NEWS: The Democratic Debate And The Slow Motion Car Crash

POLITICS: The Democratic Debate And The Slow Motion Car Crash

It is very interesting to watch Democrats make the same mistake they made in 2000 and 2004. During both of those election campaigns, Democrats choose candidates who were so poor at debating that they ended up losing to the pathetic George Bush. Al Gore was so fucking boring and wooden that it was insane. Watching him lose the first debate to "barely able to speak sentences" Bush was startling. Then came John Kerry, who wouldn't know a sound byte if it crawled into his anus and set up a Starbucks. (Who would? That doesn't even make sense.) Anyway, Kerry is a blow hard. His inability to make points concisely was a disaster. But both suffered from one common, glaring problem: They were unlikable. After watching last night's debate I can tell you the most unlikable person on the stage was the Democratic frontrunner, Hillary Clinton.



First I'll run down the candidates and how they faired.



John Edwards was clearly the best candidate on the stage, from a debating perspective. He was very good with his answers and counter attacks. He was never ruffled, made his points with conviction and has a commanding stage presence. He is one cheesy motherfucker, though.



Edwards hit Clinton hard all night long, with jabs like this about Hillary's recent vote on Iran.

Joe Biden also came across very well. He was authoritative, made his points and was at times funny. He slammed Giuliani with a fantastic sound byte.

Nicely done. Biden is one hell of a corporate whore and I would never vote for him, but you cannot disregard his likeability factor.



Chris Dodd. Dodd could play a president in a Hollywood movie. He just has that look. He sounded intelligent, clear and was very well spoken. Dodd is less likeable than others on the stage, which may be why he is in the position he is today because on the issues he is just what liberals are screaming about.



Bill Richardson. I think he was running for Secretary of State. He spent the entire evening running his diplomatic resume, at one point saying he had negotiated the release of six US soldiers remains from North Korea earlier this year. Congrats on getting those dead guys back! He also asked everyone to play nice and stop picking on Clinton, which was the most pathetic brown-nosing attempt to get a job I have ever seen. Richardson is a likable guy, though he seems more fit for someone you would want on your bowling team.



Barack Obama. About as likable as they come with a voice that commands attention, too bad there is nothing to back it up. Obama started off strong but then began to trail off as the debate went on, probably because he hits the same note over and over. Yeah, yeah, we all should get along. We get it. You are the great healer. Maybe he doesn't realize this is the exact shit Bush was saying in 2000. For Democrats, after years of being shit on by the opposition, it is time to fight, but Obama wants to orchestrate a group hug.



In the Sunday New York Times, Obama was quoted saying that it was time to get tough with Clinton for acting like a Republican. During the debate, Russert asked him directly about that assertion. It was a softball question that should have been hit out of the park. Obama's answer:

Nice. Try to find a way to appear weaker, because it is exactly what America is looking for right now. Obama went on to make a joke about boxing and how he is all for "big meaningful change." Fuck off.



Dennis Kucinich. He is very small. Small people don't get elected to be the "leader of the free world." End of story. Oh, and he admitted to having seen a UFO years ago.

Kucinich handled the question well and he brings up some very important points, but he is unelectable because he is a Hobbit.



Lastly, Hillary Clinton. Seriously, this is what you guys are going with? She could not have sounded more like a Republican. Her answers were broad, completely lacking details and there was no sign of leadership anywhere. She made it very clear that she does not like Bush and his policies and kept saying she would do the opposite. She's going to "bring smart people together" to come up with ideas and whatnot. Super. Thanks for more of the same.



The inescapable reality of Clinton was highlighted at the end of the debate. Elliot Spitzer, governor of New York, is working on a controversial bill regarding giving illegal immigrants drivers licenses. Clinton had told a group of editors that the idea made sense, so Russert asked her about it. She blathered.

Great, now do you fucking support it or not? You actually can't do a poll right in the middle of the debate, so you have to make a choice. An actual decision.



Chris Dodd stepped in and said he did not agree with the idea. At that point, Hillary the follower got worried that she might have actually said something of substance.

