I'm watching the whole shebang despite Wolf being the mediator ...this might help me get and unbiased view of who I will be voting for this upcomind Tuesday.
They both look good...can't say I care for Candy Crowley....but whatever.
Obama opening....acknowlegdes Edwards right off the bat...good idea. Seems relaxed and calm...so far so good. ...talks about how she and Hillary will be friends no matter what...(too bad his supporters here can't seem to say that though). Ok I'm getting bored by his politicking and stump talk.
Hillary opening....Hopes looking at next president next 1/20/2009...then will have a slew of problems that face them Talks positively too about John and Elizabeth Edwards and what they believed and talked about..Thinks time for a problem solver. ....she's ready for it.
First Question...about what biggest policy difference between the two...says she and Barack some differences but nothing compared to she and repukes. (healthcare difference) mentions mortgage issue (moratorium and interest rate freeze) certainly understands and reels of specific details on the issue here (that impresses me and I like it). Mentions difference of meeting with foreign country leaders without preconditions. But ends with both of them are not more of the same ole repuke crap.
Obama policy differences...says what Hillary said were true. Mentions health insurance. Ummm a bit vague and scattered mentions his mother then jumps to some handicapped kids...(not sure where he's going with this) thinks making it affordable..with rebates.now tells people Hillary wants to force people to get it who don't have it. Mortgage crisis...says he put forth 10 billion proposal. Now talks about how Bush created this mess (no oversight) I like that he attacks DimSon. Now goes onto lobbyist...ethics proposals (says he doesn't take lobbyist money) agrees with Edwards on this. Now goes onto Iraq...sez against it from beginning (my thought but he still wants to fund it).
Overall both good answers.
Posted by emal at January 31, 2008 05:18 PMI'm watching, too, emal!
Posted by iamcoyote at January 31, 2008 05:21 PMBlitzer's such a putz "was that a swipe at Clinton?"
Posted by iamcoyote at January 31, 2008 05:29 PMthink you're being redundant using Blitzer and putz in same sentence.
But anyway.Like Obama going after straightalking McCain and repukes and their tax cuts for the wealthy...good idea. Then Putzer goes after Hillary ....so Hillary you want to raise taxes on the wealthy to pay for your Healthcare plan.. gawd these pathetic greedy bastards and their kkKarl Rove talking points..they just don't give a damn about anyone but their elitist wealthy friends..ooooooo the boogey man the taxes will rise on the wealthy...oh the humanity Putzer. Hillary scores one with ummm taxes will go to level they were before Bush and last she checked even the goddamn wealthy were still doing really well and others did even better...snap!
Posted by emal at January 31, 2008 05:39 PMThat was a good one, emal! But why did Obama say immigrants have to learn English? Isn't that a Republican cause?
Posted by iamcoyote at January 31, 2008 05:42 PMAh, Hillary said it, too, adding we have to help them learn English.
Posted by iamcoyote at January 31, 2008 05:45 PMObama just knocked it out of the park on immigration. That Hack from Politco (I forgot her name) asked a terrible question to the effect of "What would you do to help all the black folk who have lost their jobs to illegal Mexicans."
I was flabbergasted by the question. She definitely had him in an uncomfortable spot.
Obama spoke about his work with people who have lost their jobs and said 1. That he would not scapegoat immigrants and 2. That that is what separates us from the Republicans!
Out of the park Home Run! Whoever gets the nomination can use that one again I hope.
Posted by midwestdem at January 31, 2008 05:49 PMNicole Belle at Crooks and Liars is fearful of being accused to be pro-Hillary. Such fanaticism makes me want to puke. If Obama wins the nomination I will vote "present" in November.
The Abrams Report: Is the Media Making This More of A Horse Race?
By: Nicole Belle on Thursday, January 31st, 2008 at 4:00 PM - PST
I was a little hesitant to do this post at first because I’m sure I’ll be accused of doing a pro-Hillary post. But stay with me here.
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/01/31/the-abrams-report-is-the-media-making-this-more-of-a-horse-race/
Posted by Prabhata at January 31, 2008 05:52 PMYeah, that was a good answer, but then Obama basically called her a flip flopper, so he kinda ruined it.
Posted by iamcoyote at January 31, 2008 05:52 PMJust got a bit distracted getting kids showered and some to bed...so missed a bit of the immigration issue. (to be perfectly honest the bits an pieces I've heard from both at this point are seem valid and both seem to realize that this is an issue raised by repukes to distract/scapegoat from many other important issues.(imo it's replacing gay marriage we had in 2004). Hillary said seems like people are struggling economically and are frustrated so are looking/grasping at reasons why this is happening. I score this issue a wash for the two..and agree the driver's license issue doesn't really get at the real underlying and complexity of the issue at hand.
