- Obama Hits McCain on Campaign's Lobbyist Ties
- Obama on Iowa Return, 'a Terrific Way to Bring Things Full Circle'
- Clinton Not Running to Represent Some People on Television
- Obama Hints He Sees Imbalance in the Way the Press Covers McCain
- ‘I'm Staying,’ Minority Leader Boehner Declares
- Clinton Sits Through Sermon About Adultery
- McCain Jokes About Age, Democrats, on Saturday Night Live
- Clinton Delivers Scripted Attacks Against McCain
- Obama: Bush, McCain Should 'Explain Why They Have a Problem With JFK'
- Clinton Takes on 'Those People on TV'
- Obama Iowa Bound...Again
- Kennedy Suffers Seizure, Rushed to Hospital
- South Dakota Switchers, Screw-ups and Signage
- Huckabee Jokes About Gun Aimed at Obama
- McCain Calls Obama Reckless in Ongoing Spat
« Romney Outspending Rivals Combined in N.H. | Main | Poll: McCain Up Six; Clinton-Obama Tied »
Live-Blogging From Debates By Rick Klein
January 05, 2008 4:54 PM
10:45 pm: Some final thoughts on the Democrats. Edwards may have turned in the strongest pure performance. But that will be overshadowed by a couple of stand-out Clinton moments. She let it all out tonight -- the entire book on Obama. But she opened the book on herself with those flashes of anger. New Hampshire voters don't like candidates who feel entitlted to nominations -- they get to decide, things are not foreordained and candidates are not inevitable. Sen. Clinton had some moments tonight she'll want to take back.
That's all for tonight -- read The Note tomorrow for a full recap and analysis, and a look ahead, as always.
10:37 pm: I'm so glad at least Edwards and Richardson could have some fun at their own expense.
10:34 pm: A fun last question -- what would you take back? But a dangerous one to play on.
10:31 pm: My colleague Jake Tapper points out that the debate isn't over yet and The Moment is already a YouTube clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07u6uffKvpA
10:30 pm: This happens at just about every debate: John Edwards comes back to his message again and again, in an effective way. If a debate could vault him back into the game, he may be having that very debate.
10:26 pm: ABC's Sarah Amos, who covers Richardson: "Sometimes I feel like Richardson would do so much better if he just stopped talking 20 seconds earlier. Strong answers sometimes, but then they meander until people forget his point entirely."
10:20 pm: Obama's retort to Hillary's best line: "The truth is, words do inspire." Here's the thing: it's more fun to vote for optimism than realism -- I didn't say it's smarter, necessarily, just that it's more fun.
10:17 pm: Now she's just as angry defending the Clinton legacy: "I think we've got amnesia." Got her some applause inside the debate hall.
10:14 pm: Hillary Clinton brings the "reality check." "When it comes to lobbyists, Sen. Obama's chair in New Hampshire is a lobbyist. . . I think it's important that all of us be held to the same standard." Some standards are more "same" than others -- but she has the ENTIRE dossier on Obama out on the table tonight.
And HERE'S her most effective argument, well put: "Words are not action. And as beautifully presented and as passionately felt as they are, they are not action."
10:13 pm: Does Charlie Gibson know Obama's lobbying bill better than he does? He didn't seem too ready/able to defend his bill. But "we have to bet on them." See, the spotty first half of that message was forgotten quickly.
10:11 pm: So far, like the GOP, I don't see a clear winner as much as I see a clear loser. Edwards is effective as always, maybe more than usual. And yet -- that's not where the focus is. It's hard to game out the scenario that leaves him as the last person standing against Obama, which is his central problem at this moment.
10:08 pm: Richardson almost made Obama's argument for him by talking up JFK.
10:04 pm: Obama is taking the opportunities to talk about his core message now. His "working majority for change." If you're still on the fence, that's compelling stuff.
10 pm: "I'm offering 35 years of experience making change," Clinton says. And then she turns it back to the records... She never got into why people just may not like her.
9:59 pm: "I don't think she's that bad," Clinton said. Obama: "You're likeable enough."
