So... who won?

[MrPeepers]

The Debate just wrapped up, who do you think came out on top? I thought Kerry did very well, myself. Some more great one liners. I'm quite glad the Fox News people handled this pretty well and avoided those little incidents we had the last go around... although they did take a shot at Kucinich there. So, you've heard my opinion, what's yours?

Peepers

[RevolutionStartsNow]

1. Fox analysis (and NPR too) was unanimous that Dean won

But what do they know? :evilgrin:

[MrPeepers]

6. I donno.

I don't much trust the Fox analysis myself :) I thought he did pretty well, sure, but I just didn't get the feeling that he was on fire tonight. I mean, everyone's just so fixated on how he's in the lead, they don't even pay attention to what he's saying anymore. It's all just "Well Dean's the front runner, so he must have won." At least that's what I take out of it. I could be wrong, I donno. But either way, I think Kerry really did a bang-up job. The tax cuts for example, I thought he handled really well.

Peepers

[pruner]

16. I think Dean beat Kerry on the "middle class tax cuts" issue

the audience seemed to agree, based on the comparative level of applause each guy received.

[coralrf]

15. They know what Rove wants...

That is Dean. So they will push Dean.

Nuff said.

[RevolutionStartsNow]

19. If Dean is elected President...

people here will still be saying "It's because Rove wanted it so!"

LOL

[thentro]

20. Well, Kristol is a fan of Dean

Well, Kristol is a fan of Dean, and he made a little thing called the Project for a New American Century!! (the big neo-con thinkers, made the weight of bush foreign policy of Pax Americana)

He wants Dean to win. They all do. They know they can rip him apart and leave him for dead.

Man I wish Clark could hit the nail on the head better!! Inexperience kills!

[drfemoe]

22. This is what a fan says?

--snip--"So: the Bush doctrine abroad, a moderately conservative judiciary at home, an administration putting its thumb (however gingerly) on the conservative side of the scale in the culture wars. Or a Dean-Kerry doctrine abroad, an ever more liberal and activist judiciary, and the most culturally left-wing Democratic administration in 40 years.

The stakes could hardly be higher. "

The High Stakes of 2004
From the September 1 / September 8, 2003 issue: Everything's up for grabs.
by William Kristol
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/044hwopi.asp

[dsc]

26. Why yes

If you use your special, handy dandy, tinfoil decoder ring and read between the lines, it really says Dean is a great God who shall deliver us from defeat. It really is there if you spin your monitor backwards at 33 rpm.

[RevolutionStartsNow]

24. Dean is continually "misunderestimated"

and Kristol is just another example. They are all arrogant asses, Kristol and the neocons. If they are saying they "want" Dean, it's just posturing. They know Dean is the frontrunner.

By the way, they think they can rip up any of our guys and leave them for dead. They will certainly try, no matter who gets the nom.

[xultar]

36. Absolutely Right on Target!

They are gonna push whomever they think will be the least competitive opponent for shrub.
I too was shocked how much they all agreed that Dean won. It was too obvious what they were trying to do. Their analysis was non existant.

I do however think that their moderator was much better than Judy Wooward. The Moderator for this debate knew that she wasn't supposed to be "The Show". She kept it real and did her job. Judy on the other hand made the debate about her and actually talked more than all of the candidates combined. That looked so bad for CNN.

[drfemoe]

38. the mind boggles

"They are gonna push whomever they think will be the least competitive opponent for shrub."

So they think Sharpton, CMB and Kucinich (et al) would be MORE competitive against bushit?

that turd don't float ..

[NewYorkerfromMass]

52. No it doesn't float or pass the smell test

whereas Dean has become "credible" enough that they can push him and build him up and then pull the plug in a year.

[rwheeler31]

best

cmb

[jenk]

2. Edwards

I thought they all looked kind of flat, except Sharpton. But I go with Edwards because he's my guy and seems steady and consistent.

