Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama both went over mostly familiar policy terrain in Tuesday night’s debate. Clinton was good, as expected, on health care. But Obama was surprisingly strong on Iraq and foreign policy, an area that’s supposed to be Clinton’s strength.
Obama also laughed good-naturedly at a video clip of Clinton in a mocking harangue against his speeches. He didn’t take the bait. The effect was to elevate Obama and make Clinton look small and petty. She didn’t help matters by sounding peevish at times, at one point complaining that she was always asked the questions first.
Is this her newfound voice — whiner?
Both did fine overall. But Clinton won’t get the boost she needed from this debate.
-
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in. -
Contact us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Heckler on Open thread 10/11
- Heckler on Open thread 10/11
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 10/11
- Political_mama on Palin abused power in Troopergate
- Heckler on Open thread 10/11
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 10/11
- biased1 on Open thread 10/11
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 10/11
- annie_moose on Open thread 10/11
- Chas on Open thread 10/11
43 Comments
A thread by Randy promoting obama and dissing Clinton?
Color me surprised…
I thought she sometimes looked tired. Things weren’t going her way so much. I thought the moderators went after her a little bit.
Obama, like usual, was very clean and articulate.
I dunno, Randy. Did you watch the same debate I did?
I thought Hillary nailed him several times.
I’ll obviously support Obama if he’s the nominee–considering what the alternative wants to do to me–but sometime, somewhere, all that lack of specificity is gonna catch up to him.
Better against Hillary than McLame.
Actually, Hillary’s mocking of Obama’s speech using the old Negro spiritual style of preach-talk was what I used in yesterday’s closed thread. Hillary thought of it first, I just followed up with my own version of the parody.
The “asking me questions first” I thought was whiney and Clinton should have never wasted national exposure time on TV to bring it up.
She also got booed for one remark, but don’t recall what it was about.
Regular - Yes, it was familiar. But I thought it was petty of her as well. And I liked how Obama just let it slide right off him, even joked about it.
“She also got booed for one remark, but don’t recall what it was about.”
It may have been her brilliantly pathetic, “reject/denounce” debate tactic.
I felt sorry for her for one-half nano.
Hillary dialed back the volume after the first commercial break. She made a common mistake by playing to the arena where the debate was held instead of playing to people in living rooms. She was orating during the first part of the debate. No one wants someone orating in their living room.
Unfortunately, that’s when she bombed with the SNL joke. That’s a throw-away joke; an aside. It was so obviously scripted and orated. Jokes are dangerous things. Like guns. Don’t mess with them unless you know your target and know how to aim.
Compare to Obama responding to her pseudo-gospel preacher clip: “Good delivery.” He even made her cackle! Subtle, under his breath, self-depcrecating in that he knows the point of her preaching parody and, like JFK, doesn’t take himself too seriously. (Especially when it’s just you and me a Tim Russert in people’s living rooms.)
Gotta give him credit. On style, Obama’s GOOD!!! Maybe as good as we’ve seen; up there with Reagan and Clinton.
Reagan, of course, had substance to go with the style (yes, I know many of you disagree with it, but it was there nonetheless), as did Clinton (if you can call sticking your finger in the wind and following the polls substance).
We’ll see if Obama has substance. I’ve heard bits and pieces of subtance, but mostly style.
And of course, GO HILLARY! Here’s to a brokered Democratic Convention!!!
Yeah, Obama was good! Of course he could afford to be polite; he’s on a roll. If Hillary pulls ahead soon, you might see the shoe on the other foot. In either case, they need to tone down the intramural bickering. The goal is to win the election in November. Whoever gets the nomination, the party is going to need the support of ALL its members!
After Tuesday it will be effectively over. Even if Clinton narrowly edges Obama in OH and TX it will not be enough to derail him.
Well there went my last little bit of respect for ya Randy.
Since you’re in the tank? Say hi to the bottomfeeders for me.
“Obama also laughed good-naturedly at a video clip of Clinton in a mocking harangue against his speeches.”
Harangue? No Randy what you have given us here is a harangue. Senator Clinton quite aptly lampooned the cotton candydates soaring but empty speeches and calls to work with the enemy.
I DO wish Senator Clinton would have asked him just what he will compromise to get the troglodyte Republicans to make nice.
Clinton was the clear winner here.
GMC, as the article the link to which I posted on Monday’s Open noted, there was substance behind Reagan’s “hope” theme, but it was not readily apparent to many in 1980. I join with the author thereof in his thought that there might well be substance behind Obama’s “hope” speeches. It is my memory from 1980, and we all know what happens to memory over time, that much of the substance did not appear until after he had won the election. It seems to me that to merely dismiss Sen. Obama on this basis might be similar to those who dismissed Pres. Regan in 1980 might prove to be equally wrong in 2008. Just my thoughts.
“In either case, they need to tone down the intramural bickering.”
Wrong.
The more they fight, the more tape the RNC can use after the conventions.
VT -
the difference, of course, is that Reagan had been a political figure for some 20+ years in 1980. He’d ran for president in 1976, narrowly losing the nomination to Ford, and had been two terms the governor of California. His political stance was well know; he was a known quantity.