9:58 pm: WMUR's Scott Spradling was right to pick up on the highlight of the first half, and maybe of this and any debate.
9:56 pm: For some reason, John Edwards almost missed the restart of the live broadcast. But he's back in time, no harm, no foul.
9:49 pm: In case there's any doubt, there is no real estate worth occupying on the right on the war issue. So nobody supports the surge. Richardson gets his main message home: "I bring the troops home within a year."
9:47 pm: The Clinton campaign is beginning to churn out well-documented pieces showing Obama's shifts of positions. None of which will be as memorable what just happened on stage.
9:40 pm: There will be time to ponder this later . . . but I do wonder whether that moment when Clinton seemed almost incredulous that she's not winning is unlikely to speak to anyone who isn't already supporting her. That has the potential of being a memorable moment, for all the wrong reasons, of course.
9:38 pm: From ABC's Eloise Harper, who covers the Clinton campaign: "Snap! Clinton just lost her temper a bit. Interesting that Richardson is taking her side - after the alleged deal with Obama on caucus night."
9:35 pm: Sen. Clinton is doing more than an adequate job defending herself, but now she's in all-out warfare with two of the three other people on stage -- and has to stay on this side of indignant anger in talking herslef up. (Richardson: "I've been in hostage negotiations that are a lot more civil.") This Edwards strategy makes sense -- he wants a one-on-one with Obama. But what he's doing is likely to make Obama stronger.
9:34 pm: And John Edwards defends Obama against Clinton! "The forces of status quo are going to attack." He wants an "unfiltered debate between the agents of change." (Just like Mitt, guess who doesn't have many friends on stage?) Edwards: "I didn't hear these types of attacks from Sen. Clinton when she was ahead."
9:32 pm: Obama is defending on substance -- that is good. This is good for the process. And ABC's Karen Travers drives home this point: "It took about the same amount of time in both debates for the debating to start-about 23-24 (assuming they keep this going). Maybe that is the comfort point."
9:29 pm: I'm surprised that Obama is bringing up the differences between the healthcare plans. And Clinton is taking him on over mandates -- I'm very curious to see whether he can keep that debate going. Wow -- wow, she is bringing it all tonight. She will have left it all on the field. I give her serious credit for taking this on, not leaving it to oppo or negative ads or surrogates.
9:27 pm: Ahh, CHANGE. This is the heart of it, now isn't it? Clinton talks about "bringing people together" -- sort of an Obama line. And she wants scrutiny of "our records." And then she brings it: "He could have a pretty good debate with himself." "I think that's relevant. What we're looking for is a president we can count on. . . . I have no problem with whatever scrutiny comes my way."
9:23 pm: The Richardson campaign points out that he is the only one calling for Musharaff to step aside. Fair point.
9:21 pm: Maybe, on second thought, this is Obama talking to his supporters. They don't want a play it safe, complacent frontrunner. They want him to feel strongly, and speak strongly. So that in itself makes for a different debate dynamic.
9:16 pm: Intriguing answer for Obama to go on the offensive first, by mentioning Iraq. As everyone paying attention knows, he's the only person on the stage who was against the war from the start. Not a classic frontrunner's move, but maybe it pays off.
9:14 pm: No real separation on this first subject so far. They'd all go into Pakistan -- a nuclear nation -- to take out al Qaeda. But Hillary Clinton is the first to connect it to her campaign message: "We have to be very conscious of all the consequences." She finds five consequences -- designed, it seems to show that she knows this stuff well. A tour de force of an answer. Experience begets change. That's the campaign message.
9:11 pm: If people are still having trouble watching online try http://www.wmur.com/politics/index.html
9:08 pm: I wonder who loses the most from being seated -- the John Edwards passion doesn't come across the same way from a swivel chair.
9:06 pm: This seems like ages ago when Obama was talking about going into Pakistan. In a sense, anything pre-Iowa was ages ago. He has to watch every single word he utters tonight, and he's doing it hoarsely -- he's used to talking, and doing so with volume, after this non-stop stretch of campaigning.