[Nashyra]

3. Sharpton then Clark

[jmw25]

35. Edwards

Last night's debate was a lot of fun, especially every time Sharpton was given a chance to speak. I doubt anyone who watched changed their position on who they were going to vote for...just too many candidates and not enough time. I still like Edwards and thought he did a great job last night, especially after the attempts of Lieberman to paint him as "anti-troops". A new poll came out showing Edwards has moved into third in New Hampshire, meaning he's in third there and in Iowa, and first in South Carolina. I think he has a great chance to be our presidential nominee and provide the alternative to Dean for the Democratic ticket

[jeremiah fpoa]

43. go edwards

Thank you for making it known of Edwards' consistency. He doesn't do anything rash to get attention nor does he injure his campaign by not doing so. We need to nominate someone who is consistent and earnest. Edwards is our man.

[mandyky]

4. I don't think anyone can win these things

Joe Lieberman surprised me by laying off Dean and going after Clark, Edwards, and Kerry. Sharpton, as usual, was the wittiest. Other than that everyone held their own.

[diamondsoul]

5. Sharpton won-

Kerry and CMB right behind. Dennis was good tonight but didn't shine the way I like him to.

[vincentwithak]

7. It doesn't matter...

There were maybe 3000 people in attendance and another 100,000 watching at home. The question of who won is pointless because the media will decide that question for the American people (no matter how much any of us hate that fact.) We can each be predictable and say that our favorite candidate won without any reason. Really were any of us swayed to another camp tonight? I think not.

[ModerateMiddle]

10. Actually, the last debate had approx 1.8 million viewers

That compares quite unfavorably with 10 million or so for a sitcom, but 1.8 million ain't nothing to sneeze at before any primary is even very close.

[MrPeepers]

8. Yeah,

but really Sharpton wins every time :) I love that slap the donkey thing he keeps tossing in! I thought Dennis did pretty well, but that 300 vs 30 thing kind of make him look bad, even though it was just a slip of the tongue. The moderator went a little too hard on him for that one.

Peepers

[raysr]

9. DK

I am so pissed at these debates, the ONLY, I repeat ONLY candidate that is truely progressive and an antedote to Bush is DK and in none of these debates do they ever let him talk. He has the plans for his administration on paper and already has congressional support, why won't they let him speak? I saw a pole which rated the candidates on time talked and he comes in last. I think Sharpton is great and I would be up for a parliamentary form of government. What we have sure doesn't work. DK is my Prez also, he can do what he advocates. If they'd just let him speak.

[JohnKleeb]

12. You got that right ray

[Desertrose]

13. The debates are so frustrating the way they set it all up

and then let everyone just run over their allotted time and the way they
ALWAYS SHORT CHANGE DENNIS ON TIME

....and yeah, the numbers thing was not that big a deal- a slip of the toungue- like when would he have had a chance to correct that when they never let him speak???...at least give him a chance to correct it himself rather than have that condescending mod do it for him!!!
:grr:

I always notice a quality of stillness when Dennis speaks...like people know that when he speaks they will actually hear truth instead of spin....

Welcome raysr :hi:

Peace
DR

[no name no slogan]

18. That's what I thought, too

I checked the clock, and they didn't even let DK speak until almost 1/2 hour into the debate. That is pathetic-- but I guess it would be too much to expect from Fox.

After the mod cut DK off when he was trying to explain and correct his error, I got up and walked away. This whole "debate" thing is just a sham. I thought the panel and the mod were downright condescending to those who weren't considered "serious" candidates. It was pathetic.

:argh: :grr: :grr:

Welcome to DU raysr! :hi:

[DemDogs]

49. Who was worst?

Kucinich who is usually good in debates: had his worst performance of the debates. Not just the mistake about 300 dead in Detroit in a month but everything.

Gephardt: had a strong closing but was foggy otherwise. His whole campaign is his health plan and he didn't talk about it.

