Fiery Debate Turns Campaign Toward the Personal

Subscribe to this blog's feed

« Previous | Main | Next »

Fiery Debate Turns Campaign Toward the Personal

January 21, 2008 10:36 PM

ABC News' Rick Klein Reports: It took voting in three states and a few hundred or so debates for it to happen. But finally, Monday night in Myrtle Beach, S.C., the Democratic candidates tossed it all out on the table.

Dropping the niceties and couched language of previous encounters, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama engaged in a series of fierce -- and remarkably personal -- clashes that touched on all of the big issues, and their respective weak points: the Iraq war, healthcare, the economy, and even Clinton's service on the Walmart board and Obama's ties to an indicted real-estate mogul.

The debate was stark evidence of the tight nature of the campaign; the three remaining major candidates have three very different paths to the same nomination, all of which run through South Carolina, in their own way.

Obama made clear from the outset that he's not going to let the Clinton name -- or former President Bill Clinton himself -- intimidate him. He tied his pushback to the message he's long espoused, of a new type of politics he hopes to usher in as the Democratic nominee.

"I think that part of what people are looking right now is someone who is going to solve problems and not resort to the same typical politics that we've seen in Washington," Obama said.

Clinton didn't back down, not just defending her husband's attacks but adding her own. She unloaded a crate's worth of opposition research, citing chapter and verse of multiple storylines her campaign has been trying to tell behind the scenes, until now.

"Senator Obama, it's hard to have a straight-up debate with you because you never take responsibility for any vote," Clinton said. "It's just very difficult to get a straight answer."

Obama was literally the man in the middle -- at center stage and the focus of the campaign at a forum held on MLK Day. And he took shots not only from Clinton but from former senator John Edwards, who made clear he is still very intent on contending for the presidency.

Edwards again brought passion and a clear message, and he seemed to rise above sparring that seemed petty at times. But -- in a major break from previous debates -- he was ready to back up Clinton's arguments, realizing that he needs to cut into Obama's support in his native South Carolina.

"What we need is a president of the United States who actually believes to their core in equality, who's willing to fight for that equality, who's willing to do things that may not be politically popular," Edwards said in summing up his argument.

Mostly, the debate showed a new campaign dynamic defined by aggression. The candidates are long past the time where they can join forces in blasting Republicans, and need to draw contrasts that resonate with voters -- and take their opponents down a peg or two.

Now that all the issues are in the open -- at last -- there's no putting them back in any bags. As the campaign moves to the South Carolina primary on Saturday -- and the de facto nation-wide primary on Feb. 5 -- the race seems destined to turn on key differences in how the candidates would approach the job they all want.

And now, the race is very much personal.

January 21, 2008 in Tancredo, Tom | Permalink | User Comments (216)

User Comments

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

Hillary clearly won this debate.

Barack was arrogant and rude to not only Hillary, but to John Edwards as well.

Hillary's experience and ability shone through tonite!

Hillary 2008!!

Posted by: matthew | Jan 21, 2008 10:48:54 PM

Keep thinking that she won Matthew. Whatever makes you sleep at night. She finally was called out on her campaign's dirty politics and political pundit's are pointing this out. Good win Obama and a respectable showing by Edwards

Posted by: Mike M | Jan 21, 2008 10:54:37 PM

The debate showed America that Obama is not so much substance, as he is a dreamer. He offered nothing specific. Hillary seemed to be the most ready to lead with thought out well planned specific solutions. Edwards seemed to be the most sincere. Edwards proved to be passionate. Hillary/Edwards 2008!

Posted by: American for Hillary | Jan 21, 2008 10:56:16 PM

Obama won the debate, hands down. As usual, all of Mrs. Clinton's answers were scripted. And I have no idea what her answer was to the question about whether Martin Luther King would endorse her.

Posted by: Alison | Jan 21, 2008 10:56:45 PM

hillary won again... obama can justify anything he wants. however hillary won. and will continue to win..greg

Posted by: greg | Jan 21, 2008 10:57:04 PM

Obama did not answer the questions posed to him. He looked so upset, worried and unsure of what to do next.

Posted by: Vee | Jan 21, 2008 10:57:30 PM

Hillary--you rock! Hillary was the ONLY one on that stage tonight that said anything specific. The two others left us once again with their worn out, tired cliche statements that had attach nothing current, or specific, or substanative. Hillary has proven that she has the brains, brawn, and moxy to stick it to the Republicans in November, while Obama has just begun to feel the sting of having to answer to his record. Can we really afford someone like Obama to run, when he has not been tempered under the full-throttle fire of the GOP? If tonight's performance is any indicator, he would be anilated by them. Hillary baby you ROCK!

Posted by: swoosie10 | Jan 21, 2008 10:58:04 PM

Women (and the rest of us as well) deserve a better nominee than HRC. Why are many women willing to settle for this old, establishment female icon whose administration will in all likelihood actually be run by her husband? Heck, he's already running the campaign. I wonder if he still remembers he not the one running for president.

