Live Blogging From Sunday's Democratic Debate

Subscribe to this blog's feed

« Previous | Main | Next »

Live Blogging From Sunday's Democratic Debate

August 18, 2007 3:48 PM

9:17 am CT: That has to be it from me (Rick Klein), gotta run a few minutes early to get to the spin room. Keep reading abcnews.com/politics for the latest analysis, and check out tomorrow's Note for a full post-debate look and all the top political news of the day.

9:13 am CT: Obama has to be careful on the merit pay issue -- huge issue for teachers' unions. Or maybe his new politics means blowing up the model, taking on unions too?

9:11 am CT: Richardson is cooking at this debate -- he is coming across really, really well.

9:05 am CT: Edwards with some revisionist history on the war -- wow, will people buy this? "What I didn't express was the huge conflict I had, because I did not trust George Bush," Edwards said. And Clinton picks up on that -- Clinton said she told the truth "as she saw it." And this: "I never would have pursued this war." Then why'd she vote for it?

9:03 am CT: That action behind the moderators was a tech guy who tripped and fell, just before the broadcast came back from break.

9:01 am CT: ABC's Teddy Davis overheard Gravel on stage: "I got to get that one percent." He was at zero in ABC's latest poll.

8:59 am CT: The break update -- I for one expected more hand-to-hand combat on stage -- but it may be too early in the day (or too early in the cycle) for that. Edwards delivered the messages he wanted -- but he needed to be sharper to make himself more of a factor. So far, Obama's "bumper car" line is probably most memorable. Clinton still rising above the rest of the field -- why not, as long as you're leading in the polls?

8:55 am CT: I don't see anybody breaking through on the agricultural front -- they are all making the right sorts of points, but not much distinctive here.

8:47 am CT: Biden also has an interesting, soft-spoken response that looks inward. And Obama is the only one to connect his answer on religion to a campaign message. "We've got to express those values through our government."

8:44 am CT: Getting the candidates on religion is always interesting -- and Edwards has a moving response citing family tragedies: "There are some things that are beyond our control... I don't think you can prevent bad things from happening through prayer."

8:39 am CT: It's sort of remarkable to me that Obama still gets applause by saying we should have figured out how to get out of the war before we got in. Clearly Democrats still care about who was against the war from the start, but do they care enough for Obama to get traction on this right up until caucus day?

8:38 am CT: Richardson now is getting the debate he wants -- he wants all the troops out, and he wants people to know it. Not sure that message was entirely clean, but he got it out.

8:34 am CT: Edwards gets applause with a line that could have been delivered by Clinton: "Any Democratic president will end this war. That's what we know." And the Republicans are "George Bush on steroids." So far, this is his strongest debate performance.

8:32 am CT: Iraq discussions are not made for debates -- and we're reaching a point where there's nothing more interesting that can be said by Democratic candidates on the war -- except for the bomb-throwers.

8:29 am CT: So the first half hour hits the two big issues -- Clinton's electability, and Obama's experience. They skate through OK, but no question Clinton took the most incoming fire. So far, you've got to think Edwards is happiest with how this debate is going, with Obama a close second.

8:24 am CT: Edwards is getting the fight he wants. This was his main agenda item coming in, and he's getting direct engagement with Clinton on the lobbyists' money issue.

8:21 am CT: Clinton gives a savvy response: "I don't think Karl Rove's going to endorse me ... but I find it interesting that he's so obsessed with me." And her negative ratings, she says, are because she's a fighter. She loves startig sentences like this: "The reason why we're going to win..."

8:18 am CT: Here we go: Obama engages on the question of Clinton's divisiveness: "We're going to need somebody that can break out of the political patterns that we've been in in the last 20 years." And Edwards jumps on by making it about lobbyists: "America wants change in the most serious way." So far, Clinton is fair game to attack, Obama isn't.

8:15 am CT: Gravel makes the argument for winnowing the field. Cheney should be "committed"? Excuse me, senator?

8:13 am CT: Edwards is channeling the Edwards of 2004 -- much, much different than him on the trail. He just defended Obama -- the same candidate he directly criticized all week on the trail in Iowa.