And (I know I am getting flamed)
Dean: His closing was a complete ramble that could only be understood by people who have so little to do that we spend time on DU (I am including myself). He never made a single positive point in the whole debate. Kerry's response that you don't elect a staff, you elect a President was a killer and made Dean look small (in the eyes of someone who doesn't support either one of them as my favorite.)

[maddogesq]

11. My take, for what it's worth.

My heart of hearts sat here, 25 miles from the debate site, trying to make up my mind. My head says: “Who can beat the fucking monkey?” My heart says: “Who can recapture what is to be a Democrat, an American, a person with compassion?

My heart of hearts says: “Al Sharpton won. He has yet to win any of the previous debates...until tonight. Everything he said was as thunderous as the applause he got. Oh well, that’s the fantasy.

The reality is—and I actually agreed with the Faux commentators on this—Dean continues to nail down the nomination. He did not slip; he did not succumb to the attacks by Holy Joe.

The big disappointment for me was Clark. I did not think he was prepared for this city, this crowd, or the Faux panel. I am sad, because I had it in the back of my mind that he was the one to be the Simian on foreign policy. Kerry had been my guy for awhile, but he seems as if he is teetering on disaster.

So here I am, yet undecided. My heart aches, because I want to get behind someone, once and for all. What do I do? How should I feel?

P.S. I thought Mosely-Braun did a good job tonight. She is a bright woman, and I think she has earned a spot in the next administration’s hierarchy. She cannot beat Bush, but she would make a heck of a secretary of labor!

[tpub]

17. mdogdrum

I hope you'll just wait for a little while longer because the tide is beginning to turn Kerry's way. Just watch for a while...

[madfloridian]

14. The Republicans won.

.
They won because we here are attacking each other's candidates.

[drfemoe]

21. They All Won

Transcript here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A21551-2003Oct26.html

I think Dean actually got some booos when he said "bush lite" .. --snip-- "If you're going to defend the president's tax cuts and you're going to defend the president's war, I frankly don't think we can beat George Bush by being "Bush lite." I think we've got to stand up for Democratic principles. "

(APPLAUSE) ... --snip--

anyone else notice that?

I say they all won because the debate got my 'current occupant' supporter roommate to actually consider voting for a democrat! Unbelievable.

I still think Dean is the top pick. Al is a hoot and it's a better field with him up there. It's a good thing fox asked some tough questions. WC still does not know how to answer a question. I feel embarrassed for him.

It might surprise some of you to know that some folks on the dean blog are calling for Dean to rescript his war ad. I thought his explanation made sense (he is referring to his opponents who supported the war) .. but it was good to get that issue out in the open and emphasize the entire record.

We can do this ...

[dsc]

23. My take

Kucinich turned his best performance. He didn't scream, he didn't use odd hand motions, he didn't look mean. This is the Dennis I knew and loved both growing up and in the Congress.

Kerry did quite well. I think he lost the tax cut debate as well but he did very well on virtually everything else.

Edwards sounded good.

Dean did very well. He has constantly done a good job at these debates and doesn't lose ground. He was crisp and clean. I wonder if he stood for his interviews if he would be better at those. He seems much more relaxed standing than he is sitting.

CMB still is terrific. I think she was out of practice as a candidate at first which is why she had such trouble in the early debates. As an Ambassador she couldn't stray from written text and that is why she read so much early on IMO. Now she is remembering what campaigning is about and doing beautifully.

Sharpton turned in another great performance. I wonder how many New Yorkers who voted for Messenger in that primary would have voted for Sharpton then if he bahaved like he is now. I am referring to the 97 New York mayoral primary.

Gephardt did OK. He has done better in the past.

Lieberman was truely terrible. I haven't a clue as to what he or his campaign is thinking. He comes across as mean, surly, and not terribly honorable. His dig at Clark was just mean and his smile as he was discussing how angry he was, was weird.

Clark still just doesn't seem to have any ideas.

Finally the moderators were terribly agressive. I think Dennis is owed and apology as is CMB. They were shameful.

