a moral duty to keep silent about all of the candidates. That's because most, if not all, those who weigh in on the Swamp haven't "attained" the office of mayor, governor, senator or congressman like the remaining candidates have.
Political discourse - free speech as it were - is too valuable to be silenced by such petty considerations as the status "achieved" about the person under scrutiny. We have a right to know whom we will elect, and to express our thoughts and feelings about them. It is the only way to share the collective impression a candidate makes. Thus, in the sake of assuring the free flow of information about these candidates, we cannot censor ourselves or anyone else regardless of how distasteful a remark might seem.
Or, in case you haven't noticed, we have a President who didn't get enough scrutiny in the press and public fora before he was elected. The average voter didn't know enough about him the first time around to give him the thumbs down in favor of another candidate.
Posted by: John W. | January 6, 2008 8:13 AM
Hillary/Bill did not look so presidential last night, did she? She is likable, though, in a quaint sort of way. But Barack has a long way to go, and he will go the distance if he does not get Tanya Hardinged by the Clinton attack dogs.
Posted by: GW | January 6, 2008 9:01 AM
Other than their racial and gender make-up, what is the difference in the positions of the democratic?
On the repub side. Domestically Paul's smaller gov't stance makes a lot of sense, but his foriegn policy stance is way off base. For example, blaming 9-11 attack on the facts that we had an air base in Saudi Arabia. As far as I know the gov't of Saudi Arabia has invited us there.
Guilani doesn't fill the social policy of a conservative. McCain - a man of principle, but he goes off the reservation every now and then; e.g.; McCain-Feingold. Romney - still not sure what to make of him. Huckabee - good on social issues, but a populist on economic issues. Thompson seems to be solid on the issues, but needs some caffine.
Posted by: Terry | January 6, 2008 9:47 AM
America is certainly tired of the Clintons by now Edwards is not bad could deate the issues all others but Obama he is your guy fresh energy and new ideas hillary would be taking four years fighting
with all the republicans
getting nothing done Bill
who knows what he will be doing so Obama all the way.
from Mike a Bush suporter
Posted by: Mike | January 6, 2008 9:50 AM
Between Republican and democrats, Clinton, Huckalbee, Obama and McCain show leadership abilities. Obama stands out due to his speaking skills. But being a first generation American, you would wonder where his loyalty would be. But we leave that to American people. But Sadly, the debates so far have not provided the American people with any clear answers. How will they balance Budet? Why is America keeping all our bases overseas? Why are we supporitng the Antidemocratic regimes in teh middles East? Why are we sbsidizing religions, including muslim (cult) by keeping charitable contributions free)? How are we going to end Welfare?
Posted by: Roy John | January 6, 2008 11:09 AM
"Hint (he wants to legalize marijuana). Enuf said. He's just the 21st century version of Timothy Leary."
Posted by: Frank O - Arizona | January 6, 2008 2:11 AM
Frank,
Ron Paul has gone on record only for supporting the medical use of marijuana and to allow the growth of industrial hemp (to make paper, fabrics, etc.) He isn't in favor of legalizing marijuana for recreational use.
Get your facts straight.
Posted by: John W. | January 6, 2008 11:49 AM
Terry:
Do you know the difference between "blaming" and "explaining?" To "explain" is to expound upon the reasons for a phenomenon; whereas, to "blame" is to assign fault for its occurrence.
Ron Paul does not "blame" the U.S. for 9/11. He assigns no fault for 9/11 to U.S. policies, although he suggests that staying out of middle-east regional politics would have been the wiser course. He certainly doesn’t suggest we “deserved” the 9/11 attack or that the terrorists who carried it out were in any sense “justified.” He "explained" 9/11 as having resulted from the antagonism felt by Islamic radicals due to the U.S. intervention in the region, its support of Saudi Arabia and placement of U.S. personnel on Saudi land. These are exactly the reasons al Qaeda leaders have given for the attack. In addition, the bi-partisan 9/11 commission report says the same thing Dr. Paul does on this issue.
NEXT TIME: Why Dr. Paul is not an isolationist.
Posted by: John W. | January 6, 2008 12:10 PM
I can only hope that the voters of NH are as smart as the voters of Iowa and they see through Hilary's "experience" (35 years?!? yeah right!) and the perceived inevitability of her nomination. I have never not voted for the Democrat in a Presidential election but if she wins I cannot in good conscience for vote for her... my vote will then go to Huckabee or a third party (Bloomberg?).
Posted by: Bruce | January 6, 2008 12:13 PM
JOhn W,
Yes I know the difference between explaining and blaming. If the US was not in Saudi Arabia, the Islamonuts would not have attacked us. The hidden message is "as long as we do what the Islamonuts say, no furthur harm will come." The US cannot close its eyes and wish this problem away - a stronger version of the Clinton approach.
Posted by: Terry | January 6, 2008 1:06 PM
Hillary was vibrant. She answered the questions well and in a focused way. The one element, no one mentions, with all the maleness in all directions, journalists, the media, the candidates, this is the lone female. It has been known from psychological research, that there can be subscious gender biases. Hillary is more than a courageous person. Indeed, this woman embodies change.
Posted by: Arlene Feiner | January 6, 2008 1:49 PM