Dodd responded that she had just said the plan made sense. Clinton then said that the plan contained three different types of licenses. (Which was the compromise, not the original bill that she was asked about.) Clinton then accused them of playing "Gotcha" with her.



Today her campaign said she totally supports the bill.



Get used to moments like this being a common sight if Democrats choose Clinton. She is not and has never been a good debater. Her inability to give an opinion that she believes in without consulting a poll will devastate her, just as it devastated Gore. It is one of the reasons she comes across as unlikable. Standing up for what you believe in is a very attractive quality and Clinton does not seem to be able to do it.



Hillary Clinton also arrived at this stage in a very different way than the other candidates. All the other Democrats in last night's debate started their careers winning little elections, making their way up the ranks until they achieved rather impressive victories. Barring Kucinich, that means a body of people wanted to be represented by that particular candidate and chose them. It happened again and again, until they reached a higher office. Likeability is an inherent factor in that equation. Sometimes unlikable people squeak through, like Gore and Kerry, and for whatever reason Democrats are incredibly attracted to them as presidential candidates. I offer the following as proof:

Kerry

Gore

Dukakis

Mondale

Talk about charisma! That's like lightening in a bottle, right there. Hillary is more of the same.



Hillary came to the scene as the wife of a president and from there jumped directly to the Senate. That means she came in with a massive war chest for her New York campaign and had a name that people loved. She ran against Republican fill-in candidates, who entered the race after the original GOP candidates dropped out late. Basically, she won races that were tailor made for a victory and has not proven yet that she can beat a politically savvy, likable candidate. Does she have the smarts? Absolutely. But I think we've seen with Gore and Kerry that smarts do not mean shit. They were both beaten by a likable retard. Hillary is certainly intelligent, capable and corrupt enough to take over the job. She's just not likeable enough.

Look at that, voters don't want a Republican, but in a head to head, they don't really want Hillary either. She has the two perfect qualities that could lead to a loss: She is unlikable and she represents the right wing of the Democratic party. Why not just vote for a Republican instead of a Democrat who is acting like a Republican? At least he will seem like a nice person.



Get used to polls like this. The Democrats are about to elect the only candidate who could possibly lose.



I think my feminist wife put it best:

Actually, she's worse.

You say this like Al Gore lost the election in 2000.

http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/presidents_and_first_ladies/49369

If the Democrats would nominate someone who didn't come off as a complete tool, then they wouldn't have to worry about squeaking by with a win.

The difference between Clinton and the others right now is that she is running for pres. and they are running against her. She will win the nomination but I still am not sure that she can win the presidency yet. I dont think she will win against Rudy becouse he is so likeable unlike her.

Well, we'll see about that in January.

I agree with the cheesy part about Edwards, but this is the first time in a while I've felt the man has much substance.
Although this debate may have been a big bump in the road to the nomination for HRC, it won't matter if the remaining candidates continue to divide the anti-Hillary vote.

For what it's worth, Kerry was effectively selected by Republicans in 2004 because they knew they could beat him. The Republican Club for Growth spent a huge sum of money in Iowa during the run-up to the Democratic primary in order to destroy Dean's reputation and his lead.

Similarly, Republicans (and Republican media) are backing Hillary because she is the most beatable. (I still think she'll win.) But if you look at swing state polls of potential candidate match-ups, it is Edwards who beats EVERY potential Republican challenger by the largest margins.

Also for what it's worth, Kerry was seen as a far superior debater than Bush in the traditional debate format. It was one of the things that kept him close. Bush tended to win the "town hall" style debates.

Also, Hillary will win in a walk against anyone the GOP nominates.

Frodo/Samwise 2008!

Holy fuck do I hope she doesn't get the nomination. Obama would be fine by me, as I would love all the partisan bickering to end for actual, pork-barrel free, compromise-heavy work to get done, and a vote for him would send that message loud and clear. Also, he's black. And let's face it- that actually means something. I would love for there to be more strong, powerful role models for minorities in this country, b/c right now, there are rather few. (Richardson is one - and I'd be damn happy if he -does- land Sec. of State.)