I agree I don't care for the way the question was raised to begin with.
Good answer by Hillary about USA being way more than a effing business we are a trust and not out to make a profit. Plus we had an prez who ran as CEO prez and look at the mess he created). Obama knocks Romney's investment in his campaign return...snap...score one Obama.
Okay I'm biased, Hillary makes a good point about electing first woman preznit!
Posted by emal at January 31, 2008 06:07 PMemal,
I agree. But unlike the wholesome appeal of "defending marriage" the immigration issue failed the Republicans in 2006, and it will have failed in the primaries when McCain's nomination is official.
It is a lame issue designed to motivate the Reich Wingers and I for one am glad to see it fading. I hope Lou Dobbs is watching.
Posted by midwestdem at January 31, 2008 06:08 PMIf nothing else, I am so incredibly proud of the Democratic Party's nominees' ability to conduct an intelligent, civilized debate on the issues.
Sure makes last night's debate look churlish and oversimplified.
If these two human beings we're watching could settle their differences and be on the same ticket, America would vote for them in a landslide!!!!
Posted by Mary at January 31, 2008 06:13 PMon immigration, i thought hillary was very good, speaking about the need for a comprehensive approach.
they're both doing well, and the tone is much better than last time. so far...
Posted by at January 31, 2008 06:14 PMI agree with Turkana, the main themes so far are their differences, deep ones, between the two of them and the Republicans. They're both doing very well I think. Obama without teleprompters and Hillary without anyone to play Obama off of. Her jewelry looks nice on my tv, and Barack looks strong and wise beyond his years.
Ooh, she did well with the 20 years of Bush/Clinton question and how can she be an agent of change. That's the kind of moment that will play well on the tv shows tomorrow.
Emal and Coyote, great job and Midwest, that was a horrible question.
Posted by Jeff Dinelli at January 31, 2008 06:15 PMIt looked like Obama took credit for the higher turnout at the primaries, which seemed just a little arrogant - especially when he said "and partly for Hillary." I thinks it's more a hatred of what the 'pukes have done with their time than anything else.
Hillary's "It takes a Clinton to clean up after a Bush" got a laugh!
Posted by iamcoyote at January 31, 2008 06:16 PMWolf not successful in characterizing Barack's Iraq speech as a "swipe." They both handled that well. Settle down, Wolf.
Posted by Jeff Dinelli at January 31, 2008 06:24 PMIt was still a bad vote, Hillary. The Iraq one. She would do well against McCain here, though.
Posted by Jeff Dinelli at January 31, 2008 06:28 PMIt was still a bad vote, Hillary. The Iraq one.
She dug herself a really deep hole.
Posted by phid at January 31, 2008 06:34 PMAgree think Putzer trying to make an issue where they don't exist...please.... Clinton handle the botched vote and why very well. But still do think that Obama is stronger and closer to my opinion in many ways on the Iraq issue... I mostly liked his no permanent presence statement! I appreciate how Hillary knows that unfortunately it's a complex situation over there thanks to Dimson's obsession and quagmire, and mentioning that the Democratic position is far superior to the McCain and repuke policies. I enjoy how they both are going after McCain and the National security issue of repukes.
Oy.. the redirect by Putzer...so what you're saying is you were naive in your vote...Putz got booed (yehaw). Hillary Nice try Putz.
she finally gives a good answer- that they've had the same record, since he entered the senate. but it was a mistake to try to explain her vote. she should have stuck on what we do now, rather than what happened in 2003.
Posted by Turkana at January 31, 2008 06:38 PMHillary says she would never have taken her eye off Afghanistan if she were prez. Wolf calls her naive. He's so bad. Can't we find a grown-up to do this?
Clearly, though, Obama easily wins this argument. I don't think it's a stretch to suggest that all of us here on TLC as writers or readers knew that was a resolution that should never have been approved. I personally feel for Hillary when she says it's a matter of Bush taking the thing and fucking it up, but he should never have been given the chance. Barack's right here, it speaks to judgement. But they both have voted exactly the same since the disaster started into an avalanche of horror and blood. They both have made strong cases that they will handle this much more maturely than McOld could ever even imagine contemplating. Oh, Man, we've gotta get one of these two in the White House.
