Final Dem Debate Liveblog
Anyone interested, please post your thoughts as the debate runs as comments to this thread.
I predict Hillary will be aggressive then passive, she’ll start out really negative, try to get Obama to fall into a policy oriented trap, she’ll frame her attacks as self-defense, rather than as an outright attack. If it doesn’t go well with the crowd, she’ll try to pivot to a love fest, but in the end she will question his ability to be commander in chief. I would feel vindicated if she used the line I’ve been predicting, “a commander in chief doesn’t get to vote present.”
Wouldn’t it be great if Obama borrowed Reagan’s line “There you go again” when she gets all ridiculous-distorto-hateful with him. I predict he responds forcefully, without counter attack, and then says the natural “this is the same old politics…turn the page…bring people together instead of tear each other apart…lift America up rather than tear each other down, etc.” Either that, or if he’s really on, he’ll use dismissive humor, like when he called her earlier attacks silly.
Early in the campaign I attended a Hillary Clinton fundraiser where Bill Clinton spoke. President Clinton was on his game that night, and the most important thing he said was “every campaign I ever made about myself, I lost. Every campaign I made about the people, I won.”
This is a telling quote, and a good diagnosis for Hillary’s diseased message. Hillary is at her best when using a populist message, and on several occasions on this blog I’ve highlighted when she started shifting up that message and using populist themes, thinking she was finally going to get it. It’s also telling that the tired talking points she continually reverts to are about her, not about the people: I have 35 years of experience, I am ready to lead from day one, I have made change, etc. Contrast that with Obama’s messages: when ordinary people come together than can do extraordinary things, we can change this country, yes we can, we are the change that we seek, etc.
If anyone in the Agora is considering donating to Obama, if you do, I’ll make a matching donation (within reason) to the DSCC or to a targeted house race. He is almost to 1,000,000 donors. If you haven’t donated yet, I’d encourage you to make even a modest donation. If you’d like to take me up on this, email me at inspired.augur@gmail.com.
Comment by Augur on 26 February 2008 at 8:07 pm:
With no real rules, my guess is that she will try to talk 65% of the time.
Her makeup looks overdone. Ear rings too big, necklace too cheap looking.
She might not like what Obama said about making people buy health care who cant afford it, but she didn’t refute it.
I’m a little worried that Obama looks like he’s about to start laughing at her.
Question about the garb: Hillary handled it pretty well. She says she would ask someone to leave over that.
Comment by J. Prescott on 26 February 2008 at 8:09 pm:
Obama is misleading on the healthcare issue.
But, The Annenberg Political Fact Check, or Factheck.org said that Obama is being misleading when he says his healthcare proposal would “cover everyone.”
Factcheck.org says Obama’s plan would make coverage available to all, but experts that the organization consulted estimate that 15 to 26 million Americans would not take it up unless required to do so, which means, the new policy would still leave almost half the currently un-insured, still un-insured.
Comment by Augur on 26 February 2008 at 8:10 pm:
Obama: He has occurred repeated negative mailers. Says the 15 million are inaccurate. Cool collected rationality. Well explained about the mandate.
Her campaign has constantly sent negative attacks, fliers, radio ads, robocalls, etc. Basically called her a whiner b/c she’s getting a tiny taste of her own medicine.
She tries to say it’s ok b/c she cares so much about health care.
Comment by J. Prescott on 26 February 2008 at 8:14 pm:
Obama constantly toting the Sec. Labor from the Clinton administration is not the total truth.
Reich, Dec. 3, 2007: I’ve compared the two plans in detail. Both of them are big advances over what we have now. But in my view Obama’s would insure more people, not fewer, than HRC’s. That’s because Obama’s puts more money up front and contains sufficient subsidies to insure everyone who’s likely to need help – including all children and young adults up to 25 years old.
More recently, however, Reich has not been so emphatic. In a Jan. 13 item he found the plans of Obama and Clinton to be “the same” in almost every important respect. While on Dec. 3 he said he thought Obama’s plan would cover more people because it “puts more money up front,” by Jan. 13 he said that all Democratic plans “spend nearly an identical amount of money.” On the question of whether Clinton or Obama’s position on mandates is best, he said, “Who’s correct? It’s hard to know.” He urged the Democratic candidates to “stop squabbling over healthcare mandates.”
