Jane!

2

Yeah, but that first 30 minutes made my butt itch.

I thought it was overall much better than any of the others, as we got to hear some somewhat substantial policy plans. Edwards and Clinton came across as more passionate and focused than Obama, who I thought tended to ramble and drone.

FWIW Kos has up a vote on who won the debate: For the moment: Obama, Edwards, Clinton - in that order. Grain of salt….

Glad i came in on the tail end

(((((((JOHN/HILLARY 2008!

I agree. I think casual viewers will get the clear message:

Democrats = Diverse
Republicans = Not

I was proud of them too!!

Dems: smart, informed
Rep: not, not

Of course, CNN is focusing on that first 30 minutes, particularly Rez.

The idea that any candidate “wins” won of these things is patently absurd.

Being a fan of Airplane…
may I just say….
John Edwards sure picked the wrong election to be
a straight, white, male.
Strange, interesting stuff here.

I STILL want to know why Bill was live in Nashville (on CNN) during the debate.

Oh dear - Bill…what are you thinking?? I dunno, what think you:

http://www.nypost.com/video/?v.....itrate=700

Would Hillary take Edwards as VP? I don’t think so. My impression is that she desires a Milquetoast.

As soon as it ended those pernicious assholes started in with the “who scored what points on whom” bullshit. I am so disgusted with the mainstream media right now, it sometimes even distracts me from my disgust with the Republicans.

Alas you are a scientist (substance?), I am a humanist (art of the debate) :-). And I said, grain of salt….

grain of salt?? more like a big giant hunk of salt lick…

;-)

I believe the supporters of all three candidates could feel good about the performance of their respective candidates. It was by far the best debate performance by Edwards. He had “home field” advantage and he used it very effectively. It was pretty obvious that many in the audience were rooting for Obama. This could be an indication of what will happen on Saturday.

I think Wes Clark will get the job if he wants it.

Would Hillary take Edwards as VP?

And would he even agree to that? Prob’ly not.

It is also up on Drudge. Ouch.

There are way bigger fish to fry than SC. And whoever doesn’t come in first there will spin it that way.

Mark Warner

What is up with Bill?

That’s what they do. I had to turn it off. CNN has a Lyndsay Lohan look alike sound alike. Did you see her?

Perhaps it was because the field has now narrowed to three,

What’s with the passive voice here? You and the mainstream media may have decided to narrow your options to those three. I do not accept them. Kucinich is still running. He has my vote. Did the rest of the progressives roll over and die?

I Googled “Obama Rezko” and came up with all sorts of links to Free Republic - a site not noted for its interest in the truth. Hillary’s people are digging in the same places as Free Republic?

I was actually quite proud of them all.

Me too.
I have problems with all three, but would take any of them over any Republican offering
No hesitation
No reservation
I am beginning to think Obama’s combination of stirring rhetoric in a public speaking situation combined with his somewhat halting off-the-cuff debate presenced could be a winning combination
I stil *like* Edwards best.
Hil has the most polished political approach, which would be expected.

snoozing Sunday morning in church… right after Saturday night in NV…

I think he’s freaking exhausted. Are you still here, LS?

Mark Warner

I like Warner :-)

yes and it so maddening to be a big, die-hard Edwards fan and at the same time so thrilled to see some diversity up there. Go white male!!! oh well

Bill is sleeping behind the speaker. At one point, he looks at his watch. Will the MSM jump on this? Hell yes they will. Poor sleepy Bill.

1 + 1 is equaling something other than 2.

As to the VP question, I for one would like to see the post relegated to it’s historical signifigance.
We need one leader, and a strong team.

I’m here.

Edwards and Clinton came across as more passionate and focused than Obama, who I thought tended to ramble and drone.

Edwards was consistently good in is responses. Clinton was uneven. When she talked about the need to fix what Bush has broken and about women and inequality she was very good. When she attacked Obama, ducked the lobbyists question, got vague about Iraq, she hurt herself. Obama I agree “tended to ramble and drone.” Unlike either Clinton or Edwards, I don’t think he gave a single response that seemed to come straight from the heart.

check the Chicago Sun Times from Sunday… quite of bit of coverage from the mainstream press… nobody else has picked it up yet…

Google Rezko Fitz.