8:10 am CT: The difference on ruling out nukes? "You've got to put it into context," Clinton said. "This was not a hypothetical." That's a better answer than what her campaign said a few weeks back, that she was speaking then as a senator and now as a presidential candidate. Obama's retort: "There was no difference." Then comes the politics of hope -- decrying the "gamesmanship." Interesting exchange, though so far a subdued debate.

8:08 am CT: Obama had this line ready to go, don't you think? "To prepare for this debate, I rode in the bumper cars at the state fair," he said.

8:06 am CT: Sen. Dodd is also not taking the opportunity -- at least not directly -- but isn't that a mistake for a candidate who needs to catch on? He's sounding senatorial. "You're not going to have time in January 09 to get ready for this job," Dodd said, in the closest he came to criticizing Obama. And Sen. Biden is wading through the weeks on Pakistan. Looks like Obama is going to duck direct jabs. How about Gov. Richardson jumping on the silence ntough -- "Change and experience -- with me you get both."

8:02 am CT: Sen. Clinton decided not to take the first opportunity to question Sen. Obama's qualifications to be president. "You don't have to be against anybody," she said. Words that can only be spoken by a front-runner.

7:49 am CT: For what it's worth, the Democrats are a lot looser than the Republicans were before the debate. Two weeks ago, the GOPers stood behind their podiums awkwardly, and the crowd was silent as they twiddled their thumbs. The Democrats are milling around the stage, chatting with each other, and generally appearing to be having a good time.

7:44 am CT: Here comes Hillary -- being last to come to the stage means getting her own ovation.

7:40 am CT: The candidates just walked into the room -- to big applause -- but one is missing: Where's Hillary Clinton? The empty podium at the end of the stage has the crowd buzzing.

7:28 am CT: I'm in the debate hall now -- warming up the crowd are Howard Dean and Gov. Chet Culver -- a couple of popular figures among Iowa Democrats. "We are excited once again about having the first caucus in the nation -- in 2008," Culver said. He's among those who know that a December caucus could be disastrous for Iowa.

7:25 am CT: And Joe Biden's folks are out in force -- they have a huge sign outside the site showing the candidates' "ears of experience" -- and Biden, naturally, has the largest number of ears of corn.

7:22 am CT: John Edwards just made his entrance to the debate site, and I've never seen anything quite like it. While the other candidates were slipping into the building via a secure back entrance, Edwards and his wife, Elizabeth, walked up a path and into the front door -- trailed by a contingent of aides, supporters, and reporters. As he walked, supporters chanted, "Two-zero-zero-eight, who we gonna nominate? Edwards! Edwards!" Enough to pump up a candidate who's loaded for bear?

7:18 am CT: A great scene -- dueling flatbed trucks circling the block. Obama's has a huge sign reading "Hope." Clinton's says "Clinton Country."

7:03 am CT: I'm at the debate site, and it's a huge party outside near the Drake campus, even though it's barely light out. ABC's intrepid Teddy Davis reports that Barack Obama has the biggest crowd, followed by Hillary Clinton and John Edwards. By 3:30 am, Obama had more than 100 supporters outside, and he has a drum-and-step troupe dancing around the block. The Clinton folks thought in advance -- they got permission to put a huge Hillary for President sign on the movie-theater marquee right off campus. And while the crowd is far larger than it was for the Republican debate, a single veteran in a wheelchair is rolling up and down the block -- with a huge American flag, and a Tancredo for President sign.

The Note's Rick Klein here -- I have a belly full of food-on-a-stick from the Iowa State Fair (corn dog, chicken on a stick, beef on a stick, cheese on a stick, pork chop on a stick, and yes, fried Snickers on a stick -- what I do in the name of journalism). I'll be live-blogging at 8 am CT (9 am ET) during the Democratic presidential debate on ABC, from inside the debate hall at Drake University. And check out the latest analysis in a special debate preview edition of The Note.

August 18, 2007 in Tancredo, Tom | Permalink | User Comments (70)

User Comments

You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Seeing that before the Debates have already started , there's a poll up asking who we think will win the debate, I thought I would take it a step further and comment on the LIVE Debate that hasn't even occurred yet. Here I go:

WOW!

Barack is really sticking it to Hillary. Way to go. It's about time.

