Reply #11: In reality, he had to bring up that HRC was the one who wanted the rules changed

[karynnj]

after the game was played. She would be on solid ground had she, well before the election occurred said that it was her belief that the primaries had to count and that she would act accordingly. She, in fact, did the opposite giving lip service before Iowa to being ok with the DNC.

Scheiffer had already framed the question in HRC's way, Kerry needed to expand. It's true that he didn't need to expand to the pattern of rule breaking - that the Bill Clinton offering all but offering the VP was - a blatant attempt to suggest a vote for Clinton is a vote for both. He was there to support Obama and he did. It may have irritated a Clinton supporter, but, at worse, it might make someone neutral think Kerry went off topic - but this is not a high school debate that would be judged that way. It also was Kerry, not Obama.

In real life, Kerry made an excellent point on an issue that was more central to the decisions of people than the Florida question. The one that looked out classed to me was Nelson, a US Senator, who has supported HRC for 8 weeks, who was in essence said he wasn't able to counter anything Kerry spoke of. (Who long has Kerry supported Obama? I think around 8 weeks.) It didn't make Kerry look small - it was a cheap Clinton ploy that he attacked and he attacked it well. It made Nelson look weak.