As for Edwards - I am fine with him, too. Hell, I am actually OK with Giuliani over Clinton. That's right - I am liberal / libertarian policy-wise, which Rudy is not - but I still far prefer him to her. Because seriously, forget about policy for a second. I just don't want her to represent me, in any way, ever.

This is really all about the DNC throwing their muscle behind the most 'power-house-y' candidate - see Gore over B. Bradley, Kerry over everyone. There was NOBODY out there who said, "Oooooh, Gore gets me excited!" Same for Kerry. But they were the most politically powerful and the DNC threw its weight (and money and protection) behind them.

Think about how many people were jazzed about Bradley, vs. how many were jazzed for Gore. Or Dean, vs. Kerry. Didn't seem to be a lot of young, popular support for Kerry, did there?

It's the same today. Obama energizes some people, Edwards energizes some others. NOBODY is energized by Clinton. I really hope she doesn't get the nomination. Ugh.

And the Clinton talking points have begun:

6 men vs 1 woman. It's the same thing that would happen in any primary, but it's different this time because she's a woman. I've already seen the argument popping up on blogs that support Hillary. This shouldn't polarize the country more at all.

If he keeps showing off that wife of his , I'll vote for him too ! In all seriousness , in those online " who should you vote for " polls , Kucinich has been most in line with my opinions so far . And I won't say I'd vote for Giuliani over Clinton ( cause I won't vote for a republican ) , but I sure hope it doesn't come down to me having to make a choice between those two .

No. No, not really.

Ambivalence, apathy, low voter turnout are one thing that this country seriously suffers from. Hillary Clinton will drive people to the polls just to vote against her.

Even I hate her, and I almost always vote dem.
I would vote for a republican turd sandwich before H. Clinton.

None of the candidates, democrat or republican, are worth a flying fuck. They are bought and paid for by BIG MONEY. Nothing changes. "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss."

It's no surprise that people successful enough to become president are going to be successful in other things, and have many other successful friends.

Anyways, nobody really appeals to me except Chris Dodd. Too bad he won't win the nomination

This all sounds depressingly familiar.

Is this up on YouTube yet? I missed it.

No. It was televised by MSNBC and I don't think they are allowing it to go up.

That's fucking annoying. It's not like they're going to play it again on the air. Just let us watch! Democracy NOW! bitches...

Frodo has no political aspirations, and Samwise concerns himself more with starting a family than any other "delusions of grandeur."

Brandybuck/Took 2008.

I prefer Obama, but I'm pretty sure I would vote for just about any of the Democrats over just about any of the Republicans.

The exception is Clinton. I would find it very hard to vote for her. The thing with the drivers' licenses was just one example of her frequent double-speak.

And her fellow Democrats have left Whitewater alone. If she's the nominee, she will get hammered on this. In my view, she's the only chance the Republicans have of winning the '08 election.

There are a few video highlights from the debate up on Raw Story:
Dem underdogs open debate with salvos against Hillary

I guess Clinton's in trouble now with her stance on Immigration... I thought that was supposed to be a dead issue (or at least stagnant). Ah, like a zombie from the swamp IT emerges once again to haunt us. I for one am getting a bit miffed about the framing of political debate lately. Sure there's a lot of crap going on around the world (and yes, I care about that too), but I'm getting a real bout of "what have you done for me lately" syndrome when it comes to domestic policy issues... Everything seems to hinge on Iran lately, I hope they focus on more domestic issues in the next debate. I want to know if Obama can pull a rabbit out of his hat in Vegas. In the mean time, here's my graphical opinion of the presidential debates (as of late).


For the record, I'm more inline with Kucinich's views and goals (boot the bastards out of the Executive), but the poor halfling won't get half the vote... I gave to Obama's campaign early and now I'm wondering why I wasted good money I could have spent on crack cocaine... I like Richardson, but not enough to think he'd make the best President. Oh well. I'm not particularly fond of Hillary, she's far too like the things in this country that I fear and dread, namely Republicans (funny how they dislike her more then any of the other Democratic candidates...) OK, I'm done for the day.

When she wins the nomination, she will lose the general election. People either love her or hate her. Not enough love her to win, plenty hate her enough to lose. She is the only Dem candidate that would make me vote for any Republican instead...

oops