[JohnKleeb]

25. You really think so on Dennis

Well thanks, I am not sure how things went being that I had no TV to watch it on, but I respect how you unlike some other people I saw didnt jump on him, they said he was whiny. Thanks for being objective, its hard I know.

[dsc]

27. I think he did a great job

and that the moderators should have treated him better. Clearly they hadn't explained the rules terribly well given the fact that both he and CMB felt cheated. I wouldn't call him whiney.

[JohnKleeb]

28. I didnt see but you may have seen earlier

some moderate bashing of him but I handled it, hint just be a smartass. The nation will catch on soon enough I think, I think we are bigger than most realize, I was in DC for the protest and I know many of these folks are left but a good if not a lot of Kucinich supporters there.

[dsc]

29. I watched the debate on tape

and couldn't start until 11 so I avoided early threads. I didn't want to be influenced.

[Township75]

30. Kuci did give a great performance,

and I feel he got shafted alot in this and many other debates, because there are so many candidates the he can't speak for more than 4 minutes.

Kuci isn't my man, Dean is, but Kuci did look good last night, and I haven't said that about him before.

[JohnKleeb]

31. Weird township and dsc being that most of your comrades are saying

that he was whiny. Kuci heh Ive never heard that on him before. Yeah he has gotten shafted, thats why many of us have fuses ya see.

[Tom Rinaldo]

44. The value of ideas

"Clark still just doesn't seem to have any ideas."

Well, I don't agree with that comment, but I will agree that Clark has less specific proposals than many of the candidates. Specific proposals are red meat in primaries because those who vote tend to to be keyed in on key issues that they would like to see specifically addressed with policy proposals. That is much less true for the general election. But I will willingly go out on a limb here and state that the presentation of specific policy proposals by candidates will still later have to broaden their constituency to win the actual Presidential election, and then form an actual administration with presumably expert but as yet unnamed Cabinet Heads, to push a revised political agenda through an as of yet not elected Congress, is a little overated. In all honesty at this point big picture priorities and a sincere held general policy orientations are more important to me than the actual nuts and bolts proposals.

Obviously more specifics should be provided by Democratic party candidates than The Arnold got away with witholding from the Public in California (though Arnold still won). But it is important to remember that the real Presidential campaign doesn't begin until after both parties have their nominees and the real debates start happening. That's when Clark would need to become more specific. That's when the public will be ready to listen. In the meantime people can already know where he stands on many important issues.

My point is Clark is personally, at this stage, an expert on International Affairs, less so on domestic matters. Besides the obvious fact that he served decades in the militay outwardly rather than domestically focused, his campaign is the newest. He's only had a team of domestic policy advisors at his call for a short time compared to the other politicians who have had paid staffs devoted to such for years. Face it, no politican writes all the legislation that they sponser, let alone introduce. They hire experts to develop policy proposals that are consistent with their overall beliefs, and then they sign off on the ones they essentially can agree with (leaving out money and curruption as a factor for the moment). Once the Democrats sslect a nominee whoever is chosen will cannabalize whatever good ideas are out there to intergrate into his or her own policies, provided that they are not at odds with an important previously stated policy position or orientation.

I am not proposing that Clark having fewer and/or less detailed policy positions prepared at this point in time is an advantage, or a reason to vote for him over someone else. I am just trying to put the question in perspective. First off, it's only October 2003, he is still introducing himself to the public. Second, politics is sausage making, details get shuffled countless times to win over or hold onto key votes needed when the time comes to seek passage into law.