Woah! That Dennis is a little firecraker. He's tearing up Edwards

OMG! Edwards just slammed Kucinich back on that War Vote comment.

LOL. The crowd loved that one. Way to go Biden !

This was a great debate.

Obama won for sure, but the pundits will declare it for Hillary.

Posted by: Dee Anna Roberts | Aug 19, 2007 12:31:29 AM

George, with 2 decades of real experience, ask honest questions. Not hard questions, that is beyond your strength. On honesty, integrity and ethics just how ethical will Hillary, Obama and Edwards be as president. All have significant issues in capabilities and abilities. Hillary is flat, her “space shuttle picture (Kerry in the space capsule) was on USA Today last week while she stood in the hospital room learning the real ins and outs of the medical profession, such a dry person with a frown that drags the ground. And Obama, when will the picture on the prayer rug finally come out. And Edwards so fake he is flat. And you last week saying Hillary has 81% of American support. George, she has 81% of 27%. That sounds like she has maybe 19% of the real American vote. Frankly, most Americans are scared to death of the Socialist Democrat Party. The Democrats have no vision, no future and no leadership. Sometime ask Nancy why she is protecting the pornography industry. You can pay off the National Debt with a real sin tax on pornography of 20% and nobody will care, well nobody but the Nancy and Barbara crowd who get big political donations from the pornography industry—a real story for you.

Posted by: Larry Rutherford | Aug 19, 2007 8:28:24 AM

Pretty clear edwards doesn't want be the VP nominee again

Posted by: handy andy | Aug 19, 2007 9:30:57 AM

I wish George S. would ask more meaningful questions about issues rather than trying to get candidates to criticize each other. They won't answer those kinds of questions and turn their answers into speeches of their own.

Posted by: Tom Aitchison | Aug 19, 2007 9:33:30 AM

Kucinich was right... this is a polarizing debate... Gravel has gotten more camera time than Kucinich or Dodd at this point!

Posted by: Jay in DesMoines | Aug 19, 2007 9:40:20 AM

Too many Democrats, too little time. I'd score clarity of thought and excellence of presentation as follows:

1.) Chris Dodd
2.) Joe Biden
3.) Barack Obama
4.) John Edwards

On the "irritation scale" for evading of questions and drivel, the champion is Hillary Clinton. How George was able not to point blank tell her to answer the questions is beyond me. I side with the lady in the audience who looked like she wanted to say to Hillary, "Shut Up".

In general after the numbered four above it goes way down hill from there. Bill Richardson in charge of foreign policy scares the hell out of me. If the nominee is anyone but one of the four above, say hello to four more years of the GOP.

Posted by: Joe Mathews | Aug 19, 2007 9:50:59 AM

So the blogger is for Edwards!

Posted by: stephanie Spears | Aug 19, 2007 9:51:10 AM

George is not giving everyone time to talk. The same top three always get all the air time. Once again the media will choose the nominee.

Posted by: Robin | Aug 19, 2007 9:52:08 AM

Who the heck is Gavel, Gravel or whomever and why is he running? I disagree with "Dennis the Menace" most of the time, but admire his guts and presentation. I expect Edwards to meet me at the hospital door, if I'm hurt, to present me with a contract. Sounds like he's whining.

Posted by: Joe Mathews | Aug 19, 2007 9:56:07 AM

I am an Edwards supporter but I think Mr. Stephanopolis is doing a bad job spreading the questions around...Kucinich got benched!

Posted by: lakerdem | Aug 19, 2007 9:59:49 AM

Clinton mentioned she is pro America concerning trade. Does that mean she feels that NAFTA, that came about under Clinton, was a good thing? NAFTA hurt American workers and I want to hear someone come forward with an answer to how they are going to repair all the damage that NAFTA has caused with outsourcing to the American worker and the American people.

Posted by: Michelle Burnell | Aug 19, 2007 10:03:26 AM

This debate is a fluke!

I'M TIRED OF HEARING HILLARY VS. BARACK.

THERE ARE MORE CANDIDATES ON THE STAGE!

By directing all the air time to two or three candidates, they are endorsing them and gagging all the other ideas for change from all the candidates.

This debate is pitiful.