Mark Warner

I like Warner :-)

We really need that Senate seat.

Ding

Did you see this?

There is some cognitive dissonance in that.
Who’da figured?

Our two parties can be discribed as the Sophisticates and the (what’s the name of your act) Aristocrates
.

Would have rather had him as governor next time around, because he’d ensure proper control of redistricting.

Compare the Democratic lineup to the Republican candidates. We (the Dems) have a rather progressive Democratic “son of the south” (Edwards), a woman, and an African-American. We think Edwards did quite well tonight and believe he would be the best choice for president. And we also belive that all three Democratic presidential candidates did well. We will vote Democratic in November.

Goodnight. Sweet dreams, sweet folks.

Lahoma and Oklahoma kiddo

Steve @42, you’re right. Warner for VA Senate.

Now, let’s see how much CNN plays anything that John said after they gave him ~2 minutes of face time right after the debate.

night Lahoma, night kiddo

Make that Warner for US Senate from VA (sheesh)

Finally, guy on CNN !!!! said JE was top in debate. But now they’re deconstructing all the HC-BO exchanges.
Great live-blogging.This is the way to watch the debates.!!

A VP candidate makes a difference to the voters. Cheney (with a full assist from the media) helped give Dubya credibility. See, you can have a dry drunk frat boy at the helm if you’ve got somebody smart to help him. That’s how they sold 50 million voters a train wreck waiting to happen. VP choice is important, IMHO.

CNN has a poll up too, same question as Kos. Under 1000 responses so far, BO-HC-JE-none in that order.

Score!!!!! Goooooooooooaaaalllll!!!

I also thought Clinton was really passionate when she asserted that the Congress should forbid Bush from making a deal with Iraq for permanent bases, based on the shared treaty power. I would so like for her and the Democratic Senate to really put their boot on Bush’s neck at least once before he is run out of DC.

One thing that was also heartening was that they were all starting to seem a lot more comfortable making it clear that Bush is an irredeemable fucknozzle. The American people need to start hearing loudly and clearly and repeatedly that the current national clusterfuck is a creation of the Republican Party and the band of insane neo-confederate delusional feudalists who control it.

Goodnight to you as well.

Clinton taking a nap is one of those Clinton tricks.

“See kindly old Grandpa Clinton taking a nap. You have nothing to fear from Grandpa Clinton.”

I’ve got it downloaded Loo Hoo, but Mr. LS is listening to Delbert McClinton, so I’ll watch it as soon as I can!! *g*

In all of the debates, or otherwise, has any candidate been asked “who would you choose as your VP running mate”? Not that I know

Great point!

Edwards would help either of them. I dont’ think he wants VP from either of them though.

Clinton will not VP for Obama.

If I were Clinton I would not want Obama for VP. The “not vetted” stuff is people’s way of politely saying “there’s stuff that’s going to come out.” I would probably put a warhorse in (someone without presidential ambitions) and make a deal with Obama for full support (ie. race relations are broken: go fix it!) and he can have the VP slot in 4 years if he wants it and Clinton machine support in 8 years if he wants to run for President. He’s still young, he can wait.

It’s interesting that the name “Bush” came up a WHOLE lot more times in this debate than in any of the Republican debates. Maybe not the way he’d like to be mentioned, but that’s a good thing as far as I’m concerned.

Candy Crowley speaking of Edwards as the alternative anti-Hillary candidate… I still thinking more people are voting FOR someone than AGAINST anybody…

but I may well be wrong on that.

MONTREAL (Reuters) - Consumer advocate Ralph Nader said on Monday he will decide soon on whether to make a another bid for the White House in 2008, eight years after playing a key role as a third party presidential candidate.

“I’ll decide in about a month,” he said in an interview broadcast on CBC Radio’s Daybreak show in Montreal…
____

Ralph, spare us, please. You gave us Bu’ush. Enough damage for ten lifetimes.

I also thought Clinton was really passionate when she asserted that the Congress should forbid Bush from making a deal with Iraq for permanent bases, based on the shared treaty power. I would so like for her and the Democratic Senate to really put their boot on Bush’s neck at least once before he is run out of DC.

She is trying to block the Status of Forces Agreement..and IIRC only Sheldon Whitehouse is a co-sponsor..WTF

K, LS. Think you’re going to love it!