More important to me are leadership qualities, demonstrated competency, core values and beliefs, and yes electability. Every month that goes by will feature Clark trotting out more specific policy initiatives, he has catching up to do. I guarentee you Dwight Eisenhauer was not elected for the first time on the strength of his detailed domestic policy initiatives. I think Wes Clark's heart and mind are in the right place vis a vis the issues that confront our nation, and I think he has an excellent heart and an excellent mind. At this stage whether or not he makes it through the primaries to become the nominee will depend most on the strength of his campaign themes and vision for America, and how well he defines his potential leadership. We already know that he is pro choice, pro affirmative action, sees the need to protect the environment, believes in a progressive tax structure, prioritizes increasing health care, will roll back most of Bush's tax cuts etc. He makes a fine Democrat, has the stature and experience to be a world leader when we need one most, and I believe he would defeat Bush, running a truly National campaign with large parts of the South in play.

[Padraig18]

32. Kerry and Dean won.

Kerry, because he was articulate, funny, relaxed and confident; Dean, because no one 'blew him out of the water'. I also feel that Edwards acquitted himself well.

[democratreformed]

33. Al Sharpton

clearly received the most enthusiastic applause. It is too bad that I am committed to a different candidate; otherwise, I think I would have to start working for the good reverend.

[robbedvoter]

34. PNAC's Krystol pushes Dean hard (why?)

I always say: debates are not contests (even when less than 9 participate). I am taping Clark's answers - WITH questions is 8 minutes so far.
Lieberman got booed a record number of times. I was happy with my candidate and basically all had their good moments (minus Joe). Gephardt tried to run with Clark's New Patriotism theme. All in all Faux did better than CNN (and then they did last time)

[indigo32]

40. While Krystol did think Dean dominated the debate

that doesn't mean he supports him. He really painted him as a leftist and you KNOW he isn't in favor of any leftist policy.

[ErasureAcer]

37. some random comments from my roommate on the c-span rerun

he watched a good 10 minutes.

dean-football coach, constapated

kerry-who cares he was in nam, I(my roommate) was in Iraq, Afghanistan, S. Korea.

gephardt-this guy needs to loosen up and stop waving his arms. too much of a politician.

clark-i like him

kucinich-this is the guy you're supporting? he looks like ross perot. at least isn't ignorant like some of these other guys.

sharpton-i never liked that guy.

braun-there's a woman up there, woah, a black woman....she doesn't stand a chance

lieberman he never said anything on because I jumped in first saying he is shit...

edwards-he is from the south, he doesn't stand a chance

so there ya go. my roommates take on the candidates from the first 15 minutes of the debate.

[indigo32]

39. Interesting

The only one that baffles me is his assessment of Clark...
He came across to me as trying to mimic the anger they were expressing last night (which was more than at the CNN debate I thought)... and it didn't come across well to me at all. Ohhhh and Sharpton damnit... who wouldn't like that guy... I was SOOOO glad they threw the tax question they did to him... that was awesome.

[DemCam]

42. Lieberman was worst...

And after that...they all had some good lines and some bad lines.

Winning? not a concept for this format. Hatchet was out for all of them in second half.

Frankly...tho I was hyperfocused on Clark since he's my man...I don't remember much of what any of them said in detail. After reading the transcripts...was stunned to find some real gems in there...and some stinkers.

Hopefully some of them will drop out before the next one.

[kang]

41. Nobody

since there were too many people on stage.

I'd say Sharpton got the most laughs and one-liners and he helps people have fun w/their frustrations about the GOP. But he's also taking up valuable time on stage.

Kucinich is really starting to go after Dean for the true leftist title and I'm sure Dean's not happy w/that since he has to show that he has more pragmatic and moderate policies too. The last thing he needs is somebody calling him a "Bush-lite" (which I believe is an incredibly unfair charge regardless of who the Dem is). Everybody applauds where his heart is, but does anybody think he could EVER get his policies passed through Congress let alone beat Bush? I mean, I hate to sound shallow (this is just a comment about perception) but he's become my visual example what Marvin the Martian would look like if he removed his green helmet. Got to admire his intensity though.

As for Dean, I thought he did fine, but again was a bit stiff and uptight. The only bad part for him was his muttering something to himself in anger when he was being attacked (I believe by Kerry). He held serve though and didn't really hurt himself.