Comment by augur on 26 February 2008 at 8:16 pm:
clintons own sec of labor, that was a good hit for obamarama
Obama forgot to say kids cant control if their parents buy health care, thats why kids have to be mandated
Comment by J. Prescott on 26 February 2008 at 8:17 pm:
Augur, the sec. labor claim is just not totally the truth. See above.
Comment by J. Prescott on 26 February 2008 at 8:19 pm:
Is Hillary seriously bitching about the debate now during the debate? Holy christ, she is not holding back.
Comment by Augur on 26 February 2008 at 8:21 pm:
Obama should talk about what Hillary said in her book
Comment by Gordon the Gnome on 26 February 2008 at 8:21 pm:
Hillary’s embarrassing herself…she won’t stop talking, she’s claiming that she gets “unfair” treatment at the debates. Citing that Saturday Night Live is a little weak; that’s source? That sketch was followed by another where farting was a recurring punchline!
Comment by Brian on 26 February 2008 at 8:27 pm:
Tim Russert is a tool.
Comment by J. Prescott on 26 February 2008 at 8:27 pm:
I love this.
We will build international consensus. We will rehabilitate America’s reputation in the world.
But first.
We will dictate to everyone else about how these treaties, that we already signed, are going to be rewritten, and if they are not rewritten, we are going to protest and shut down all trade.
Wow, thats not contradictory, or anything.
Comment by Augur on 26 February 2008 at 8:28 pm:
great line Gordon, and welcome to the thread bru!
Obama should ask for the next few questions first :)
Comment by Augur on 26 February 2008 at 8:29 pm:
Brian, why he actually gave her a tough question? That makes him a tool?
I’m all for giving these guys tougher questions, both of them. If he is soft on Obama the rest of the way, then call him a tool. punkass
Comment by augur on 26 February 2008 at 8:31 pm:
Obama seems poised in answering Russerts Nafta question. good transition to green jobs.
Comment by augur on 26 February 2008 at 8:32 pm:
Russert hit her hard again, on the pledge. Very good question
her answer scapegoating gore sucked
Comment by Brian on 26 February 2008 at 8:33 pm:
He’s a tool because his entire goal is to make himself look like a tough journalist rather than ask enlightening questions. Instead of trying to learn what the candidates think about the nuances of NAFTA and trade, he’s trying to pin Hillary down on some nonsense hypothetical that has no realistic application to the world, solely so that he can put her in an uncomfortable position and look tough. And it has nothing to do with her, it has to do with the fact that he does that to everybody, Republican and Democrat, and it’s worthless.
Comment by Gordon the Gnome on 26 February 2008 at 8:33 pm:
Man, Russert really has it out for Hillary. I don’t know if it has anything to do with Obama, maybe it’s because he’s from Buffalo (as he just mentioned), and Hillary’s not going to win a New York job creation debate with a guy from Buffalo. (I did enjoy that “I thought Al Gore would be president” excuse.)
Comment by augur on 26 February 2008 at 8:36 pm:
she always dodges the question though, ok, on this one i love obama too much to be objective, i’ll concede that he probably is a tool, and i just cant tell b/c i <3 barack
Obama should try to spend 16 minutes on the war
Comment by Gordon the Gnome on 26 February 2008 at 8:37 pm:
Obama gets props for bringing up Pakistan. After Iraq, it’s one of the most volatile and important global arenas. Even more than Afghanistan, if you ask me. (Afghani’s don’t have nukes.)
Comment by Brian on 26 February 2008 at 8:37 pm:
I just checked TPM to see if it was liveblogging, and its mockery of Tim Russert echoes my feelings on him:
“9:24 PM … Russert: If I don’t get a yes or no answer to my clownish question, you’re toast, woman!
9:27 PM … Button this up?
9:31 PM … Russert: I’m one hardass, Dude. You can’t put anything past me.”
Comment by augur on 26 February 2008 at 8:38 pm:
I think obama is praying for restraint
Comment by J. Prescott on 26 February 2008 at 8:38 pm:
But will Pakistan not hurt him? If people don’t want to go into war, wouldn’t opening up another can of worms turn people off?