9:02 pm: This is cozy cozy cozy! Just four desks plus Charlie Gibson. No avoiding confrontation when they're in each others' personal space. This does make it look like, as Bill Richardson says, the Final Four.
9 pm: Now it's on to the Democrats........
8:55 pm: Some final thoughts: Perhaps its indicative of this scattered, chaotic Republican field that it's extremely difficult to pick a winner. Maybe Rudy had the strongest night, maybe Ron Paul for what it's worth, and McCain certainly got off the most zingers.
But I saw that as a pretty bad night for Mitt Romney. I think he was outflanked on immigration by McCain and Giuliani -- that's not easy to do. And you can tell that nobody on that stage likes him. He's a frontrunner here, so he can expect the heat, but so is John McCain, and yet everyone rushed to defend McCain and attack Romney. Why would Romney say he likes mandates? How could he have let Fred Thompson best him on a debate over healthcare? Just a few of the many questions he's going to have to sort out, against the backdrop of some McCain momentum in New Hampshire?
That's it for this debate, and it's on to the Democrats!
Read all about this and more in tomorrow's Note...
8:44 pm: If you are an American with any ounce of patriotism, you cannot watch that moment -- 10 candidates of all colors and backgrounds and genders and beliefs, together on stage, one of whom will almost certainly be the 44th president of the United States -- and not get at least a tiny little goosebump.
And I will admit to being enough of a civics dork to have gotten many of them. r
8:40 pm: Look, I work for ABC, so I can't be impartial. But I loved this debate -- the format really did click.
8:36 pm: Fred Thompson does get bonus points -- if not votes -- for intellectually honesty. "We're not going to be energy independent in a few years."
8:32 pm: ABC's Matt Stuart: "Anyone else think Barack Obama wishes Ron Paul wasn't speaking right now? Or at least pronouncing "Barack" correctly?"
8:31 pm: Huckabee had all sorts of caveats before he started praising Obama, but then he gets off his strongest line of the evening: "We better be careful as a party..." if we don't do something as a party to give something to be for. I really think that was the first time we had a flash of the Huckabee that's such a magnetic presence on the stump.
8:30 pm: ABC's Bret Hovell: "I think that's the second time Thompson has come to McCain's defense against Romney: We're talking about a Democratic primary here, he said, on the issue of change."
8:28 pm: Regarding Romney and his new change message, says ABC's Matt Stuart: "There's Romney's revamped stump in a nutshell. But will it work in New Hampshire…with only 4 days left?"
8:27 pm: McCain takes another unprovoked shot at Romney: "I agree, you are the candidate of change."
8:26 pm: Thompson: "Sen. Obama has adopted the position of every liberal interest group in this country, as best I can tell." Even if he was right, it makes me wonder -- can Republicans win this year by painting Democrats as liberals? To sounds Thompsonesque for a second -- will that dog hunt?
8:25 pm: Wonder if Sen. Cliton is liking or hating that the Republicans are being asked to take on Barack Obama. "The biggest difference I think . . . is this is a time where America wants change," says Mitt Romney. Any doubt now that he's trying to out-Obama Barack Obama?? Does he really think he could be the change agent in a debate against Obama?
8:22 pm: From ABC's Christine Byun: "Thompson and his Iowa "best friend", Rep. Steve King, have strict definitions on immigration and amnesty. King told me he wanted to come out to this debate - but since Thompson isn't playing here, they perhaps are saving him for South Carolina, where illegal immigration is a VERY hot topic."
8:18 pm: Mike Huckabee hasn't spoken a single word in this second segment of the campaign, has he?
8:16 pm: I'm glad Fred Thompson is speaking again. I literally think he was about to fall asleep on stage. He tends to do well early and fade as time goes on on these stages...
8:15 pm: And the gang-up on poor Mitt continues -- Rudy says Reagan would have ended up in a Romney negative ad.
8:14 pm: I'm sorry, but is Mike Huckabee still on the stage? At least New Hampshire residents are seeing their Big Two duke it out.
8:13 pm: McCain -- temper, temper: "When you change positions on issues time to time, you will get misquoted," he tells Romney.
