Tuesday Night's debate

Email Print posted by yturks 01/15/2008 09:26:37 PM EST

Google Technorati del.icio.us digg reddit
Who watched or is watching this Democratic debate on MSNBC?  It's an embarrassment. I can't find a better, more eloquent description than just plain "stupid".  The first 40 minutes were complete nonsense.  They talked about race and gender and petty fights and irrelevant topics like personality.  What an enormous waste of time this is.

Meanwhile, the campaign is ridiculous. Clinton came out with a $70 billion stimulus plan, and two days later Obama proposed a $75 billion plan, thinking this would one-up Clinton. How pathetic?  Is this what Obama means by change?  He included $250 tax rebates for individuals in his plan. Come on, let's get serious.  I am disgusted by these candidates.

On the Republican side, I just wish McCain would stop saying "my friends" all the time.

< Loop & Membership | ACLU Holds Spit Bucket for Larry Craig >
 Display:
Tuesday Night's debate | 22 comments (22 topical, 0 hidden)
Regardless (none / 0)
of what anyone thinks about Edwards, no one can deny that the guy often comes out with plans *first*.

The issue you raised above is just the latest example.

by ihavenobias on 01/15/2008 09:32:32 PM EST

Here's an excerpt for the lazy among you (none / 0)
"...Here's On the Democratic side, John Edwards, although never the front-runner, has been driving his party’s policy agenda. He’s done it again on economic stimulus: last month, before the economic consensus turned as negative as it now has, he proposed a stimulus package including aid to unemployed workers, aid to cash-strapped state and local governments, public investment in alternative energy, and other measures.
 

Last week Hillary Clinton offered a broadly similar but somewhat larger proposal. (It also includes aid to families having trouble paying heating bills, which seems like a clever way to put cash in the hands of people likely to spend it.) The Edwards and Clinton proposals both contain provisions for bigger stimulus if the economy worsens.


And you have to say that Mrs. Clinton seems comfortable with and knowledgeable about economic policy. I’m sure the Hillary-haters will find some reason that’s a bad thing, but there’s something to be said for presidents who know what they’re talking about.


The Obama campaign’s initial response to the latest wave of bad economic news was, I’m sorry to say, disreputable: Mr. Obama’s top economic adviser claimed that the long-term tax-cut plan the candidate announced months ago is just what we need to keep the slump from “morphing into a drastic decline in consumer spending.” Hmm: claiming that the candidate is all-seeing, and that a tax cut originally proposed for other reasons is also a recession-fighting measure — doesn’t that sound familiar?


Anyway, on Sunday Mr. Obama came out with a real stimulus plan. As was the case with his health care plan, which fell short of universal coverage, his stimulus proposal is similar to those of the other Democratic candidates, but tilted to the right.
 

For example, the Obama plan appears to contain none of the alternative energy initiatives that are in both the Edwards and Clinton proposals, and emphasizes across-the-board tax cuts over both aid to the hardest-hit families and help for state and local governments. I know that Mr. Obama’s supporters hate to hear this, but he really is less progressive than his rivals on matters of domestic policy.


In short, the stimulus debate offers a pretty good portrait of the men and woman who would be president..."

by ihavenobias on 01/15/2008 09:37:42 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Edwards strategy becomes clear. (none / 0)
The Edwards people understand that there is only room for two lumberjacks on the log. They want to make sure that Obama gets knocked off rather than Edwards.

But I have bad news for the Edwards people. Your candidate is a loser, and his political career is coming to an end.
see ya edwards! 

by KenTX on 01/16/2008 12:22:07 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Edwards (none / 0)

Edwards seems to be attacking Hillary more than Obama...niether strategy is going to work because none of these ppl will get out before super Tuesday. Maybe if he gets enough delegates he can use them to pick whether he wants Obama or Hillary to be prez...and he gets VP.....isn't that how brokered conventions work? or for that matter Hillary could give hers and she could be VP and so forth.