CNN just came back from the break in mid-Barack sentence, at least on my dish. They seem to be talking about censorship. I hope they're careful here.
Posted by Jeff Dinelli at January 31, 2008 06:44 PMI'm sorry but I think the questions asked by this chick on stage that are allegedly being sent in by voters seem biased against Hillary. It's sounds like Obama or repuke people sent in these questions. I really am sick of this shit about Bill right now. Good answer Hillary and shut these idjits up who are asking for it.
Talk now about Dream ticket (I'd go along with that idea myself). Obama avoiding answer of it but tries to make nice. Hillary defers to Obama's answer (avoid it too)..unified party.
But boy this whole debate is such a pleasant change compared to those on the repuke side...watching adults who can think, reason, be cordial and talk at the same time...nice.
Initial reaction....both candidates are good.
Cnn PUtzer he's such a turd! Crowley sucks too...mute button on.
Posted by emal at January 31, 2008 06:54 PMYou know, I kinda like the Obama/Clinton, Clinton/Obama question, it certainly got Stevie Wonder out of his seat. Again, handled well, and Barack was very gracious towards Hillary at the close.
I feel really good about this situation we have here. There's still room to fight it out over issues, that's healthy. But it looks like they're on the same page, as we all should be, and we've got two great candidates here to take on the Dark Side. Good show and congrats to the both of them. Hopefully this pours some water on the flames of divisiveness we've seen around here and around the lefty roots.
Posted by Jeff Dinelli at January 31, 2008 06:56 PMI have to commend them both for not taking the bait all night from that shithead "Wolf"! He kept at it all night trying to get them to tee off on each other, both maintained civility and a high level of composure!
Obama even helped Hillary with her chair!
This is my Democratic Party!!
I wonder if this was brought on by Edwards dropping out?
Posted by Seven of Six at January 31, 2008 06:58 PMFrankly, I'm just not hung up on the AUMF vote. It would have passed with or without her, Bush would have gone to war with or without it, so it's just a ploy to try to force her to make an apology no one will accept anyhow. I don't blame her for not doing the dance of humiliation that everyone's demanding. And if Obama thought it was such a bad idea, why is he still voting to fund it?
It was a great debate, I thought, and both of them looked very good, especially in contrast to the idiot 'pukes. And a unity ticket would totally be unstoppable in November.
Posted by iamcoyote at January 31, 2008 07:01 PMOlbermann's gonna have "representitives" from TPM, HuffPo and Crooks and Liars on his show.
Posted by Jeff Dinelli at January 31, 2008 07:16 PMI watched some snippets of it on CNN.com. Opening statements were good. Both looked a bit uncomfortable when Obama went into the past vs. future thingy. But not to bad. All in all I remain convinced that they would both make very good presidents.
I agree with coyote. Bush was going into Iraq regardless of whether he got the AUMF or not. I have no problem understanding the vote. We kicked Saddam's ass back in 1991. A unified Congress saying to him in 2002 that they stood prepared to support the president if he decided to do it again was a strong signal to send in the effort to get Saddam to leave Iraq without a war. But yes, Hillary should have understood that Cheney had already sprayed the handwriting on the wall. And no, she should not apologize.
Posted by snark at January 31, 2008 07:17 PMFinally Coyote says the obvious!
Of course the AUMF vote didn't matter---not the way people think it did.
I missed it. Did anyone say we invaded Iraq for the oil?
Posted by Bob In Pacifica at January 31, 2008 07:22 PMA couple of Hillary highlights:
Posted by Jeff Dinelli at January 31, 2008 07:24 PMemal, thanks for helping with the semi-live blogging, you're a natural!
Posted by iamcoyote at January 31, 2008 07:24 PMbased solely on the undecided voter meter, it looks like hillary did solidly better than obama. she stayed around 7 (out of ten) most of the time, knocking a few out of the park to approach close to 9. obama stayed around 6 and sometimes dipped below 5. in any case i'm thankful for the civil tone of both.
Posted by nance at January 31, 2008 07:30 PMWow, watching in HD really brings out the make-up these politicians wear on their faces. I think Romney had more on his face last night than Hillary did tonight.
Posted by Seven of Six at January 31, 2008 07:34 PMI thought she was solid, great. I liked him better than before, but I don't think he masters the issues like she does. I'm going to vote for her, but they'd make a great ticket.
