Looking Professional, Democrats Hold Their Own

The Candidates and the Debate



CNN got to work early beating up on the Dems even before the debate began. Lou Dobbs castigated the Democrats during the pre-debate with Conservative spokespeople much like a Roman Nero waiting for the lions to maul the Christian slaves..

In the arguments leading up to the debates, Republican attack dogs underscored the democrats failure at getting benchmarks approved for their Iraqi bill as if it were worse than the very act of war, itself, especially this unproven, unjustified war. .

Overall, the debate proved better than most. It seemed democrats took away from 04 the lesson of not going on the attack early or playing all of your cards. To their credit, however, all of the first tier candidates looked professional and acted the part. And most of the entertainment was provided by those considered second tier with a few exceptions.

Here’s the quick assessment.

Overall, the candidates seemed to have done their homework re the issues. Joe Biden stood out for his knowledge of the War in Iraq. Dennis Kucinich was the only one to mention “special interests.” All of the candidates addressed health care but, surprisingly, only Kucinich hammered on the need to reform these high profit producing sectors of the economy especially the insurance companies who keep costs high.

What should give everyone a sigh of relief is that no one seemed to slip badly and most performances were consistent with the candidates’ former statements; therefore, we shouldn’t expect major shifts in the polls.

If anything, Governor Richardson may have come up the strongest by sounding professional with a good managerial style that voters could relate to while Joe Biden’s anger seem to gain support from the Internet left who were already angry; but may have cost him vital points among more moderate dems who don’t consider anger as a favorable characteristic of a presidential candidate.

Edwards, recognizing that he was going into this debate as number three, had to do something to attempt to change his standing. As a result, he was the first to try to draw blood by accentuating the differences between himself and the other candidates. He may have come across however more as the Sunday school moralist. Edwards emphasized that neither Obama or Hillary showed leadership by their vote—which seemed to be at the end of the day with little fanfare. As you may recall, Hillary choose to vote after seeing how Obama voted. Not what one might call a real act of courage.. And it seemed a point worth noting that both candidates seemed reined in, not yet ready to indulge in the pyrotechnics we’ve learned to associate with most debates; however, their actions may be prescient in the light of former debates where things can get nasty and distasteful long before the Primary.. .

Obama managed to look presidential in one or two specific situations.

In one, by calling attention to one of the questions raised b Wolf Blitzer, Obama responded that “those are the kind of questions that divide us…” to Blitzer’s question about immigration and who was for making English the official language.

While Obama did a good job of seeming a “uniter,” he does not seem capable of going in for the kill and that may be in the long run perceived as a weakness in a candidate who may be called upon to make hard decisions. Hillary, on the other hand, seems to be the ready warrior capable of sharp elbows and delivering a haymaker when the occasion presents itself; however, she, too, was on her good behavior during the debate and looking strong and in control.

No question, looked like and acted like the front runner. Her arguments were calculated and carefully made. It is clear that she doesn’t want the voter to view her as a flip—flopper with all of the pejorative baggage that connotes. Nor did she slip from her perch and continued to hold onto her lead by minimizing the differences between herself and the rest of the candidates on the issue of Iraq. She even said that all democrats were basically of the same view that the troops should come home. It was only in the details where they differed. And when push came to shove, she placed the blame where it belonged at Bush’s door step and that reinforced her front runner status.

Using this tactic on more than one question seemed to show Hillary wisely using her perceived advantages to consolidate her gains.

Kucinich kept to his position as a leader for liberals and the left but he seems to generate very little heat in general among middle of the road voters he is the one presidential candidate who seems to be judged less by the content of his words than his somewhat shrill delivery. Kucinich never seems to get the credit he deserves for his willingness to separate himself from the crowd with well thought out counter arguments. Nor does Joe Biden, who works hard to gain mastery of his subjects and has more experience than anyone at the dais in terms of years of service on important committees.

Not much from the Senator from Connecticut, Senator Dodd, in terms of light and inspiration. Too bad inasmuch as he needed some real pluses to climb out of the second tier candidates.

Summing up, Richardson was up, Biden stayed the same, Hillary was up, Edwards was down and it was slightly up for Obama; Dodd in a holding pattern; and inertia for the other candidates.

Overall, the voters are taking their time to gauge the position of the candidates and determine who and who is not presidential. And perhaps that’s the way the system should work with an early start and lot’s of discussion which, hopefully, will lead to more and more dialog.

We shall see. Otherwise, a pretty good show!

Les Aaron