Comment by augur on 26 February 2008 at 8:39 pm:
yawn, is it just me or does hillary really start saying “balhal blah bladathityblah” after about 4 minutes?
Comment by Brian on 26 February 2008 at 8:41 pm:
That “bus into the ditch” stuff was good. As is wholly predictable, Clinton was much better during the health care part of the debate and Obama is doing much better on the foreign policy stuff. Who knew that being right made it a lot easier to win a debate?
Comment by augur on 26 February 2008 at 8:41 pm:
Obama is risking being too mean
bus in the ditch was a good analogy
good clarifying statement by obamarama on curry pancakistan
Comment by J. Prescott on 26 February 2008 at 8:42 pm:
Ok that question by Russert was just absolute crap. “What do you do if Iraq tell you to leave?”
Comment by augur on 26 February 2008 at 8:43 pm:
Russerts “get out” iraq question could be dangerous for obama
Comment by Brian on 26 February 2008 at 8:43 pm:
Holy SHIT, that was Tim Russert at his worst!! WTF?!?! My jaw literally dropped at that question.
Comment by Gordon the Gnome on 26 February 2008 at 8:43 pm:
I don’t think Pakistan talk hurts Obama. He looks tough but respectful, and he has nothing to prove from the “peace” voters; it’s the “security” voters he needs to take him more seriously.
I wonder if they’ll mention Turkey’s invasion of Kurdish Iraq…
Comment by Brian on 26 February 2008 at 8:44 pm:
The right answer to that question: “Tim, that’s never going to happen and it’s kind of a silly question. Let’s get real.”
Comment by Brian on 26 February 2008 at 8:45 pm:
More mockery from TPM: “I love it when Tim goes into character as an Iraqi nationalist.”
Comment by augur on 26 February 2008 at 8:46 pm:
good hit by hilldabeast about obama not holding a substantive hearing
Comment by Gordon the Gnome on 26 February 2008 at 8:46 pm:
Good point from Hillary, bringing up Obama’s foreign committee positions and asking what he’s done. Very Realpolitik.
Comment by Augur on 26 February 2008 at 8:49 pm:
Brian Williams showed how unreasonable she was in how he cut her off. It’ll make people notice that super obnoxious habit of hers the rest of the debate. She’ll probably be worse and worse about it too.
guys have any thoughts about my point on populism on the initial posting?
Comment by Brian on 26 February 2008 at 8:49 pm:
Hillary did pretty well just then pivoting away from dumb hypotheticals into a less simplistic discussion.
Comment by Brian on 26 February 2008 at 8:52 pm:
Btw, I just learned from a television ad that apparently Democrats in the House are going to kill us all.
Comment by J. Prescott on 26 February 2008 at 8:53 pm:
I thought that was obvious Brian.
Comment by Brian on 26 February 2008 at 8:55 pm:
Wow…um…Obama just got a break there. MSNBC bias, anyone?
Comment by augur on 26 February 2008 at 8:55 pm:
great use of humor by obama
god that cackle is obnoxious
classy pass at hitting back
Comment by augur on 26 February 2008 at 8:56 pm:
obama made it about the people again, seizing populism
lets see how she handles this
Comment by Brian on 26 February 2008 at 8:58 pm:
Obama just got handed on a silver platter an opportunity to be gracious and above the fray, and he knocked it out of the park.
Comment by Brian on 26 February 2008 at 9:01 pm:
Ooh, a little cutting sarcasm from Obama on that “As a general matter, that doesn’t work” comment. It made me laugh, but I’m not sure if it didn’t make him look a little cocky.
Comment by augur on 26 February 2008 at 9:01 pm:
i like his point about thinking the point was to fight
she totally blundered health care, it’s good that he’s softly touching on that
Comment by J. Prescott on 26 February 2008 at 9:04 pm:
A February 3, article by “The New York Times” reported that Exelon Corp, the nation’s largest nuclear plant operator is one of Obama’s largest campaign donors. According to the article, Exelon’s support of Obama far exceeds money given to the other candidates.
The “Times” pointed out that Exelon chairman John W. Rowe has been an Obama donor and is also chairman of the Nuclear Energy Institute, the nuclear power industry’s largest lobbying group.