8:12 pm: Romney's getting snippy! And McCain with a soundbite you'll see again: "You can spend your whole fortune on these attack ads, but it still won't be true."
8:09 pm: Rudy essentially said he's going to let 12 million illegal immigrants stay in the country. Closer to John McCain than Mitt Romney.
8:08 pm: And here's Romney's response. He calls McCain's plan "a form of amnesty." He sounds like the common-sense candidate when he delivers this response -- whatever he's said on the subject in the past, he's got this answer down pat. That's what a hundred million town-hall meetings will do for you.
8:07 pm: McCain on immigration: Yes, he still has the same plan. He can talk all he wants about the need to secure the borders first, but his plan is still one that no one else on this stage would support -- and most Republicans still disagree with him. If he wins the nomination, it's in spite of his views on immigration, not because of it. Romney is almost certain to attack him, but he wants the debate to stay off his lawn.
8:04 pm: The candidates are back on stage a bit early, everyone chatting amiably. But Romney is off in the wings still. A fitting image for the man they all love to hate.
8:01 pm: It's only a three-minute break, but all the candidates left the stage -- except for John McCain, who's chatting with people in the front row.
7:59 pm: As regular readers of my blog know, I'm not a fan of Fred Thompson's previous debate performances. But he came to play tonight.
7:52 pm: "I like mandates." -- Mitt Romney. He did not have to utter a phrase that way to convey his cogent thought. Fred Thompson is really eating his lunch now.
7:50 pm: So far, Ron Paul is having a very good night. He's center-stage, and centered around the action. (And ponder this: He could beat Fred Thompson and maybe even Rudy Giulianin in New Hampshire.) Thompson, though, is good when he breaks out the sarcasm.
7:49 pm: This is actually the best I've seen Romney in talking about his own healthcare plan. He has found a groove on an issue he's handled in stops and starts. Then he's back to the cheap seats by saying "we don't need Hillarycare." That is a term that no longer has meaning, and I think Mitt Romney knows it.
7:47 pm: Really, they're all dodging on health insurance. Look, there's just not a good Republican position that involves government getting more involved in health care. If there was one, they would have found it.
7:45 pm: Rudy is the first to throw out "socialized medicine" in regard to the Democrats' plans. It's just a dodge though, to avoid the question and score points. It does, however, work as a line.
7:43 pm: I like the format so far, and I think the candidates like it too. A little much Ron Paul on foreign policy early, but this has been meaty and interesting so far.
7:40 pm: Huckabee should not be talking about "changing policies." He can clarify about the difference between policies and positions, but that's a tough soundbite.
7:36 pm: ABC's Matt Stuart, who covers Romney, says that Romney never called for a timetable for withdrawal, but did envision troops moving to a "standby" role some time in 2008.
7:32 pm: This is a question written for McCain -- standing by your principles. That's why those in New Hampshire like and respect him. Interesting to see if Romney tries to take that image on tonight.
7:29 pm: Enough from Paul.
7:28 pm: From ABC's Bret Hovell, who covers McCain: "McCain has not spoken in 10 minutes. Is that good for him? Are they beating themselves up? He wants to be the one looking most presidential on the stage. But is there a point at which you can't look presidential if you don't talk?"
7:27 pm: Romney is a name-dropper! And this: "don't talk about my position." Huckabee: "Which one?" This is getting good...
7:26 pm: I do think Huckabee is holding his own: "I'm not running for President Bush's third term." He's running on his own terms. So far, it's working. So far. And he knows the complicated names Romney knows too. This bickering though doesn't make Mitt look too good. McCain: "Did you read mine?"
7:25 pm: ABC's Jan Simmonds, who covers Giuliani: "Rudy has got to love that this debate has started on what he feels is his strongest issue. For the last week he has pushing his plan to attack the War on Terror with little media pick-up due to the Caucus in Iowa. This theme allows himself to re-enter himself into the debate."
7:23 pm: Ron Paul is suddenly the center of the action. Hmmm... who wins here? And Mitt Romney likes to pronounce complicated names, we get it.