I think they purposely don’t ask that question at this point in the campaign, because they know that no candidate would come close to answering. There has got to be a much clearer delegate picture before any of the candidates can even think about it other than in multiple contingent scenarios.

I guess things could be worse! :) I really am concerned with losing Edwards’ voice in the general. And now hearing bits about Nadar considering running. Edwards’ presence keeps the DLC honest to us progessives. Without Edwards, I fear the machine that will cause the inevitable pull to the center/right and will disenfranchise so many people like me that see a light at the end of the tunnel with Edwards. If Edwards goes, I will be hanging my head. Where will me and Susan Sarandon go?

He’s still young, he can wait.

A term or 2 as Illinois Governor would do wonders for that resume.

YEP!

Oh, Christ on a crutch. Will someone PLEASE take him out behind the woodshed with a horsewhip and get his mind right? Hasn’t he done enough fucking damage yet?

Yes, and he needs a voting record. Not a “present” record.

I wholeheartedly agree with you … Nader, please sit this one out !

One thing that was also heartening was that they were all starting to seem a lot more comfortable making it clear that Bush is an irredeemable fucknozzle.

I agree. The fucknozzle factor is not to be underestimated.

Edwards would help either of them. I dont’ think he wants VP from either of them though.

Maybe this was just wishful thinking, but I had the impression that Edwards was signaling that he and Clinton could work together, whereas he and Obama could not.

I agree that they settled down after 1/2 of the debate was over. Or I should say Clinton and Obama settled down. I also agree that some great stuff got to be debated - I think because the D’s rightfully took those questions and elevated them as they should, and I think the R’s could not.

If Obama doesn’t make it this time..I think Deval Patrick will be the next AA candidate.

Agreed - I just don’t want to actually invest the office with real power.
In other words, I like Edwards as President, or doing something productive somewhere other than as Veep.
Richadson, makes a nice Veep choice, … if he’s interested.

Stupid. This time, though, I don’t think he would affect results. Sad that this is his life.

And Bobby G? I was sorry to hear how the economy will affect your family…

No one escapes that office cleanly

One thing that was also heartening was that they were all starting to seem a lot more comfortable making it clear that Bush is an irredeemable fucknozzle.

Thank you for this. Maybe we can abbreviate it - Bush is an I.F. Love it!

Thanks. Scary.

Edwards would help either of them. I dont’ think he wants VP from either of them though.

Maybe this was just wishful thinking, but I had the impression that Edwards was signaling that he and Clinton could work together, whereas he and Obama could not.

–

Note sure about that, I think he was just banging the other side of the drum since he was mostly attacking Clinton as an arm of the same branch (insider) in the previous debate. But I do wonder where Edwards could be a VP or US AG for Clinton or Obama or neither.

Clinton has been moving left, hard and coopting a lot of Edwards plans and language. Obama is moving left a bit too, but not as fast or strongly (being the “Republicans are people too” candidate makes it hard to move too far from the “center”. The NV polls showed that as Edwards lost support, Hilary picked up more than Obama did.

Edwards knows that barring a miracle he’s not going to win. So now the question is who’s willing to implement more of his policies. At one point that looked like Obama, but over the last few weeks I’ve come to think that in economic terms, Clinton is the more progressive candidate.

It is sad that this is his life but I don’t want him messing with MY life.

A term or 2 as Illinois Governor would do wonders for that resume.

Obama is way too honest to be Governor of Illinois. There are only two kinds of Governor in Illinois, those who have been indicted and those who should be.

Gosh, where to go?
I remember in high school when a friend of mine was gonna live the US if Eugene McCarthy didn’t win.
Ha!
But, there is so much time left. Stick to your guns!
(sorry for the ammunitions reference.)

Investment Guru tips:

I recommend Confederate bills and beanie babies.

-G

Does anyone know where I can find the full debate coverage? I couldn’t see it tonight and would like to watch it at some point……Thanks!

Thats true, when fleshed out that way I understand and agree. That is why I have been trying to pick Obama and Clinton as 2 or 3 but can’t agree…I guess Edwards will have to unless he takes at least #2 in SC.

I know a couple who moved to Vancouver, BC Canada when Dubya got selected in 2000. It was a good time to go.

Hah !

