Observations on the Debate

Well, I didn’t really see any of the things I wanted to see in the debate. That wasn’t the fault of the candidates, the CNN crew simply decided to ask different questions. I could go on a tangent about the quality of the questions but I’m just going to let it go. I’d rather talk about my impressions.

I was most impressed with Barack Obama’s performance. He was willing to take courageous stands on the granting of driver’s licenses to undocumented people and on insisting that people that make over $97,000 a year pay more into Social Security. If there was one thing I took away from the debate, it was that Obama is willing to take some positions that are correct, but that are ripe for easy distortion and attacks ads. That’s precisely what it is so hard to get a Clinton to do.

Hillary had a much better debate than two weeks ago in Philadelphia. She didn’t make any obvious gaffes and she probably had the best moment of the night when she talked about the problems women face with glass ceilings. She was also assisted by a very sympathetic audience…her supporters lustily booed every time any other candidate attacked her record. I suspect that is a new strategy, but it could have been spontaneous. Not.

Edwards was the recipient of much of that booing, which caused him to back off a little. Nonetheless, Edwards is an impressive debater and, as usual, had many fine moments. He wanted to plant the idea in the audience’s mind that Hillary Clinton is a ‘corporate Democrat’ that takes lobbyist and PAC money. The booing blunted his effectiveness.

Richardson demonstrated that he is a world class panderer. Asked if we should dump nuclear waste in Yucca Mountain, he suggested we create a research facility there instead, to study what to do with nuclear waste. Asked what he would do about income disparity between troops and mercenaries, he said he’d take all the mercenaries out of Iraq. There seems to be nothing Richardson won’t say or promise to provide.

Biden does very well in these debates. He’s funny, he’s confident, and he’s articulate. I just don’t see how can break through.

The same goes for Dodd, who did very well. I’d say he did better than in any prior debate. But he has no angle except for his steadfast support for our civil liberties, and that didn’t come up.

Kucinich did a great job and had many applause lines. His best was when he pointed out all the flip-flops…on the Patriot Act…on NAFTA…on the war…and then said, “Wouldn’t it be great to have a president that gets it right the first time?”

The bottom line is that the Democrats have a very strong field of candidates. My personal favorite, Chris Dodd, is the only one that isn’t a strong debater…and he’s not bad at all.

There wasn’t a whole lot of substance to this debate. It was notable that Hillary Clinton reluctantly admitted that NAFTA was a mistake. Chris Dodd distinguished himself by pointing out that human rights happy talk is all fine and dandy, but Pakistan is a little more complicated than to have or not to have elections. We don’t live in an ideal world. Elections have not improved Iraq, or Palestine, and there is no guarantee that they will improve Pakistan.

Several of the other candidates seemed wrapped up in some Wolfowitizian fantasyland where elections are the solution to every problem.

The post debate analysis/spin was predictably fatuous. They tried to make it out that Obama had tripped up on the drivers’ licenses question, but that was absurd. He had a complicated and courageous explanation. It was his finest moment of the debate.

One last observation: Hillary broke a cardinal rule of the frontrunner. She said the others were not gunning for her because she is a woman, but because she is ahead (in the polls). That is true. But the frontrunner should never refer to the polls before the votes are cast. It’s not only bad ju-ju but it’s arrogant and can really come back to haunt you. Howard Dean was wise enough never to say anything like that. The fatheads on CNN thought it was her best line of the night.

And, uh, CNN didn’t disclose that James Carville is part of TEAM CLINTON. Carville said she won the debate. Go figure.

Author: BooMan

Martin Longman a contributing editor at the Washington Monthly. He is also the founder of Booman Tribune and Progress Pond. He has a degree in philosophy from Western Michigan University.