7:22 pm: Taking on Ron Paul -- it's a layup, but this is Rudy reaching way back to a moment that helped him in an early debate. Bigger audience tonight, but can he go back to that well?
7:21 pm: And Fred Thompson talking some serious substance too -- man, maybe I underestimated him. I think he does maybe sort of want to be president...
7:19 pm: Romney embraces fully: "We owe him a debt of gratitude," referring to President Bush. And this is a deeper foreign policy vision that we've heard from Romney so far -- he and Huckabee both lack foreign policy experience, but he's trying to show that he and Huckabee can't be lumped together.
7:16 pm: ABC's Christine Byun, who covers Thompson, adds this: "Thompson going after Huckabee on foreign policy - he started this line of attack in Iowa, prior to the caucus when the news of Bhutto's death rocked the trail."
7:15 pm: As Rudy and then McCain embrace the president's foreign policy, it occurs to me that Huckabee is occupying some of the anti-Bush real estate that does exist out there. Really not a terrible addition to his campaign.
7:13 pm: Fred Thompson stirs: "Maybe the governor's rethought his policies." "The bottom line is we are in a global war with radical Islam, declared war on us a long time ago." That's a line Rudy Giuliani or John McCain or Mitt Romney would have loved to use.
7:12 pm: Huckabee doesn't like to have to answer questions about where he is vis a vis the Bush foreign policy. Remember that Republicans are still behind the president. He's skating beyond the issue by saying he'll do what's in the best interest of the country -- who wouldn't? He is measured in his response though -- wonder if anyone's going to take him on over this. Being critical of Rumsfeld is savvy -- even Republicans don't like the guy at this point.
7:08 pm: Thanks, sleuths, for finding the link to live video: http://www.wmur.com/video/14986153/index.html
7:04 pm: Here they come onto the stage -- first thing I'm struck by is how manageable the field seems with just six as opposed to seven or eight candidates. Sorry, Duncan Hunter, but one of these six men will be the Republican nominee. And the fact that they're seated seems . . . civilized. And no lights or clocks on the first section of the debate. They're checking their mics while TV viewers watch Diane and George.
Fred Thompson doesn't like the format: "Who set this up so McCain is as tall as I am?" Good laughter from that line.
7:02 pm: Everyone likes to say their debates are different -- trust me guys, this one really will be. Should be mostly interaction between and among the candidates. Hopefully, it's lively, entertaining, and informative.
6:59 pm: Left coasters: I believe the debate will air on your affiliates later tonight (check your local listings, as they say). Each affiliate makes its own timing decisions, so don't blame me (I just work here).
6:53 pm: Charlie Gibson just told us he's a Redskins fan (who's disappointed in the score so far), and an audience member asked him about the Patriots (we are in New England). He was resolute: "It's like rooting for General Motors, or the Yankees." Big boos for Charlie. (Remember, New England.)
6:53 pm: I'm still coming up blank, guys, but if it's streaming anywhere online it's going to be here at 7 pm ET: http://www.wmur.com/politics/index.html
6:50 pm: Quick thought before we start -- huge, huge night for Mitt Romney -- he badly needs to bounce back in New Hampshire after his disappointing finish in Iowa. The WMUR/CNN poll confirms what many of us are sensing here in New Hampshire -- that John McCain is on the move. And two candidates could use a boost of energy -- Fred Thompson and Rudy Giuliani. Both of them would love a strong showing -- maybe third -- if they want their bids to continue. And one other point -- though Mike Huckabee won Iowa (and by rights should be labeled a frontrunner) I don't think he'll be in the center of the action this evening. The dynamics are such that he's not a big player in the next contest, here in N.H. So my guess is most of the fireworks involve Romney and McCain, the two frontrunners here.
6:42 pm: John -- no new ABC poll, but there is a new WMUR/CNN poll (WMUR is ABC's New Hampshire affiliate) out tonight. Details below, at posting I entered at 6:01 pm.
6:40 pm: The pre-game show just started here at Saint Anselm College. I'm in the back row, but this is a small house so the seat's not bad. Maybe 500 people in the room. Six desks lined up in an arc, with swivel chairs behind them. Charlie Gibson will seat back to the audience, facing the candidates. And if his vision comes through, the candidates will be responding more to each other than to him.