The article did not mention that Rowe, like several other powerful energy power players also sits on the influential, right wing and neo-conservative American Enterprise Institute’s Board.
Comment by augur on 26 February 2008 at 9:04 pm:
wow avg donation 109..
Comment by Brian on 26 February 2008 at 9:06 pm:
This question to Obama on his public financing promise is a tough needle to thread, but he’s making the best argument he can: it’s not just about public financing, but also 527s and things that McCain is inevitably going to want to rely on in the campaign and probably won’t be willing to give up. If Obama can pivot more into pushing McCain on that, he can make a winning argument
Comment by augur on 26 February 2008 at 9:07 pm:
Tax return thing is weak. If it was filed, it’s pretty simple to let people copy the files.
Comment by J. Prescott on 26 February 2008 at 9:08 pm:
Who gives a shit about Louis Farrakhan?
Comment by augur on 26 February 2008 at 9:11 pm:
Man, this is rough on Obamarama. Snowballs chance in hell comment could give this legs.
Hillary could open up on him w/ the quote BJP mentioned earlier on the blog today
Comment by Brian on 26 February 2008 at 9:11 pm:
This is a pretty reprehensible line of question by Russert on Farrakhan, Obama’s pastor, etc. Nevertheless, in the general it’s gonna become a much bigger deal, so it would be nice to see a little more fire in Obama’s tone on this.
Comment by Gordon the Gnome on 26 February 2008 at 9:12 pm:
Nice point from Obama on trying to bridge blacks and jews. That’s a pretty tall order, but he can try better than anyone.
Comment by Brian on 26 February 2008 at 9:12 pm:
He’s talking in a tone that makes him sound defensive and not confident, like he’s being defeated. Not good.
Comment by Brian on 26 February 2008 at 9:13 pm:
Wow. Hillary contrasting against him on this is going to certainly give this legs. This could be the clip of the night, and it could be a big deal.
Comment by augur on 26 February 2008 at 9:14 pm:
She’s trying to stick farakahn to him a bit more, decent effort.
this is a little petty by her. he should use humor
Comment by Brian on 26 February 2008 at 9:15 pm:
Very well done by Obama. Ignore my previous comment. Well, it could still be the clip of the night, but it doesn’t hurt Obama as much as I first thought.
Comment by augur on 26 February 2008 at 9:15 pm:
every time the name farakahn is mentioned it’s a point for hillary
great recovery
brian williams is great
Comment by Brian on 26 February 2008 at 9:18 pm:
A few comments on that last exchange:
(1) Tim Russert sucks.
(2) In retrospect, it might have been better for Hillary to have said something classy in Obama’s defense on this point rather than try to hit him on it.
(3) Obama is quick on his feet. He was clearly reluctant at first to say flat-out he “rejected” Farrakhan’s support, then realized that was a mistake and not only defused that bomb but made Hillary look bad in harping on it. This guy is a talented politician.
Comment by Augur on 26 February 2008 at 9:22 pm:
From LBJ’s famous 1965 We shall overcome speech:
What happened in Selma is part of a far larger movement which reaches into every section and State of America. It is the effort of American Negroes to secure for themselves the full blessings of American life. Their cause must be our cause too. Because it’s not just Negroes, but really it’s all of us, who must overcome the crippling legacy of bigotry and injustice.
And we shall overcome.
…
It was more than a hundred years ago that Abraham Lincoln, a great President of another party, signed the Emancipation Proclamation; but emancipation is a proclamation, and not a fact. A century has passed, more than a hundred years, since equality was promised. And yet the Negro is not equal. A century has passed since the day of promise. And the promise is un-kept.
The time of justice has now come. I tell you that I believe sincerely that no force can hold it back. It is right in the eyes of man and God that it should come. And when it does, I think that day will brighten the lives of every American.
Comment by Brian on 26 February 2008 at 9:22 pm:
This is an area where Obama gets semi-annoying to me. I wish he’d say something like, “Yeah, I’m a liberal guy. I think I’m capable of persuading the American people that liberal solutions are the right ones.” But obviously his actual answer is politically smarter and has done him a lot of good so far.
Comment by J. Prescott on 26 February 2008 at 9:25 pm:
If any of these guys were truly ballsy, they would propose including Kosovo in NATO.