… on second thought, thanks for the tip … *g*

It’s going to be repeated tomorrow morning on C-SPAN2 at 8AM (not 100% certain on the time, but pretty sure).

Plastics

Petro!

Cheers from NH.

-G

Here’s are my Bill theories:

1) He gets tired because he’s had the heart condition.
2) He’s got an agenda that is not 100% for Hillary.
3) He’s competitive with Hillary.
4) He doesn’t want Hillary to win because he wants to be the only president in the family.
5) He knows the shizzola she’s gonna face that will be thrown in her face when it comes down to it.

Hmmmmmmm….

1. Yes.
2. Yes.
3. Yes.
4. No.
5. Yes.

Bottomline….He is appearing to be disrespectful to her and to her campaign, and he certainly did while he was president. He subjected her to the most humiliating circumstance by making an intern seem more desirable than she was, and it was exposed to the entire world.

What a cut down to her…no one can imagine what she experienced…nevermind…the fact is, she’s still with him, and now he’s causing her grief in her campaign by making nutsy comments…I dunno…I’d have kicked his butt out a long time ago, unless there was some really good medical explanation…

Now, when he could be of the most help to her, he’s causing her problems…WTF???

Sooner or later, you’ve had enough. Unless there is some medical explanation for his comments and his actions, I say…fire his sorry butt. But, that’s her choice, and she has to live with it. They have their personal reasons of which I am not privvy.

Well, Obama is better on some important things, like telecoms and network neutrality, for example.

So it really depends on what one’s priorities are. Fopr Edwards, economic issues are a priority, so even though I think he doesn’t much like the Clintons (not sure why, but I get that impression) and does like Obama, since the Clintons seem to be better on what he cares about most…

But I can understand why folks have trouble deciding between Obama or Clinton. I have a hard time myself.

Edwards as AG would be interesting.

To Hillary’s staff who frequent this blog: Another excellent job with the wardrobe and makeup … whoever manages this part of her campaign has my deepest respect.

Well, I can definitely say that debate got me feeling a lot better about this Democratic primary campaign.

lol

Widgets. Where would we be without them?

If I could think Clinton would hire people like Edwards to do the right thing as US AG or the like (and others in leadership positions) then I would be apt to think of Clinton over Obama as she knows some people and if was detailed in putting the best people in spots that need TLC not DLC she could do it quick.

Not much to cheer about today in Canada’s financial capital … how’re you doing in NH ?

But it’s likely Nader’s last chance! And he’s likely not going to steal any progressive votes, is he now?

Where will me and Susan Sarandon go?

Me too!

Supreme court justice is what I’d love to see. I’d laugh and laugh and laugh.

He’d be a good one too. Not top flight intellectual, but he’s smart and hard working so he wouldn’t be an embarassment, and he could help put together majorities, smooth things over and so on. And a reliable labor vote on the Supreme Court would be sweeeeet.

Plus wingnut heads would explode, and that’s always a plus. Yet, at the same time as an ex-Senator and southerner, you could probably get him through.

It would be interesting, but I can’t possibly imagine him wanting that position.

“Here’s are”…Bwahahaha…sorry :>

Any off the cuff thoughts as to who Hillary might choose as running mate if she was the candidate? I am leaving out Obama and Edwards, bec. neither seems a likely match.

But if they don’t say they will do it does that not mean she is going to be offering them corporate lobby money but that is what they are - so I hope whoever the president chooses for their jobs is down with TLC not DLC.

Edwards as AG would be interesting.

I like this idea.

I agree. He was with Clinton tonight. It worried me last debate when he seemed to be siding with Obama.

Agreed. With the added benefit of being able to actually answer straight questions with straight answers at his confirmation hearings.

Last chance for what … making a mockery of an otherwise remarkable career ?

Clinton would also not take any shit at all from Republican malfeasors. I suspect that she learrned a powerful lesson from the first Clinton presidency’s clumsy attempts at “bipartisanship”.

Here’s a compliment for Wolfy (behold my intimidating beard stubble). Blitzer was not nearly the whore that Russert was.

Obama for President 2016

Mack … do you have any thoughts on the “present” votes issues? A bunch of IL bloggers consistently say that Obama is right to use the “present” vote when he did and they see this as a slam but I don’t know the state proceedures at all?