Obama, on the other hand, is a one term Senator with some local activism and some State legislative experience. He’s a blank slate, nationally, and can “create” his own image. It very much remains to be seen whether there’s substance behind that image.
Well
Obama DID say that we would have to go BACK into Iraq, if, after we withdraw our troops, Al Queda developed a strong hold there.
McCain is having fun with that one.
Hillary and her 3 personalities means a piss poor President.
Most rational people will see her as who she really is..NOTHING!
Hillary proves Eleanor Clift isn’t Bill’s ugliest sycophant.
“at one point complaining that she was always asked the questions first.
Is this her newfound voice — whiner?
How’s that science debate you were trying to get promote going Randy?
Wouldn’t your efforts today have been more wisely spent on that than on this schlocky Obama love note?
You demonstrate why Senator Clinton was RIGHT to speak up. I have never SEEN a more blatant case of bias than how these debates and the media in general are clearly biased for Obama. The Saturday night live send up was spot on.
I think Senator Clinton is so aware of the bias that she several times pulled punches or didn’t throw them at all. For instance? Obama made some crack about “voting no when you mean no”. She COULD have mentioned the more than a hundred times Obama voted “present” and HIS attendant waffling. I know she wanted to. But she held back. And I think we better ask ourselves if that sort of thing is good for our process. Certain leaders being so…charismatic that they are given a pass?
Senator Clinton also did Obama a favor. By getting him to be clear in rejecting the support of Louis Farrakan, she saved him having that hanging over his head. Should he be the nominee, McCain does not have that one to drop on him.
Can we please have an end with the fawning and the fainting? At least from the press? I don’t care if Obama can fart rainbows. We are choosing the next President of the United States not the winner of American idol.
JR
Hillary is toast.
Live with it.
Hillary is toast.
Face your fears.
Deal with reality.
Hillary did not even get her paperwork and her delegates all filed, in Pennsylvania, so after Texas and Ohio, she can NOT win very big in PA.
It is over, JR.
I did not pick your candidate, the Democrats did.
You change parties so much, surely you realize that we all have a right to our opinions of all candidates, in all parties.
Radio advertising in Florida:
“Obama was selected and not elected, your Florida vote did NOT count. Did you vote for Hillary Clinton, in the Primary? The Democrats did not count your vote! Show your disgust with the Democrat Party machine, vote for John McCain”
Of course, the above should be run in SPANISH and in English.
And
Do not forget —
I WANTED HILLARY TO WIN THE PRIMARY!
There is no way that Hillary could win, in November. The American public dislikes her, intensely.
Also, Hillary is actually far more conservative than Obama.
Nobody in the US Senate is more liberal than Obama.
However, I live in the real world. There is no way that Hillary can pull this off.
Wishful think elsewhere paulie.
I KNOW you and yours want Obama. But we have insurance and firewalls against your sort of interference.
Hillary.
Fork.
Done.
I think I said so 3-4 weeks ago . . . .
and I’d have preferred to run against Hillary. Obama is simply a better campaigner. We’ll have to see if he can stick some substantive meat on those pretty rhetorical bones.
Well it’s becoming ever more clear who the REPUBLICANS want the Dem nominee to be!
Take note Democrats and independents.
It’s not who we want, JR (hell, like I said, I’d rather run against Hillary - she keeps on reinforcing her negatives!). We’re just smart enough, and realistic enough, to understand the situation.
You however, apparantly continue to ignore the 800 pound gorilla in the room, even as he destroys your chosen candidate. But then, you have often seems to have a penchant for self-deceit.
I know a bag of wind when I see it GMC.
I pronounced you one early on didn’t I?
And while I earlier defended Obama, he is clearly a cotton candydate.
Senator Clinton is forced by a biased media to hold her fire. But I see no quit in her. Indeed she is handholding the younger and substance free Obama TRYING to help him WHILE she competes against him.
Oh this is FAR from over. And it may not even be Clinton or Obama as the nominee.
And THAT GMC is what you and yours are afraid of and why you want to “help” Democrats pick their nominee. You know you are in for an ass kicking. And you HOPE Obama will continue to play nice.
I see how you are betting. That’s why I’m against Obama.
Hillary is so hungry for POWER, why would she not run as an Independent after getting whooped by Obama?
A 3-way race with 3 weak candidates. She may have a chance with a 34%, 33%, 33% vote tally.
Sure that would cut her Democratic ties, but isn’t she too old to run after 4 or 8 years of Obama?
We have a opportunity with McCain and brand him as someone who is neither trustworthy nor likable, and can take away much of the sympathy factor based on his war prisoner status without even mentioning his being a war prisoner. What makes this even better is that we can use the words of his own republican party colleagues, also without even making mention of his being too conservative or his positions on issues.
If we can brand McCain as “Senator Hothead”, or as “erratic”, someone who holds grudges or who is “stubborn” - those are all things that have been said about him by republicans - many who are in Congress. Of course, those are similar qualities of a certain current resident of the White House, and look at what a hotheaded, erratic, grudge holding stubborn bully who makes snap decisions has done for this country over the past 7 years.
