So, what did or do you think? The 'fight' was fought,. So now what?

[babylonsister]

Who do you like, and this isn't a poll obviously. And why?

[2rth2pwr]

1. everything carries on as before

Hillary still leads and will go further up in the polls.

[emilyg]

13. I agree. Well informed. Attacked repugs.

[JDPriestly]

2. Edwards showed he can win in the general election.

He is a fighter. He thoroughly understands the issues, knows where he stands on and offers viable solutions for each of them and can get his point across in a few seconds. Most important, he is honest and genuine. He is our best bet for 2008.

[babylonsister]

4. Thanks. I thought Kucinich was fab, but Edwards got enough time to

state his case, and I liked it.

[The Traveler]

3. Who do I like?

Edwards. Kucinich. Obama. Biden. Dodd. Richardson. Clinton. Pretty much in that order.

There is for me a close grouping of Edwards, Kucinich, and Obama. All these guys correctly (in my view) see a need for a systemic change. Their hearts and minds are in the right place, and they are smart enough to work out the details. I would proudly vote for any of these three.

I like Hillary the least because, quite frankly, she does strike me as being in national security matters close to Bush in basic approach. She'll just bring competency to the task. I don't trust her to dismantle the powers Bush constructed for the executive branch. Rather, I think she will seek to legitimize them. She will be more deft in their use. Compared to Hillary, Bush has the IQ of a carrot.

If Hillary wins the nomination, as appears probable, I will vote for her in the general election. But I will do so with a certain apprehension.

[babylonsister]

7. I like your evaluation, and agree. Not so much with the 'probable, but

otherwise, OK.

[Rydz777]

15. Your last sentence sums up where I am too. nt

[Colobo]

5. Obama showed us why he is our best candidate.

[kad7777]

6. JOE BIDEN finally gets the bump up he deserves.

Honest, experienced, knowledgeable, integrity, intelligent, expert in foreign policy, and dare I say...Presidential. AND, he can pull down Republican votes!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUC8LeZ1hM4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtGCaqOdIJ4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_HcXkLbRIWw

[babylonsister]

8. Biden, Dodd, Richardson and Kucinich got the short end of the stick tonight,

and I thought and think that sucks. But that's me.

[CitizenLeft]

10. what I just said below

totally agree. :(

[Sparkly]

17. I think he's the one to watch.

Especially in Iowa.

[CitizenLeft]

9. I don't have a candidate, so my mind was, and is, wide open

Hillary Clinton is not someone who inspires sympathy... but I found myself wanting her to keep her cool when she was being drilled from all sides. She did keep her cool, but her tightrope-walk on some of those answers was painful to watch. I think it will hurt her, especially her answer about immigration. She did NOT endorse the driver's license move, she said no when pressed to say yes or no, but they'll continue to say she did. It doesn't matter what she really said, or what she says in the future - they will hammer that nail to death for next 6 months - or year, if she's the nom.

One of the pundits before the debate - don't remember who - said Obama was not particularly comfortable during debates, he prefers one-on-one or directly addressing a group. I couldn't put my finger on it before, but tonight I could see it. Not that it's an obvious thing, necessarily, but his speaking style - drawn out and thoughtful - is not conducive to those bang-bang answers that are required in those things. I fear for him in the general because of his style. I think he's best when he gets annoyed. But somebody like Giuliani, a bald-faced unabashed liar, would get deeply under his skin and rattle him. I don't know...

I really wish I could back Joe Biden, but his tendency to make unforgettable faux pas terrifies me. Make one oops comment in the general, and he's toast. Otherwise, he'd be my man because he's a phenomenal statesman and shoots from the hip every time.

I keep wishing Edwards would just take over, he's the closest to being my candidate, but I can't figure out what it is that holds him back from getting the numbers. I suspect that it's his demeanor, it's just short of charismatic, and he seems more snarky that sharp sometimes. It keeps him from being "likable," that x-factor thing that takes candidates over the top. But charisma is in the eye of the beholder.

