The Democratic candidates for president will be debating tonight at 8pm Central Time at Drexel University in Philadelphia. The debate will be broadcast live on MSNBC.
What do you hope to see? What are your impressions of the candidates?
UPDATE: Courtesy of the Dodd campaign, the Talk Clock:
Be nice. 😉
all get articulate about going along with Dodd on FISA and they hit Mukasey hard as not being fit to be attorney general.
I know that most people watching this are the choir anyway – but ordinary Democrats need to understand the FISA and Mukasey issues.
is getting the endorsement of the NH SEIU. He already has Iowa. Helps his ground game in both states.
No Gravel this time. Wonder why?
unfortunately. As we’ve seen with Edwards, being first on an issue rarely translates into much oomph in the debates.
I also don’t think there’s much of a distinction between the candidates on FISA and Mukasey, at least, none that will come out in the debate. I don’t know if Clinton has spoken more forcefully on a filibuster of a FISA bill w/telecom immunity, but even if she hasn’t, she’s savvy enough to not get nailed down on it.
I hope someone presses the issue of basket warrants, which is getting lost in this focus on telecom immunity.
My desktop is in a different room than the TV, and since I have a Mac, the video feed (which usually only works in Windows Media Player, especially on MSNBC) is an iffy proposition.
I’ll probably chime in with my thoughts after the debate.
I do expect Edwards and Obama to go after Clinton pretty hard tonight. Obama has been saying that he would, and Edwards ripped into her yesterday.
Trying to figure out where this will show up.
$upport Kucinich!
I don’t think Hillary came off well in that exchange at Yearly Kos. The audience sure wasn’t buying it, and Obama and Edwards both made light of her answer to good effect.
For those of us who don’t have cable?
Although I guess I could watch it on their website?
Clinton sounded strong but Edwards sounded strong AND differentiated himself from Clinton. Obama didn’t sound strong.
everyone around me thought she came off well. Not that the answer made sense but that she looked tough but poised when she gave it.
I think when Edwards and Obama went on the attack everyone thought — I don’t know, that she would just sit there and take it. She pleasantly surprised them. They thought she was wrong – but she handled the attack well. She showed that you can attack her but she isn’t going to sit back and take the shit. She’ll come right back and stand up for herself. So we can all be assured that she’s not going to burst into tears at a G8 summit or anything girly like that.
And … the people near me seemed to be all undecideds like me. I suspect you were hanging out with people who weren’t undecided?
I find this all disappointing. As if it will change the outcome?
Rudy Giuliani, John McCain, Fred Thompson, Mitt Romney and all the rest of the republican candidates have said and done enough to provide plenty of fodder for criticism by Democratic candidates. That’s what I’d like to see – our party candidates using “earned media” to stick it to the republicans for their grotesque and sustained record of failure.
I thought Athens was the birthplace of democracy.
But good call for impeachment. Crowd liked it.
I just want them ALL to stand tough on those issues as an educational exercise for the non-blogosphere democrats who are watching. I’ve found in real life that they aren’t as up on the issue as we are.
Candidates are allowed to talk about their differences in a debate.
What a STUPID question. Asking for a Pledge. And he’s supposed to be one of America’s top journalists?
I liked Biden’s answer. I liked Dodd’s answer too. Of course they had the benefit of not going first.
I don’t know if they were undecided.
Really, if you’d watched every previous debate, Clinton never got knocked off her game. But for a second at Yearly Kos, she sputtered for a second, then reached (confidently, to her credit) for an answer that not many could say with a straight face.
Bill Richardson seems to think that there is a difference:
(What simplistic questions).
Hillary – yes but I don’t oppose the troops. Not enough planning to stop it yet and she will plan when she’s president. (Somebody should ask her how long her planning will take). This is a weak answer imo.
Obama — (different question – is Hillary being consistant). He’s not answering either the first question or the second question. And he’s floundering. Reminds us he didn’t co-author the resolution. Does say they need to engage all the regional powers.
Edwards – understand that there are clear choices in this election. If you believe that combat troops should remained stationed and missions continued and no timetable then vote for Clinton. He disagrees – he will end combat missions and combat troops out in the first year. Reiterates that you can’t trust Bush – what if Bush invades Iran before the election? Talks about Hillary’s vote on Iran. Responsibility is to be in tell the truth mode. I think this was a strong answer.
Clinton rebuttal – will pursue mission against Al Qaida if they are a threat. Combat troops as quickly as possible (doesn’t give a deadline). Talks about limited mission. Ending the war is complicated and will take time and will do it in a way that’s safe for troops. I REALLY don’t like this answer but I think it might play well.
Asks Hillary about Guliani’s question on experience.
Hillary – 35 years … yadda yadda. Nice of them to give Hillary the opportunity to fight Guliani. Can’t believe she doesn’t attack Guliani’s credentials in her answer.
Russert follows on her experience as First Lady – will she have national archives to release the papers. She says the archives is doing there thing slowly. As far as she knows – health care papers are available. Doesn’t answer the question that Bill and Hill’s communications be released.
Obama — Obama attacks her on that. Dumb. Most Americans probably don’t think papers between husbands and wives should be released. Again, he appears to be floundering. He really isn’t much of a debater. Republicans are comfortable fighting with Hillary because it’s been going on forever – and we don’t need another 8 years of bickering. That’s an effective attack on Hill – but no evidence he can end the bickering.