Edwards did well again as expected, but still appeared to be the baby in the pack when standing next to Kerry who's practically an Abe Lincoln minus the beard and hat.

Gephardt spoke a bit slower this time and less fired up, but he actually did pretty well. I'm sorry though, but he reminds me way too much of Al Gore. They even have the same cadence.

EDIT: forgot Kerry here. He did fine I think, but didn't really explain why he should be picked above anybody else. He's sort of lost that message because it used to be his military experience. He really hit Leiberman well though pulling the whole "I've seen combat" retort...but it was well-deserved since he was attacked first. I still get a bit lost in his rhetoric sometimes and forget what the topic was in the first place.

Ok, my guy Clark had a so-so performance and I think was hurt by lack of practice (lost his voice earlier in the week). I liked his answer on the Shelton question and the fact that he smiled when he was being attacked. There's no point in letting these things get to you and showing that such minor things agitate you.

What's strange is that in smaller live events, town hall meetings, and one-on-ones he's much better talking about policy and specifics. I still think he's getting his experience w/the debate format, but still too stiff and not free-flowing. He needs to stand a bit stiller behind the podium and answer questions more directly. Finally, I think he shouldn't mention the Army too much since most are aware of that fact. He'll get better over time and he's got more than enough opportunity (it seems there's one every week!).

So while there were no winners, I'd say the clear loser was Leiberman. Going negative and attacking nearly half the candidates only makes him look weak and desperate. You can smile and joke all you want, but I don't think anybody's buying his "attacking nice guy" routine. When he doesn't place 3rd in NH and gets creamed by Clark in the following 9-state race, it'll be game over for him IMHO.

Hope others find that this was a fair assessment.

[Egnever]

45. Sharpton

Deans my guy till the end.

I thought last night was not a great night for him however. He seemed confused in some of his answers and unprepared. There were a couple points were he made his point very well, but he was also attacked a couple times with no chance to rebut and i think it hurt him.

The second time kerry went after him and they went to comercial dean clearly made a fuss to get a chance to rebut the point but I think by the time the break was over and they got back to it he had lost what it was he was rebutting and was trying to address the comentators questions and kerry's jab in the same answer and i think he flubbed it.

That aside I dont think he got hurt. I agree with what a lot of others are saying. I dont think he gained much support from the debate but I dont think he lost anything either.

Lieberman slaughtered himself I think. I will be amazed if he doesnt take a huge hit in the polls behind this.

Kerry I think had his best performance to date. Despite the fact that he practically never addressed the original questions he had his points prepared and delivered them well. I think he has figured out that the strategy in these debates is to take your time and make the points you feel you need to make. I think it worked well for him and agree with the strategy. I personaly cant stand the man but i think he did well last night.

Ghep said nothing IMHO or less than nothing. It was all about why hes not bush over and over. Bush bad ghep good cause clinton was good and ghep like clinton. Just no substance there I dont think he did himself any favors.

Edwards over all was decent I think he got nailed on the patriot act think th ough and I think it will hurt him. Till last night i thought he was coming on strong but the patriot act question was really bad for him and i think it will hurt him. I was moving edwards to my number two spot before last night but now he slides backwards some.

Kucinich ...... HMMM Denis had a mixed performance last night. I think he was great on his Iraq exit strategy and scored points. However his clear disgust with the moderators and his attempted attack on Dean didnt go over well i dont think. Also his answer on the department of peice will leave people going huh? He was trying to make a point i think of the dangers of the detroit streets but I think his misquote and his trying to connect those deaths with his department of peace diluted his message and made it apear strange.


CMB was affable as always. Not a contender IMHO but once again presented herself as inteligent and worthy of a position somewhere.