 

 

by acroso on 01/16/2008 01:41:08 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Is it just me... (none / 0)
Or does Edwards remind anyone of Kenneth the Page from 30 Rock?  If you're thinking I'm making fun of Edwards, remember Kenneth's poker face/game with Jack - a little goofy, but very determined... BTW - It was great to see Edwards come correct on Hillary in regards to race in the United States.  From what Hillary said, I take it we might as well toss out race and gender since everything is supposedly peaches and cream in America. .

edwards-kenneth

by rev24 on 01/16/2008 12:42:05 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Unless you're (none / 0)
In the lead against Hillary. That's when you'll become the spawn of Satan.

Cynicism is poison to reform and pumps life into the status quo.

by prezalex on 01/16/2008 07:56:13 PM EST

[ Parent ]
cynicism.... (none / 0)
gives hope to the disillusioned!

by rev24 on 01/17/2008 12:03:17 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Clinton\Obama (none / 0)
Do Clinton\Obama want to stay on Iraq. I thought Edwards was the only one who wanted out?

by acroso on 01/15/2008 09:41:37 PM EST

I am watching (none / 0)
who was that guy yelling in the audience  :-)

by mrsjdaniels on 01/15/2008 09:41:50 PM EST

Not sure (none / 0)
I think he was yelling something about "race based questions".  That's what I heard.  Though they were well out of that part of the debate by the time he was yelling it.

by Spencer on 01/15/2008 11:38:54 PM EST

[ Parent ]
nothing like a yeller (none / 0)
I'm pretty sure he was yelling at the moderaters since he referenced "race-based (baiting, biased?) questions" - maybe MSNBC/NBC...  Don't fear the taser!

by rev24 on 01/15/2008 11:39:45 PM EST

[ Parent ]
debate (none / 1)
I watched...and I know that some of the questions were retarded.  But, the whole of the debate was wonderful.  Has anyone ever watched a repub debate?  All they have is fear, fences, torture, hate (of people different from them) and lies.  Tweety is wetting himself over Hillary...and he is wrong.  The way I see it, there were three equally wonderful people who could run this country without peer compared to this current criminal in the Whitehouse.  The contrast is astonishing.  Hillary is third, Obama is second, and Edwards is one.  But, any dem is head and shoulders over what we have.  Don't hold the questions asked against the candidates against them...

by bheartlib on 01/15/2008 10:50:35 PM EST

Romney (none / 0)
Romney timed his victory speech to cut off McCain and get McCain riled up. McCain has a temper problem so this was awesome...because McCain will be whining about it for the next month.

by acroso on 01/15/2008 10:52:30 PM EST

link (none / 0)
link

by acroso on 01/15/2008 10:52:51 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Not Prepared (none / 0)
I am completely astonished that Hillary would have the audacity to say that neither Obama nor Edwards would be prepared for the first day in the White House.  Shame on you Clinton and don’t forget to keep that fear alive!

by rev24 on 01/15/2008 11:45:54 PM EST

Clintonistas LOVE it, though (none / 0)

At least some of the more insane supporters in the liberal blogosphere do. Checking Taylor Marsh's blog, oh lots of love for Clintonian fearmonge...I mean sophisication and Talk Left has all the usual in terms of back-handed compliments. So the Clintonian spinsters are standing on their heads and twirling like tops. Awesome, that must mean everything's normal.

Now these moderators just sucked. Whether it was about time, which wasn't a factor in part cause NBC News pushed out candidates like Gravel and Kucinich, or the number of questions a candidate could ask, cause who wants the candidates to ask each other tough questions, really, it was clear Tim Russert and Brian Williams are pinheads. Complete utter pinheads. Their questions early on, I believe, could've cut to the heart of the race issue, but they were too late to the party, so to speak. The ship had sailed, they should've been asked days ago.

Now, who won? I think Obama not only had his best performance, he really showed off part of his head of the Harvard Law Review brain. He delved deep into policy nuances, took tough stances that were unpopular but his own, and articulated his ideas and message for the Democratic Party that could really help the party become a stronger force for progressive action in more of a way than any of the other candidates.