Comment by Joe D. on 26 February 2008 at 9:25 pm:
“Me-dev-dah”?
It’s not hard to pronounce: It’s Medvedev.
Hillary’s debate prep leaves something to be desired.
Comment by Brian on 26 February 2008 at 9:26 pm:
I think Russert’s next question is going to be, “Do you have a specific plan if space aliens invade the world and form an alliance with al-Qaeda?”
Comment by augur on 26 February 2008 at 9:29 pm:
Hey Joe! Great to see you Bro!
Good answer for Obama on what he could have done better.
good line about inaction being as costly as action
4 “maybe more after that”
obama is going to go all class here.
Comment by Brian on 26 February 2008 at 9:29 pm:
Good answer by Obama on mistakes: “As a constitutional law professor, I should know better” was a compelling line.
Comment by augur on 26 February 2008 at 9:32 pm:
Obama A+ on the last question
Comment by Brian on 26 February 2008 at 9:32 pm:
Again, well done by Obama for being classy to Hillary and pivoting to criticism of McCain.
Comment by Brian on 26 February 2008 at 9:34 pm:
“It has been an honor to campaign. I’m still going to do everything I can to win, but it’s been an honor to campaign.”
That sounds like an admission of defeat.
Comment by augur on 26 February 2008 at 9:34 pm:
changing “what the rules are” was a nice touch.
Comment by Brian on 26 February 2008 at 9:35 pm:
Hey, Augur, she’s doing the populist thing! And, yeah, it suits her well.
Comment by augur on 26 February 2008 at 9:36 pm:
also the fighter thing, which i always think is a little hat tip to Edwards
So who won?
Comment by J. Prescott on 26 February 2008 at 9:37 pm:
Ok, Olberman is friggin tool. Comparing these debates to Lincoln-Douglas? Gag me with a spoon.
Comment by augur on 26 February 2008 at 9:37 pm:
I think Obama won. He stayed classy, didnt get mad.
Mostly he won because she didn’t.
Comment by Brian on 26 February 2008 at 9:39 pm:
Bottom line: They both had strong moments, Hillary had more weak moments than Obama. Overall just about a tie, which means Obama wins. Also, as always, it depends on how the media responds, which again favors Obama.
The REAL bottom line, though, is that the biggest loser of the night is Tim Russert. He just kept topping himself until he became totally disgusting when questioning on Farrakhan.
Comment by Augur on 26 February 2008 at 9:40 pm:
I concur BJP
Gentlemen, thanks for stopping in and commenting together. this was fun
i think the fighter thing, she’s still hoping to pull edwards, or at least keep him on the fence.
Comment by Joe D. on 26 February 2008 at 9:44 pm:
I’m an Obama guy, so of course I think he won tonight.
But let me say this, HRC needed a big win tonight. Either she needed to score a couple of big shots or she needed Obama to make a couple of major mistakes.
Neither happened.
If anything, HRC was the one making the mistakes tonight (whining about debate format, the SNL reference, the Russia issue, pushing on Farrakhan).
If anything, tonight was a draw in the 12th round of this boxing match where HRC needed a knockout. She didn’t get it, so we go to the scorecards where Obama has clearly won on points.
Over the course of this campaign, Obama has grown into the role of the front runner. Now, he’s grown past that point, into the role as Democratic nominee.
Comment by augur on 26 February 2008 at 9:46 pm:
And Joe called this really damn early
Comment by Brian on 26 February 2008 at 9:47 pm:
One final note: Having said that the whole line of questioning on Farrakhan was out of line, I will say that perhaps the biggest thing that happened tonight was something that did NOT happen thanks to Obama’s quick thinking. When Hillary challenged him on refusing to say he rejected Farrakhan’s support, if Obama had chosen to hem and haw and continue to refuse to say “reject,” it could have turned into a very big deal. It would have been a very stupid big deal, but a big deal nevertheless. Instead, he seemed to realize the danger and conceded the point. I suspect the pundits would be having very different conversations if that had turned out differently.
Comment by augur on 26 February 2008 at 9:52 pm:
good call bjp
hey, on another note, Samuel L Jackson is joining the obama campaign!!
http://tiny.cc/badmofo
hahaha
I am sick and tired of these muthafuckin debates on my muthafuckin tv