Sharpton was the man. Yet again this guy comes out and says what needs to be said. He is definately slaping the donky! I will miss him if/when he drops out. Never thought i would say that but the man is just rocking! His statement regarding the I/P situation was the closest to the truth I have seen on the national stage ever to this date. Unfortunately Lieberman followed and spouted the PC propaganda and took away from Al's message but I will have a soft spot for al from now on for his courage to stand up and speak the truth on this devisive issue.

hmmm oh Clark. Clark did nothing. I dont know if he helped or hurt himself. I think a large portion of Clarks support comes from the Idea of clark and I dont think he did anything to define himself l;ast night. His answers said Ill make things better but not how. There isnt much time to talk so i guess he can use that as an excuse but of all of them up there hes the one that needs to let his suporters and others know who he is. I dont think he did anything last night to make his positions clear.

Overall I think sharpton Won the debate. Kerry got the second best performance out of it and dean Didnt get injured. The rest either held thier ground or lost some IMHO.

It was a lively debate though and far more entertaining than any of the previous ones. The questions for the most part were good ones with the exception of a few that were completely rude. "Do you think you time is over ghep?" WTF? I dont care if he was in last place that sort of question is just out of line.

Good debate my guy didnt do as well as I would have liked him to but life goes on and its still his to lose so I am ok with it.

[kang]

46. Did anybody else find the one Fox reporter really annoying?

I had this sinking suspicion that he had a secret agenda. At one point he spoke of how Dems "complain" about Pres. Bush's policies. That's a loaded word and hardly one that you expect from a journalist in a question posed to a Democrat. Just my opinion, but I was on edge a bit the whole night about Fox airing the debate.

[diamondsoul]

48. Wow!

Would you believe I agree with almost everything you said?! You can probably imagine what I disagree with so I won't even go there at all, BUT on that Peace Dept. question, the problem was the moderator misrepresented what it was when he asked the question. It threw the entire answer off because poor Kucinich was trying to correct that before he could explain anything.

That statistic error, I got to thinking about that,(because my first thought was "How the hell did he mix those numbers up?") and I came to the conclusion he was probably trying to choose whether or not to use an annual homicide rate vs. a short-term one. I've done that before when I'm trying to make a point and strategize at the same time. That's not an easy trick! LOL

Yeah, I'm a little more irked about it because he's my guy, but I also don't think it's too much to ask that these mods know wtf they're asking about before they ask a question, ya know?:eyes:

I love your assessment of Gep, too. That's been driving me nuts, the constant reference back to Clinton. Would somebody tell Gep CLINTON ISN'T RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT!?

I did think Clark did better than I expected this time out. Still not quite enough concrete position to suit me, but I think we saw some more of the real Wes Clark last night. I also have to confess, I do love Kerry's sense of humor, almost as much as Sharpton's. Apparently CMB does too, judging from her laughter at the "Kerry goes wild" crack.

Lieberman just keeps sinking himself. I cannot figure out why he doesn't want to accept that it isn't going over with the voters.

[Egnever]

50. I always knew

You were a smart cookie!

heh but seriously

I agree that kucinich made an honest mistake on the quote of the figures. But i also think he was shooting himself in the foot with the whole line of reasoning. It apeared to me ( this is of course my take on it) that the he was trying to show detroits murder rate as an example of where his department of peace would help detroit. His shot in the foot comes from the fact that detroit has been fevreasing its murder rate for a few years in a row now as pointed out by the moderator. Something aparently they are quite proud of. Denis apeared to be trying to say what a poor job was being done in detroit to control murder rates and I think that offended most of detroit. The fact that he seriously overstated the rate in the first place while i think a completely honest mistake only made matters worse for him i think.

He did do great on his Iraq plan though so perhaps they cancel eachother out.

[knick4life]

47. Edwards

John Edwards was the winner. He always manages to stay above the fray while standing up for his democratic beliefs. He outlines solutions for America while making a contrast between his policies and Bush's.

"My view of leadership is standing up for what you believe in" - John Edwards

[DemDogs]

51. Agreed. Edwards.

This was a "make no mistakes" debate and Edwards made no mistakes. He was the winner. He actually talked about what to do in the cities. His closing was really good, too.