Edwards — maybe Republicans want to run against Hill. System is broken and corrupt and we need to start telling the truth about that. Too much lobbying influence. Attacks Hill on the lobbying issue. Can she be the person who brings change? When the election is over he says everyone is going to be fine – but what about “Americans” will we insure that our children will have a better life than us.
Clinton – says we were making progress until the supreme handed the presidency to George Bush. She says she will take 10 billion away from some in industry by cutting back – doesn’t answer the question about lobbying influence.
everyone’s being mean to Hillary. LOL!
Dodd attacks Edwards. Edwards responds. His question is about the future and whether our system works. Everybody in America sees that big issues haven’t been tackled – why? Because of lobbyists. (He’s right here but he’s not articulating it well enough. And he can’t really explain why getting money from Hedge Funds is better than getting money from lobbyists.)
GREAT answer about Guliani – it’s about time someone says he’s not qualified to be president.
good god. A debate is NOT the place for gotcha questions from the moderator.
Hillary – good answer. Won’t advocate a specific fix until we have fiscal responsibility. Especially bringing up Bush blowing the Budget Bush. Won’t call it a crisis. Points out that Bush doesn’t believe in SS.
Obama — talk straight. Everybody is against privatization. Not in crisis but does have a long term problem. Claims it is not a republican talking point and they need to talk about it to be clear to the public what they are going to do. (I completely disagree with him on this.) (And, if this is him on the attack – he’s terrible at attacking.)
Hillary rebuts – go toward fiscal responsibility which will be hard. Best way to handle challenges is a bi-partisan commission to see what we need to do, but decisions should not be made in a vacuum. This is a good answer.
No question on this to Edwards?
He’s impressive in the debates – if I went purely by them, with no prior ideas about politics, I probably would vote for him.
Punched, but not knocked out.
It should have been a knock out punch in that debate before that crowd. It wasn’t. That’s why we gave her credit and thought she came off ok.
That is a big issue, not a personal attack.
“attachments to lobbyists” is a pretty big issue.
I was in Chicago when Hillary answered the question about taking lobbyist money and, frankly, I think she came off pretty good. But that’s because they let her get away with that nonsensical answer that lobbyists represent real people too. Well, yes they do – because ultimately behind every corporation are investors who are people. But big corporate lobbyists are not there to lobby for the common good or even for the good of individuals, they are there to protect their employer who either wants a good deal from government or wants to be protected from a bad deal from government. It is ONLY about the bottom line with corporations. That’s what corporations are about – we shouldn’t delude ourselves.
I’m of two minds about Hillary. Our government is broken and part of the reason is the huge influx of corporate money in washington. The only way to pass a bill to fix this is to broker a deal between companies – so that they don’t kill the bill before it gets out of committee. Hillary knows that. So, is she in the pocket of the lobbyists and won’t push for that bill OR more importantly use the power of the presidency to try to broker that deal? Or will she be like Nixon in China – only someone who understands the influence of corporate money can get the deal brokered?
Unfortunately I doubt I’m going to get that question answered through the campaign process.
Tweety (Chris Matthews) in the pre-debate discussion on MSNBC was much worse, if you can believe that.
Obama and especially Edwards have been nailing Clinton, but she gives a seemingly strong answer and doesn’t get called on it. Her rhetoric isn’t much different than Bush’s on what we need to continue to do in Iraq.
Dodd – could directly rebate $$ to consumers from oil co. profits as a short term fix. Long term fix is to stop borrowing $$ to buy foreign oil and move to energy independence.
Biden – cost is because of risk. Price of oil rises because of our foreign policies. Short term – Need to provide assistance to people.
Edwards – Americans need to be patriotic and need to sacrifice – have to conserve. (Jimmy Carter answer – uh oh. True but uh oh).
Clinton – might tap the strategic petroleum reserve. Serious move to energy efficiency is necessary.
Obama – lower the foreign war rhetoric. Increase fuel efficiency standards on cars.
Kucinich – the war was about oil – everyone knows it. Sabre rattling against Iran is driving up cost of oil. Impeach the administration then we can get control.
Richardson – gives a big long term plan to reduce energy uses etc. — ask for sacrifice.
Hillary gives a good non-answer. The only thing that matters is she says the AMT needs to be fixed. I don’t blame her for not signing on for a specific fix because it WILL be complicated.
Obama – talking about cutting taxes for people with income under $50,000 (AMT isn’t for that tax bracket, what’s he talking about? On the other hand, most people don’t understand the AMT so maybe talking about lower income people is a good non-answer).
Edwards says the Democratic party should act on the issue. It shows corruption. Lobbyists for hedge funds killed legislation.
Edwards is absolutely right on this corruption issue and the need to get the government back to the people and not the corporate lobbying money. But I don’t think it’s really going to carry the day with the viewers. He needs different rhetoric on it.
is a preview of the election.
Hillary won’t answer – she’s going to have to do better on this if she’s the candidate.
UFO questions? Life on other planets?
This is the problem with America today – the Media.
I’m heading out.
Edwards and Biden did well. Hillary had a rough night, but did a decent job of dealing with all the fire coming her way. Dodd and Obama did OK. Kucinich was ignored. Richardson, too, although I really have to search for the point he’s making.
The main thing I took away from this debate is that Russert is a complete ass who would rather play gotch with UFO questions and 10 year old quotes than to ask a detailed question on FISA or Mukasey. WTF?
REALLY bad then. I’m glad I missed it.