Posted by: w_roos | Jan 21, 2008 11:00:09 PM

HIllARY CLINTON is ready to lead, and this debate proves it. I admit that for the first time,.. I think John Edwards got my attention. Edwards should be vice president. You go girl !! -Tyrone, Atlanta

Posted by: Tyrone J. | Jan 21, 2008 11:00:17 PM

Can you expect Obama to come clean on Rezko? The Rezko trial is on 2/25. If he was your friend for 15 years, he gave you lots of money, hosted your parties, helped you wiht your house deal and you used your position to wind millions of stae funds to build slums for the poor, are you claiming this is all 5 hours of church activity? That is why you should not start throwng stones when you are living in a glass house. All three democrats are not clean, but Obama and Edwards took on Hillary on this score in the past. Now she is giving as good as she got.Fact FACT FACT: All politicians are corrupt.Who can lead you best? If we need a president who is clean then we must vote for Ron Pual. But, sdaly he cannot win. Go Hillary, I believe that you will be the best president amongst the current slate.

Posted by: VPNNathan | Jan 21, 2008 11:01:58 PM

Hillary won again. Obama looked like a state senator while Hillary looked presidential.

Posted by: screamingspartan | Jan 21, 2008 11:02:16 PM

Obama not only was MIA on key votes as an Illinois state senator, what I am surprised that nobody called him on was his failure to show up to vote on the Kyl-Lieberman ammendment. This vote, which basically gave Bush the green light to attack IRAN by labelling the Revolutionary Guard(the Iranian National Guard) a terrorist organization was a vote that took place as the bellicose rhetoric of the Bush administration was being ramped up.

Hillary Clinton showed up to vote on it and Obama didn't. He couldn't vote "present" because he wasn't present!

He was MIA on a critical vote that could have led to another war in the Middle East...You call this leadership?

Posted by: Chicago Paul | Jan 21, 2008 11:03:56 PM

Obama making fun of Hillary Clinton being on the Board of Directors at Walmart, just proves Obama will oppress women. Why should her director position at Walmart be a bad thing? She should be proud of her accomplishments and the success in her career. A note to Obama: successful women are voting for Hillary!

Posted by: Sue T. | Jan 21, 2008 11:04:45 PM

Hillary is so not presidential. Unless this country has gone completely mad there is no way she win an election aganist any republican.

Edwards or Obama are so much better for our country - I think they would make a great team.

To bad the best man to run our country is not running that person is Colin Powell. I would vote for him even if never went to a debate.

Hillary is just edgucated trash that could care less about us -- she just wants to be president - Obama has so much class compared to her, do does Edwards.

Posted by: a citizen | Jan 21, 2008 11:07:06 PM

I'm so sick of the Obama - Hillary mudslinging feud. Thank God there's an alternative (and very electable) candidate.
This is why I'm switching my support to John Edwards.

Posted by: Bill in Mission KS | Jan 21, 2008 11:07:23 PM

Obama stumbled on answers tonight. Boy oh Boy was he getting really mixed up on the credit card vote. He did not even undertand when Edwards picked him out on it. He was ambiguous on his present vote, did not understand what universal health care is,could not answer about how he would fund the 50 million dollars and brushed aside Rezko. I will vote Hillary 08, but, clearly John Edwards was the winner today.He is smart and has substance. it will be worthwhile for Hillary to consider a seriuos role for Edwards.

Posted by: VPNNathan | Jan 21, 2008 11:07:36 PM

Hildabeast Clinton said. "It's just very difficult to get a straight answer." I wished she had said that to me! She trots her horn-dog husband out to fight her fights whenever the heat is on. This is the same horn-dog who said that he never inhaled and that "is" is not "is." She's the one who don't want her papers released until she could possibly be in office? Difficult to get a straight answer? She and her sidekick developed a career not giving sraight answers!! I wished I were Obama to be able to reply to that one! It's rare that you have a "debate" opponent who tries to throw a slider and ends up throwing a softball.

Posted by: Getalife | Jan 21, 2008 11:08:12 PM

If you want more of the same crap support Hill. If you really want someone to work for change Sen. Obama is the one who can work to make it happen. The difference between the two is night and day. Vote for Hill and you get the same Lobbyist control crap. That is the only answer support the people that will at least try to shut down K street.

Posted by: tiredofbull | Jan 21, 2008 11:08:16 PM

I am so sick of hearing Obama say duh, uh, that's not what I meant....but let's all unify. Unify against what? Let's all meet on that defining day in January and in one voice yell "PRESENT." I found it very innteresting that he not only admitted having worked for that hood in Chicago but what I was shocked was that no one mentioned he was living in a house that that same hood got him a pretty dicey deal on. All fluff and no substance. I was impressed with John Edwards tonight and truly thought he won the debate; however, I will continue to support Hillary for President.

Posted by: sjbj2322 | Jan 21, 2008 11:08:18 PM

Obama won, IMO, by pointing out Clinton's dirty tactics, and her husband's lies about him--pointing out that the politics of fear isn't coming just from the GOP establishment--but the Democratic establishment as well. He finally said it--we need to move on from the sleazy Clinton politics of the 1990's. Edwards took second, but his 'piling on' against Obama may backfire, if people see his attacks tonight as desparate. Clinton looked like a robot.

Posted by: Linda | Jan 21, 2008 11:08:19 PM

Post a comment