Posted by: Christopher Hatcher | Aug 19, 2007 10:06:28 AM

All would be a vast improvement over the current King George (just for being able to speak the language). All show the main difference between Democrats and Republicans, Democrats put people over property.

Posted by: Schuyler Cook | Aug 19, 2007 10:10:17 AM

Nobody is talking about where all this money is comming from.We are broke and going to be broke for a long time

Posted by: Terry Nichols | Aug 19, 2007 10:17:07 AM

No real deep commets

Posted by: Bill Davis | Aug 19, 2007 10:19:41 AM

WHY IS IT OK TO SPEND 100 BILLION PLUS ON THIS WAR? WHEN IN HIND SIGHT IF THIS WAR WOULD NOT HAVE TAKEN PLACE.YOU HOLD ALL THAT MONEY FROM THE AMERICAN PEOPLE MANELY THE POOR? APPARENTLY IT'S OK TO DEFEND US BUT NOT HELP ALL THE TRULEY NEEDY PEOPLE OF AMERICA WHO COULD USE 100 BILLION DOLLARS,THE AMERICAN PEOPLE!WHY DO YOU VOTE WITHIN HOURS TO SPEND THAT KIND OF MONEY ON A WAR BUT TAKE YOUR GOOD OLE TIME SOLVING AMERICA'S POVERITY PROBLEMS

Posted by: JEFFREY ALAN WILLIAMS | Aug 19, 2007 10:21:58 AM

It was very disappointing to have the first 26 minutes wasted on the previous comments candidates made on one another. We are interested in the candidates views of issues not one another. Save the tabloid stuff.
Joe Biden continues to show insight and clarity...count me in to caucus for him.

Posted by: D. Powers | Aug 19, 2007 10:26:45 AM

I most likely will vote Republican(McCain)../but listened this morning to the Debate..I mostly did not really think the Debate was giving way to the problems "on the ground"..I did like Senator Dodd's comments about Rural and Small Business and the Small Farmer..generally people seem to have lost the moments in prosperity/I think that we have lost the "better" approach to maintaining Democracy and seem to believe that excuses will prevail "just long enough"..the Democrats were all about "belief"/the Republican's seem a step in the direction that "change" is not a necessity../and in the two debating ideas of political manuver's I think the best is too have a numerical value..in this possibility I think the Democrat's are talking about "dreams" and then the Republican's are about more "on the ground" prosperity issues..most of my dis-pleasure in the American "change" movement is that they tend to offer nothng more than "messy" politics called Peace Politcs..I think in the definition of "micro" management--this type of social arena only offers up liars.

Posted by: Mark S. M. | Aug 19, 2007 10:30:08 AM

It's no wonder Murikans are ignorant! The poorist among us who are hurt the most by this travesty ogf a Government are the least likely to be informed about how they ae being rolled!
I tried to watch the debate on my local ABC/FUX NEws channel! I turned off my Direct TV because I am on too small SS income, & I was paying $43.00 per month for trash, except Link TV & C Span!
Following the pompous preacher expounding next to a large American FLag ( sound down) the debate came on at 9:am.
It was going along just fine until Kucinich got a big audience response to his answer on getting out of Iraq, ( implicating the sitting Senators who had voted FOR the war and recently voted to fund it again................) SO GEORGE Stephanopolous changed the subject completely & threw in an e-mail question about how the candidates felt about their "God"
Right there.............opening up the discussion to the public isn't, democratic, because the media "tools" still control which ones are used and WHEN!
It got worse...........At 10 AM, a paid program shilling treatment for depression replaced the unfinished debate! ( would we need treatment if our Democracy, life, liberty & pursuit of happiness weren't being disappeared?)

Response to above comment: This debate ISN"T a FLUKE! ( an accidentally lucky shot in billiards or any accidental stroke of good luck!)
It IS pitiful but it has been very carefully planned to produce the desired results ( Not being our; THE PEOPLE"S enlightenment!)

Posted by: Pat Sharp | Aug 19, 2007 10:50:08 AM

The candidates all stated that they believed some things are beyond God's control. If that's true, then why do they want the government to play God in terms of health care? An amazing contradiction of philosophy.

Posted by: Robert Rosencrans | Aug 19, 2007 10:56:33 AM

Post a comment