6:35 pm: For those looking for it on radio -- scan the dials. I believe many ABC Radio affiliates are broadcasting the debate.
6:25 pm: To clarify -- individual stations can put it online live, but ABC the network can't. I'm looking for a link for you guys that seems to work -- but the debate doesn't start for 35 more minutes.
6:19 pm: My apologies to those who are trying (and failing) to find a livestream of the debate online. Best I can offer is that my colleagues back in New York will be cutting clips of the debate and posting them on our site at abcnews.com/politics and facebook.com/politics during the debate. Unfortunately, we at the network can't make a live stream available until all our ABC affiliates (including those on the west coast) have aired both debates. We'll have longer clips up tomorrow too.
But I'm here all night for the highlights!!
6:16 pm ET: A footnote on the Kucinich story: Kucinich himself (we assume) has answered a question on the Facebook debate page. The Question: "Is a Presidential candidate's national "electability" a big factor in deciding your vote in the primaries?" Kucinich's answer: "It's not to me--but it is to ABC/Facebook, who excluded me from the important New Hampshire debate, because I wasn't "a top 4 candidate" yet in the polls. Did you know Clinton/Obama/Edwards refuse to support impeachment, gay marriage, and repeal of the Patriot Act & NAFTA? Or leave Iraq until 2013?"
6:01 pm ET: A flash of news to get us going! The latest WMUR/University of New Hampshire tracking poll has John McCain opening up a six-point lead over Mitt Romney, 33-27. In their last poll, taken Dec. 27-30, McCain and Romney were tied at 29.
The sample size is small, the margin of error large (five), but this is the first post-Iowa snapshot we have of the race, and it raises the stakes for Romney. The Romney campaign is furiously spinning the prospect of a second-place finish as a win, but as we note today he's spending more money than all of his rivals COMBINED in New Hampshire, just like he did in Iowa, where he only took the silver. The poll also has Rudy Giuliani in third at 14, Mike Huckabee fourth with 11, and Ron Paul in fifth with 9. (Fred Thompson is tied with with Duncan Hunger at 1 -- wow.)
Among the Democrats, it's Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama tied at 33. If you're with the Clinton campaign, this is a mixed message -- it is tight tight tight in the state she needs to regain momentum, but at least she hasn't cratered in the wake of Iowa. These numbers are roughly the same as they were in the last poll, which it at 34-30 Clinton over Obama. In the new numbers, John Edwards is running third at 20 percent -- if that holds, he's going to have trouble moving on from New Hampshire. Bill Richardson is in a distant fourth at 4 percent, just above Dennis Kucinich's 2 percent.
5:45 pm ET: High drama behind the scenes at ABC, barely an hour before the first debate. Dennis Kucinich filed for a temporary restraining order with a judge here in New Hampshire, claiming it was a violation of FCC rules to keep him off the debate stage. That prompted a wave of panic among the folks who have spent months planning tonight's live events. David Westin, the president of ABC News and a lawyer, personally worked the phones and got the judge to dismiss it. Elapsed time: about 15 minutes. Years off our collective lives: Maybe 15, as well.
Hi everyone, Rick Klein here from ABC's The Note. I'll be live-blogging during tonight's ABC News/Facebook Republican debate from inside the debate hall at St. Anselm College in Manchester, N.H., starting at 7 pm ET. (And I'll be back around 8:45 pm ET for the Democratic debate.)
Join me for the conversation -- while watching on ABC -- by weighing in in the comment area below. One quick note: I was involved in some of the preparations with moderator Charlie Gibson, and this is going to be a forum the likes of which we've never seen before. It's going to be incumbent on the candidates to drive the conversation -- and the stakes could hardly be higher, given the fast-approaching New Hampshire primary on Tuesday. The candidates will be seated next to each other on stage -- six Republicans, and four Democrats later. If it's like a living-room conversation, consider them two family feuds.