 
He's the candidate of a broad-based message rooted in progressive principles such that we can show that Republicans, independents and of course Democrats support progressive values if they're given a strong, inspirational case for them and not just policy wonks every election. It's his belief and mine that if we use such a message, we can make a new Democratic Majority and make sweeping wholly progressive changes in Washington with increased political capital, not just a little Clintonian change to the left here and a little to the right there and some failed  attempts at change scattered all over.

Cynicism is poison to reform and pumps life into the status quo.

by prezalex on 01/16/2008 12:19:43 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Edwards set the agenda (none / 0)

    Edwards has been saying that he will remove troops from Iraq. He has been saying that for the last two months.

  Neither Obama nor Hillary was having any of that until all of a sudden - during tonights debate - they both said that they too would pull out the troops within a year.

  Edwards is setting the tempo and the agenda of this contest for the Democrats. Obama and Hillary see his views catching on and they jump right in.

Which is OK as far as I'm concerned. Hillary and Obama need to be learned by an Edwards.

TJ
 

by topjob66 on 01/16/2008 01:05:11 AM EST

[ Parent ]
question (none / 0)
Well Hillary will say anything she needs to say to get elected.

by acroso on 01/16/2008 01:38:38 AM EST

[ Parent ]
recount rejected (none / 0)
"Paypal has frozen the fundraising account of the Granny Warriors, a Ron Paul supporters group who had been pushing for a recount in New Hampshire, causing a 3pm Tuesday deadline to be missed and the application rejected for lack of payment."

by acroso on 01/16/2008 01:05:12 PM EST

Hillary and Chris Matthews (none / 0)

Whatever you may have thought about the debate at the end of it was completely blown out of the water by Matthews coming on and going off about how great Hillary was.  What was that all about?  Was he trying to make up for his year of Clinton-bashing? 

 

I was actually doing housecleaning during most of the debate, so I didn't look at them, just listened for the first hour and a half.  It sounded to me like a bunch of smarty high school kids sitting around debating issues when their knowledge was somewhat limited.  They seemed especially weak on economic issues, and maybe that's the Edwards factor.  He keeps driving this corporate hate statement and the other two are following along because it sounds good, not realizing that beating that drum is one of the things that have killed his campaign (among everyone but the left radio crowd.)  Everyone who ever studied anything about business knows the tax code is the way it is to stimulate economic growth--not simply to make rich people happy.  I have the same complaints about most of the Republicans as well.

 

If these guys don't shape up on economic plans, they are going to get beat by one of the Republican clowns like Romney.  Hillary's politics of fear may actually help her win the Security Moms, but she's gotta stop telling people that Obama is too stupid to handle terrorists.  

 

And I agree--Hillary will say anything to get elected.  This campaign is all about HER being President.  Obama's campaign is about more than that, so that's why I support him.   

by qsoundrich on 01/16/2008 02:16:56 PM EST

Let's be real (none / 0)
Their campaigns are all about the win, as they should be. Hillary's way of going about it is just too shrill for me, and her pro-war record is just too much. We need a break from the dynasties and the neocon foreign policy and the politics of fear. Hillary Clinton is least likely of any Democratic candidate to be that sort of break.

Cynicism is poison to reform and pumps life into the status quo.

by prezalex on 01/16/2008 03:23:14 PM EST

[ Parent ]
BS (none / 0)
Considering that a majority of Americans think corporations pay too few taxes, that CEO's are paid too much and that lobbyists have far too much power (regardless of if *you* disagree with those statements) it's pure BS to suggest that the Edwards message ONLY appeals to the "radio left crowd".

You admitted that his populist message is being adopted (to an extent) by the other dem candidates, which calls your initial statement into question even further. These people aren't stupid so clearly the Edwards message DOES have broad appeal according to their analysis, otherwise why steal some of it?


And when you speak of taxes, I sure hope you aren't advocating what George Bush Sr referred to as "voodoo economics", er, I mean trickle-down economics.

by ihavenobias on 01/16/2008 06:30:41 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Tuesday Night's debate | 22 comments (22 topical, 0 hidden)
 Display: