I thought it was my imagination that Barack Obama got more face time than anyone in the debate but I guess not. Thanks to Chris Dodd’s campaign, we have the Talk Clock.
Even though Obama got more time, I think Hillary Clinton won another debate. Richardson did the best that I’ve seen him. He was more focused, his answers on point. And, as usual, Mike Gravel made Dennis Kucinich look like a genius 😉
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
Is it my imagination, or is the MSM going over to the support of Obama for President? I’ve noticed the WaPo seems to favor him, and Edwards, over Hillary. I see more positive articles about Obama than any other candidate.
1. Hillary won, hands down, with Obama a close second.
2. I think the you-tubers came up with much better questions than Wolf Blitzer ever could.
3. Please, get rid of Gravel and Kucincich — they’re embarrassing.
I did think that Hillary won. The more I see her next to her counterparts, the more I want to support her.
I am just not very satisfied with Obama. I want to like him because he’s the fresh new face….but dammit, he’s so unpolished next to Hillary.
As for Edwards…..eh….I don’t get the appeal.
I agree completely with Sean Holihan, and it saddens me to say it because like Sean, I want to like Obama so much. I wonder if part of the issue may be that Obama just isn’t as good at talking about Obama as he is at talking about John Kerry, Tim Kaine, or Jim Webb. He still gives a good speech, but when I watch him answer questions I have a hard time finding the man who was so inspiring at the 2004 convention.
I’m also starting to get the impression that all of these communications and press people he hired early on this year to help boost his visibility are starting to interfere with and harm his message. He’s got that vibe of being over-coached, “say this,” “don’t say this,” “whatever you do, don’t get creative or go out on a limb.” A candidate needs to have a relationship with his campaign advisors that is built on trust: the candidate must trust his staff to do their jobs without micromanaging or interefering because that grows too-distracting for everyone, and the staff must trust the candidate to go out and do his thing as the candidate. You can see the result of this trust in the way the Clinton campaign executes: Hillary has known everyone on her senior staff for more than a decade. I don’t know that the trust is there in the Obama camp.
I heard parts of the 2004 speech in Obama’s answers last night. Perhaps it is because he has said so little new since then that I’ve not been a fan. Except for being a fresh face, I’ve not understood his appeal.
Obama’s appeal is that fact that he is genuine. Thats what comes off with mainstream America while I still feel that the Mainstream media supports Hillary Clinton. I fail to see the leadership and in fact Hillary’s record in the Senate is disappointing. She spoke quite often about all of her “proposals” and such but lets examine the record. If she claims she can lead a bipartisan effort while in the White House, how is it the only real bipartisan measure she has been out in front on is the War and her support of it. I fail to see real leadership, but what I see is a skilled legislator/politician. Thats what I think makes Obama more genuine. He is not as skilled, nor comes off as contrived or rehearsed. I like the fact that he searches for his answers and gives them real thought rather than going off of memory from staff briefings on what answer will get the most mileage.
I think the most striking difference is if you look at the anwers on healthcare. Clinton had a chance with what I think was a Democratic Congress to make a real difference in her bid to change the system, she could not. People will be forced to remember that. In the face of those type challenges she was quick to blame the insurance companies, the health care organizations for its defeat, and yet she is taking huge sums of donations from those same institutions something Obama touched on briefly.
In the end if you support Hillary you probably did not see much to sway you from that position last night. however if like me you have other allegiances Obama’s performance calls ones support into question. He struck a nerve last night. Cander and real accountibility is something I see in him and something we simply just cannot do without in the coming years. Edwards I thought did little to help his cause.
“Clinton had a chance with what I think was a Democratic Congress–”
No. It wasn’t. This is the first year Democrats have controlled both houses of Congress since 1995. The Senate flipped back and forth a couple of times in 2001 but it had been controlled by Republicans under Lott and Frist since 2003. Since Hillary was elected in 2000 there has always been a Republican president (George W. Bush).
Which kind of undermines the whole thing….
Hey, by the way, I’m incredibly unskilled as a legislator and I’m really, really unrehearsed. Vote for me.
anon is right. The other thing to remember is that having a Democratic Congress is no guarantee of passage of bills. Just ask Jimmy Carter.
every time the canidates say cut and run or cut funding for the war it really means the u.s.military cannot win a war. other than that will any of the guys get the nut up to attack the qween bee.
Actually Anon and Vivian, I think J. Scott was refering to her time as First Lady when she tried unsuccessfully to reform Health Care. The Democrats were still in charge of both the House and Senate in ’93 and ’94 when her proposal came out, but even the they rejected it.
NOVa Democrat, thank you for pointing that out. I was indeed referring to her attempt while First Lady to address healthcare. As popular as Bill Clinton was healthcare reform still could not get passed in 93/94 and its time we as Americans face up to the fact as to the real reason why it continues to go unresolved. As long as term limitless politicians can continue to be funded by lobbying powers year after year they are more beholden to them(lobbyists) and not the Amercian people.
My view in terms of Obama was in terms of freshness. Why it is he is raising all this internet money and comes of as a fresh, new voice. It is because he comes across very unpolitical, less contrived, less rehearsed and makes real connnections with people. And in my view if you are going to get true moderates from either Party to vote Democrat it will have to be Obama. For that matter, I just don’t see Independents voting for anyone other than Obama in a general election.