January 5, 2008 in Vote 2008: Democrats, Vote 2008: Republicans | Permalink | User Comments (566)
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/433071/24836406
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Live-Blogging From Debates By Rick Klein:
Is this debate going to be available to watch online for those of us without TVs?
Posted by: tim | Jan 5, 2008 5:14:58 PM
Ditto to that question. I killed my television 12 years ago. How do we navigate to the online stream, if there is one?
Posted by: Jive Dadson | Jan 5, 2008 5:33:46 PM
Would also like to know about getting it online...am living in Ireland where we don't get the abc network but would love to see the debates live.
Posted by: Louise | Jan 5, 2008 5:42:56 PM
Mr. Klein, can ABC set up a live stream of tonight's debates? I, like many others, would like to watch the debates online.
Thank you!
Posted by: Johns | Jan 5, 2008 5:55:04 PM
I hope the debates will be streamed on ABC.com (like the YouTube/CNN Debates).
Thanks!
Posted by: DW | Jan 5, 2008 6:11:43 PM
KITV - an ABC TV affiliate in Hawaii - states on its website:
"New Hampshire will be the stage tonight as the candidates debate, fresh off the Iowa caucuses. Watch the debate live online at 7PM Eastern right from our homepage."
http://www.kitv.com/index.html
But, alas, I cannot find the link to livestream.
Posted by: Brian | Jan 5, 2008 6:11:55 PM
I like to know about getting it on stream.I live in Germany where we don't get the abc network but would love to see the debates live.
Posted by: Nnabuuko Jones | Jan 5, 2008 6:13:41 PM
I am not near a tv Will there be a live feed Please
Anyone know of a live feed thank you
Posted by: robert | Jan 5, 2008 6:18:36 PM
Great move by ABC/Westin to not let Kucinich in. His opinions -- i.e. that aliens have landed here, presumably in his head -- disenfranchise real voters by taking away time from candidates who can actually govern. Let the debates begin.
Posted by: Handy Andy | Jan 5, 2008 6:22:31 PM
Im in London and id love to know how i can get the debates on the net as they arent being shown anywhere here... Help??
Posted by: martin | Jan 5, 2008 6:22:49 PM
Why am I not surprised the Republicans are going first?
Posted by: Patty | Jan 5, 2008 6:23:34 PM
Was also hoping there was a live stream to watch, we don't have cable or rabbit ears, what's online is all I've got. If not live, please post the debate footage online afterwards.
Posted by: Julie Halitzka | Jan 5, 2008 6:23:57 PM
Thanks, Rick.
But are you saying that the statement from the KITV website is a misprint or mistake?
Check the link; the station claims it will have a live feed of the debates.
Posted by: Brian | Jan 5, 2008 6:24:22 PM
Won't be near a computer. Anyone know if there is a radio broadcast in the New York area?
Posted by: chris | Jan 5, 2008 6:25:43 PM
This is ridiculous. How can you publicize this as the Great ABC-Facebook Get-Young-People-Involved partnership, when you are not even going to broadcast it online!
I am a college student, with no TV in my dorm room, and I was hoping to watch the debate online.
You people complain about how young people don't watch debates or don't care about debates, but you don't even make an effort to reach out to us.
Posted by: O.R. Siddiqui | Jan 5, 2008 6:25:53 PM
Thanks again.
It's pretty refreshing to have a network reporter so responsive in real time.
I've been checking for streaming ABC affiliates; so far no luck, except for KITV, and it's a wild guess as to whether or not a live link will appear on that site at 7PM EST.
Posted by: Brian | Jan 5, 2008 6:32:39 PM
There appears to be a lot of interest from overseas.
I sure hope Ron Paul gets a good turn out in New Hampshire.
I'd like to see someone try to get the inflation tax under control.
Posted by: Some Guy | Jan 5, 2008 6:32:49 PM
This needs an online feed...
Posted by: JJCarbon | Jan 5, 2008 6:35:03 PM
I'm in New York too.
WPVI radio in Philadelphia - 87.7 FM - simulcasts the ABC TV station there, but I've found within New York reception.