Max
Main problem is that Hillary can not raise the money to run as an independent.
Nobody really likes her that much.
She raised money when she was “inevitable” — now, not so much.
Nobody really likes her very much.
Except JR of course.
Well, nobody with money likes her anymore.
I’ve said it before, JR. You’re always good for a laugh. You keep riding that horse . . . to nowhere.
Randy Scholfield?
I am calling you out.
Now, you are clearly in the tank for Obama. Let’s see how far.
Now in this last debate, Obama at least telegraphed that this would be the LAST debate.
Why don’t you Randy, get back to promoting your science and technology debate?
Inbetween your Obamaisms?
Surely your cotton candydate can amaze and get us all on board with a debate on science?
Let’s us see if there is anything more to you than your shilling for Obama.
Let the record show that James, Paul Rosell, and GMC, are endorsing Obama.
Let the record show, that as the Wicked Witch is crushed, under the house, it is JR who is
MELTING
MELTING!
If Hillary runs as an independent, she will be betraying everything that she supposedly stood for as a Democrat.
We already “have” Lieberman, posing with John W McBush, we don’t need another traitor.
If Clinton loses both or even one of the primaries in early March, she should do the right thing and drop out of the race and throw he support behind Obama.
If she doesn’t, she will just be proving that he ambition is greater than her concern for the Party and for the country.
And that is what the Republicans have been saying all along.
I hope to Hell that she is smart enough and honorable enough to do the right thing.
Actually, JR, I think Bob Harris has something here on the whole ‘Obama effect’–check it out:
http://thismodernworld.com/4217
Well I’m going to bed WS.
Why don’t you read the fight I just had?
Do you like the folks you have in your corner?
THEY want to call the fight your favor. And before it is over.
How BAD do you want to win?
Good night.
“Do you like the folks you have in your corner?”
I don’t have a corner - my territory is kind of funny shaped - a peninsula on the East coast, both north and south, a funny looking mitten in the upper Midwest and a jagged coast line on the west, with a BIG peninsula tacked on the upper reaches of Canada and a few islands in the Pacific.
That is my territory.
There sure was a lot of bickering on this thread last night. There is a newstory this morning in the Eagle about a new book on the costs of the Iraq War. Do you remember when we were promised by the Bush/Cheney Admin that the cost of the war would largely be reimbursed to the U.S. from Iraq oil revenue? That the total cost would be around $2 billion? This is just another reminder of the fraudulent, cowardly campaign by the Bush/Cheney Admin to take this country to war. And McCain wants to continue the policies of the Bush/Cheney liars - maybe for 100 years. I will welcome either Sen. Obama or Sen. Clinton to the White House.
JR -
You do understand the difference between “endorsement” and “recognizing reality.”
!?!?
And all this time I thought you considered yourself part of the “reality-based” community. Reality is plain as day, but you refuse to recognize it. It is what it is. Hillary’s done. Personally, I hope she wins at least Ohio, and gets close, if not wins (barely) Texas. But you know what I’m looking forward to:
Brokered convention, baby!!!!!!!
JR and Limbaugh are BOTH supporting HIllARY in Ohio and Texas:
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/republicans_vote_hillary/2008/02/28/76379.html?s=al&promo_code=4616-1
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/cleveland_clinkers.html
LOL @ JR as usual. The witch is dead, get used to it.
I see that too Rage.
I WANT a fighter.
The very IDEA of coming together with Republicans nauseates me.
I understand and even to a certain degree respect those of a more accomodating nature.
Though my Obama supporting brother and I are not currently speaking.
Perhaps Obama supporters should monitor talk radio as I do. They would find no reaching out from the other side there. Last week they savaged Obama’s wife. Now? they are after his middle name.
Such folk can not be worked with. They need worked over.
3 Trackbacks
[...] [chrisbrogan.com] wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptDebate: No whining, please Posted1:19 p.m. Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama both went over mostly familiar policy terrain in Tuesday night’s debate. Clinton was good, as expected, on health care. But Obama was surprisingly strong on Iraq and foreign policy, an area that’s supposed to be Clinton’s strength. Obama also laughed good-naturedly at a video clip of Clinton in a mocking harangue against his speeches. He didn’t take the bait. The effect was to elevate Obama and make Clinton look [...]
[...] WE Blog » The Wichita Eagle Editorial Department Blog wrote an interesting post today on Debate: No whining, pleaseHere’s a quick excerptDebate: No whining, please Posted1:19 p.m. Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama both went over mostly familiar policy terrain in Tuesday night’s debate. Clinton was good, as expected, on health care. But Obama was surprisingly strong on Iraq and foreign policy, an area that’s supposed to be Clinton’s strength. Obama also laughed good-naturedly at a video clip of Clinton in a mocking harangue against his speeches. He didn’t take the bait. The effect was to elevate Obama and make Clinton look [...]
direct minikrediet…
The most accurate john mccain education knowledge may take a small bit of time to search out….