Blah blah. Who won tonight? I don't think anyone can "win" these things at this point, it's a matter of who does the least harm, and who trips over themselves. Having said that, I think Biden took this one.

In fairness to the others, Richardson, Kucinich and Dodd barely got a word in... Russert and whatshisname zeroed in on Clinton like a beacon, sicced the other candidates on her, and spent the night trying to trip her up, leaving precious little time for anyone else to really make any points.

[babylonsister]

11. Thanks for your thoughtful comments. I think the media ran away with the

questions before they got started. Given the lack of time for candidates in these debates, our job is to keep paying attention and not put so much merit into what the pundits say.

[CitizenLeft]

14. yep

we on this board focus on these debates and we really don't miss much. But the average voter... I cringe at how susceptible they are to the punditspeak. It worries me a lot. Clinton is a perfect example. They spend weeks building her up, making her "unbeatable," and before 2 hours have passed, they chop her head off and spend the rest of the night kicking it around. And look what they did to Dean... even earlier tonight, somebody said Dean "went off the deep end in Iowa" with just that one "yell." Makes me sick.

Great thread, thanks for asking! :hi:

[FrenchieCat]

12. I think that GE won....and that Russert is a big fat Corporate money grumbing pig.....

and I never liked the other guy, as he reminds me of a cartoon character with a head too big for his body.

GE went to work on our Democrats, and at the end of the day, Kucinich was the only one to speak pure truth.

Hillary looked worried and pained a lot of the time, and Edwards only admitted to being hypocritical (about accepting Bundling cash) after attacking others and then being called on it. His "What about the Children?" Lines seemed like a canned part of one of his stump speeches.

In conclusion, I didn't like this debate as it was more of a grilling than anything, and the candidates didn't really impress me with their answers ...but I did like that Biden line about Giuliani quite a bit! He did the right thing, Biden did....in going after the Repug frontrunner. Wish the others would have been as wise....instead of taking the bait laid out by the media and attempting to deconstruct each other!

That being said, I still like Obama better than the rest of them. Along with Biden, Obama is the most natural and human.

[LWolf]

16. My thoughts, since you asked:

Clinton: not a good night. She got more questions than anyone else, more time to talk, and stayed very consistent with her message. The trouble is, there is no substance. Even reminding us repeatedly about her detailed plans won't carry water, since she doesn't say what's actually in them. She generally agrees to a vague goal without saying what she is willing to do to get there. The trotting out of the AP reporter overhearing her tell a private citizen something different than she'd been saying publicly, as well as a few of her other answers, simply provided evidence for Obama and Edward's assertions of "double-talk."

Obama: A rough start with a very weak response on his first question; got better from there on out. I noticed that nobody asked him about McClurkin, an oversight that was probably designed to give him a boost. He may not have been as eloquent as usual, but probably enough so to keep his current fans in his corner.

Edwards: A strong performance all the way around. His hammering of "broken system" and "tell the truth" is effective.

Dodd: Best performance to this date: strong and clear. Perhaps because he was given more time to present his case.

Biden: A grand slam.

Richardson: Makes good points, loses support. While I don't agree with all of his positions, I think that he doesn't get the respect he should.

Kucinich: A valiant effort to focus the conversation on the issues driving the election. Directly pointing out media complicity in war rhetoric (and stupid debate questions, by inference), bush crimes, and the democratic party's failure to oppose the bush atrocities in a meaningful way. Handled the ufo question ok; I noticed they gave it to him in the "lightning round," and were a little quicker to hold him to the time, just in case he might turn that question to a positive outcome. He didn't get too many opportunities to speak in comparison to the rest, including those that are polling lower than he is. Hmmm.....

Did my personal positions shift? Not really. They remain:

Kucinich all the way

Edwards/Biden 2nd choice

Dodd/Richardson ok for the general

Clinton/Obama off of my table.

[babylonsister]

18. We have similar tables! Thanks for your comments. nt