Wyldwolf's Infuriating Yet 100% Correct Debate Analysis

wyldwolf

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Oct-31-07 07:33 AM
Original message

Wyldwolf's Infuriating Yet 100% Correct Debate Analysis

Edited on Wed Oct-31-07 07:36 AM by wyldwolf

If Edwards really wanted traction, he should have tried to take Obama down a notch or two. Edwards has a serious chance to overtake Barack, but not so much with Clinton. He scored points by attacking her but how effective will it ultimately be to his own campaign?

On the other hand, Obama failed to live up to the hype he's created over the last week. He didn't go after her any more than he has in the past. This could still help Edwards if disappointed Obama supporters take another look at Edwards. Clinton, though, was expecting Obama to be more aggressive so she was much more aggressive in her responses the first half of the debate. After she realized he was just bobbing and weaving as usual, she was much more relaxed in her answers.

I also need to point out that Iowa voters tend to frown on negativity from candidates. If Obama realized that and backed off at the last minute to let Edwards be the sniper, it was a smart move. But he still looked like a bystander most of the night.

Clinton hurt herself by tripping over her answer to the "Illegal Aliens" drivers license question. It seemed to be the only question she didn't see coming and unfortunately for her, it was near the end of the debate so it left an impression but not so close to the end that it made the press this morning. Many reporters and columnists had already put their stories to bed before it happened. Lucky break for Hillary.

Of course, I know what she meant. I can think something is a good idea without having any intention of implementing it. I can also put a good idea on a short list of other ones. She should have worded her answer a bit better. But I don't believe he trip-up was as much a result of the context of the question as it was Tim Russert's mission to play "gotcha" with our candidates.

I've always liked Joe Biden and was one of the few on DU to defend him against the ridiculous accusation months back that he felt Barack Obama had poor hygiene. To put it another way, I was Biden when Biden wasn't cool. His foreign policy expertise is tops in the presidential field. I would so enjoy watching a General Election with Biden vs. Julie. Joe moved into my second choice position months ago and solidified it tonight. I hope whoever gets the Demnom goes to him for snarky reply advice.

Bill Richardson - my former first choice/former second choice is now my third choice. Some say he's gunning for a place in the Clinton administration. That may be so. But don't discount a Richardson senate run completely. One of the MSNBC analysts last night spoke of a scenario where Richardson could transfer his presidential campaign funds into a Senate campaign.

If Dennis Kucinich was better looking and less kooky, he'd be a front runner. He says the things red meat craving Dems want to hear in regards to policy, however unrealistic as they are in the current political climate, and I get the impression he really feels it. But his tendency for oddness and his Keebler elf appearance turns many people away. Sorry folks, that's just the way it is. But if it's any consolation at all, I, too, have seen a UFO.

In conclusion, this talk about Hillary "losing" the debate is really silly. Since pundits enjoy using Boxing terminology, allow me to as well. Hillary is Muhammad Ali. She's the current champ. Imagine Ali stepping into the ring to take on both Joe Frazier and George Foreman. At the same time. If Ali were to walk out of the ring under his own power after such a match, that would be an accomplishment.

Clinton walked out bruised but she walked out the same way she walked in - the front runner.