I agree that her Iraq vote was a mistake, but I just don't think that's a convincing argument to take the nomination away from her. I think economy and health care are what's on people's minds. I think either of them will get the troops out, but I think she's better on domestic. I'd love to see him as president in 8 years.
Posted by vt at January 31, 2008 07:35 PMI missed it. Did anyone say we invaded Iraq for the oil?
Well, back in 1991 Sec. Def. Cheney and Sec. State Baker both said it. The all war all the time crowd was a bit more discrete this time however.
Posted by snark at January 31, 2008 07:35 PMSo, they've got Arianna, who hates Hillary, Josh Marshall, who's totally for Obama and the other guy, I don't know who he's for. Hmm.
Posted by iamcoyote at January 31, 2008 07:39 PMBTW, Obama's got people on the ground here in New York. I've been handed Obama literature two days in a row at the train station.
Posted by snark at January 31, 2008 07:44 PMOk, I can't get the links to work here, but there are two Hillary highlights for those interested, one on experience and one on Mitt.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QxqAvMZEaU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vX12xWiiaJc
The links work for me, Jeff!
Posted by iamcoyote at January 31, 2008 07:49 PMI did it right the first time. I'm a dork.
It's kinda cool seeing the bloggers on tv, though Adrianna's no stranger. Good move by Keith.
Posted by Jeff Dinelli at January 31, 2008 07:49 PMamato was good, but it really isn't fair for msnbc to have josh and arianna- who both favor hillary- and no pro-hillary blogger. eriposte?
Posted by Turkana at January 31, 2008 08:02 PMWhat other bloggers are there that say anything nice about Hillary, really? That'll go on tv? As far as I know, we're the only ones who have people actively supporting her. It's why we get so much of the hate.
Posted by iamcoyote at January 31, 2008 08:06 PMI think it was a good debate -- very civil and friendly. I hope that both Barack and Hillary keep up the tone they established tonight.
Before this debate, I was not sure whom to vote for on Feb.5.
But I am not happy with Wolf Blitzer trying to make snide remarks at Hillary and the general anti-Hillary tone of the media, I have decided that I will buck the damned media and vote for Hillary.
Jonathan.
Posted by at January 31, 2008 08:10 PMI'm glad that Hilary went into detail about her Iraq vote. It was an important vote and an important issue composed of many facets. I wanted to know exactly what she was thinking at the time, and i appreciated her detailed explanation. For me, it's just not enough for Obama to say, "I was against it." or Edwards to say "It was a mistake." If you place yourself back at the time, we had just been attacked, and I actually thought Saddam DID have WMD. It would have been irresponsible to have not dealt with him properly. I don't think most people would have expected their president to be so corrupt or lie the way George W. did. I believe the presidents prior to George W. had much more integrity--including Bush Sr.
Posted by shary at January 31, 2008 08:12 PMI loved the last comment. "Some say this is the dream ticket." Neither one ruled that option out. It indeed would be the dream ticket, with Hillary as President and Obama as Vice-President. Then give Obama eight years and he will be ready to run for the Presidency. It would also unite the Party.
Posted by Judith at January 31, 2008 08:20 PMSomething tells me that I will be one of those late breaking undecided (registered unenrolled) Democratic balloting voters that effs up the damn media narrative and skews the most recent pre Super Tuesday voting polls in my state. ...gawd I love it.... and I agree with Jonathan the short piece of punditry I subjected myself to on cnn had praise for both but definitely still the damn media Clinton derangement syndrome theme running amok through it. Gloria Borger and John King just need to stfu....already. ....they know nothing about what average Americans are dealing with and how they perceive things...nothing.
Posted by emal at January 31, 2008 08:27 PMI didn't watch the debate...tied up with other stuff unfortunately. I'm glad that the tone was civil and there was more focus on unity.
Posted by eriposte at January 31, 2008 08:39 PMfrom the NYTimes: As Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign has intensified, Mr. Clinton has begun severing financial ties with Ronald W. Burkle, the supermarket magnate, and Vinod Gupta, the chairman of InfoUSA, to avoid any conflicts of interest. Those two men have harnessed the former president’s clout to expand their businesses while making the Clintons rich through partnership and consulting arrangements.
hey, I thought they were poor from all the WhiteWater defense lawyers?
Posted by datadave at January 31, 2008 09:17 PMThe best part of the "debate" was when Wolf Weinerblitzer was rightfully booed by the crowd for instigating.
Posted by TIKI AL at January 31, 2008 11:38 PMwhat's clear to me is that obama has a very light resume..when they gave their qualifcations i thought itb was stark..she could have talked all night on her background..and not just as first lady
Posted by dennis at February 1, 2008 04:12 AMDennis, yes that was very apparent.
Posted by Judith at February 1, 2008 04:28 AMdennis, you're right. At one point, I forgot which question, something about "what would you do" Clinton says she'll do this, and this and this, and Obama says "I'll make decisions, and...inspire people." It seemed really lame after Hillary had all these concrete answers. It kinda gave me a chuckle. And the part where he took credit for the high turnout for Dems at the polls really stuck out for me, as I said earlier. Not a big thing, but it turned me off.
Posted by iamcoyote at February 1, 2008 05:43 AMI wasn't able to watch the debate, but I thank you all for your postings as you watched it.
This is helpful.
I feel that the Democrats, if they can set aside the personal sniping, may have a best-faith fighting chance, if they hammer home the discussions on the issues (not on each other), and bash the Rethuglicans.
On News Hour with Lehrer last night, they showed snippets of the Rethuglican debate. Ron Paul sounded statesmen-like, while McCain and Romney sounded like overgrown fifth-graders. Just with white hair and slicked hair. And suits.
Posted by Troubled American at February 1, 2008 06:46 AMWhat faulty memories many Hillary supporters have. Noted by Obama the Authorization Bill clearly stated it was authoization for the President to go to war against Iraq.Hillary evasion number one. Not clearly stated by Obama(don't know why) many Democrat Senators on the floor of the Senate, pointed that out, over and over in debate. Russ Feingold comes to mind.
In addition to the Senators of record against that authorization many newspapers and organizations across America were pointing out the Presidents faulty reasoning. Recall the AH Colin Powell made of himself before the United Nations with his ridiclous scketches of tubes? The information was in front of the American people and infront of the blogosphere. Hillary made a fool of herself with her convoluted lies last night. Either that or she is saying hey I'm stupid I couldn't tell the emmm facts.
Most importantly when she gets in front of Bomb Iran McCain in the General Election we get a Democratic Candidate who voted for the War in Iraq, the biggest foreign policy blunder in American History. Not to mention we get to talk about Bill Again.
Why do you want Hillary so badly you risk the Democrats winning the Presidency??? Please discuss without slimming me for my opinion and disagreement on fact. I'm interested in answers the stakes are very high.
Why do you want Hillary so badly you risk the Democrats winning the Presidency???
Many of us don't believe that Hillary is unelectable.
Please discuss without slimming me for my opinion and disagreement on fact.
Your contention that Hillary Clinton is unelectable is opinion. Not fact.
I'm interested in answers the stakes are very high.
No shit.
And here's a fact for you.
The Senate voted on the AUMF in October of 2002. Colin Powell made his presentation to the UN on February 5th, 2003.
Posted by snark at February 1, 2008 08:02 AMPlaying gotcha on the Colin Powell BS presentation doesn't answer the Senate Debate or the enormous amount of coverage in newspapers and Democartic stategists about the War in Iraq being a "fariytale". The biggest blunder in foreign policy history the death and destruction and the robbing of the US Treasury deserves a more thoughtful answer.If you took the time to google the date of the UN presentation why not take the time to google HRC vote on the authorization bill, and see how many Democratic senators debated the authorization on the floor of the US Senate and how many Newspapers and commentators published the "FACTS" regarding the Presidents warmongering against a country that did not cause 9/11. Inafterthought google dates all you want but don't create your own reality citing one issue and not pay attention to what really happened. Hillary Clinton voted to take this country to war and she continued to support with blood and treasure that war until the polls showed her oops wrong Hill. MCain will make mincemeat out of her on this issue. Read something beside google today.Read some Newspapers from the date your so enamoured of.
Posted by rm forsyth at February 1, 2008 08:21 AMPlaying gotcha on the Colin Powell BS presentation...
You got your facts wrong. Not me.
Inafterthought google dates all you want but don't create your own reality citing one issue and not pay attention to what really happened.
But you were creating your own reality by mixing up historical events. I'm not ignoring what really happened. I just don't think it's nearly as important to the November election as you do.
Hillary Clinton voted to take this country to war and she continued to support with blood and treasure that war until the polls showed her oops wrong Hill. MCain will make mincemeat out of her on this issue.
McCain STILL supports the war. So how is McCain gonna use it, in a head to head election, to pull voters away from Clinton? It makes no sense.
Posted by snark at February 1, 2008 08:31 AM