Posted by: Brian | Jan 5, 2008 6:36:20 PM
I hope the candidates grill Romney on his flip-flopping. So far he is just someone with zero convictions who says anything just to get elected. His record is pitiful.
Posted by: JJCarbon | Jan 5, 2008 6:39:24 PM
Thanks, Brian. I might get it; am in western NJ. Surprised that WNYC is not picking it up, at least on their AM.
Posted by: chris | Jan 5, 2008 6:41:36 PM
Mr. Klein,
Isn't there a ABC NH poll that is supposed to be released tonight?
Posted by: John | Jan 5, 2008 6:41:58 PM
Thanks as well Rick Klein for the radio affiliate note. Hadn't seen any notice that the ABC radio network would simulcast. Appreciate your taking the time to respond.
Posted by: chris | Jan 5, 2008 6:45:40 PM
Thanks Mr. Klein!
Posted by: John | Jan 5, 2008 6:45:58 PM
Thanks Rick for posting updates; just to politely resonate what's already known: I too depend on online communities for most news (have wifi vs tv) and heartily await an online feed to watch live debate coverage. Thanks for sleuthing.
Posted by: Jill Foster | Jan 5, 2008 6:49:52 PM
No live stream? This is the 21st century right? Now to get this radio machine to work.
Posted by: Ken Mitchell | Jan 5, 2008 6:53:07 PM
My motto used to be: "A day without TV is like a day without sunshine."
And now I must suffer without sunshine. It's not as bad as, e.g., the suffering in Darfur, but still.
Posted by: Brian | Jan 5, 2008 6:53:17 PM
ABC has made a horrible decision in excluding Dennis Kucinich, from the Abc Facebook debate, He's one of five mainstream democratic candidates still in the race, not to mention he outranks Bill Richardson in both the Facebook and Abc polls listed on the Facebook/politics page. I hope Kucinich's appeal with the FCC comes back to bite Abc in the rear. Kucinich supporters are planning to protest outside the debate.
Posted by: Wayne Petitt | Jan 5, 2008 6:56:07 PM
It's not being televised here on the left coast (SF bay area). I'm disappointed in ABC.
Posted by: Tim | Jan 5, 2008 6:56:10 PM
I threw out my TV a year ago. And was shocked to discover that the debates were hardly available online anywhere. In this day of Youtube yada yada, t's not just ridiculous, it is RIDONKULOUS...
Posted by: Ridonkulous | Jan 5, 2008 7:02:09 PM
Thanks so much Rick for your efforts in finding a live stream...am hugely impressed! Looks like your suggested link will work.
Posted by: Louise | Jan 5, 2008 7:02:16 PM
I am in NYC- where is the radio or live stream. Boyfriend is watching football.
Posted by: heather | Jan 5, 2008 7:05:10 PM
I agree with Brian --except it will be broadcast 3 hours late. Would you watch a football game broadcast 3 hours late??
Why not show it on KGO DT-2 live??
Posted by: Lyle Bacon | Jan 5, 2008 7:05:42 PM
Hurray interwebs! Link functional
Posted by: Ken Mitchell | Jan 5, 2008 7:09:31 PM
Question for Obama: My friend told me that when you were elected to the Senate, you had stated a preference to be sworn in using the Koran rather than the Bible. Will you still have that preference if elected to be President of the U.S.?
Posted by: Judy | Jan 5, 2008 7:10:51 PM
After 8 years of Bush at the controls does either Obama or Hillery feel like the co-pilot of a plane in a suicide dive that was handed the controls 3000 feet from the ground.
Posted by: john | Jan 5, 2008 7:11:21 PM
I am one of the lucky ones that has a health insurance policy, but I still cannot afford any medical treatment because health costs are so high that I cannot affort the out of pocket amount that I must meet.
Posted by: Rex Undewood | Jan 5, 2008 7:11:41 PM
Just a thought: Why in the world would you not have a tv? I have never understood that.
Posted by: Slamminsammy | Jan 5, 2008 7:11:45 PM
Thanks Michal and James!
And thank you Mr. Klein!
Posted by: O.R. Siddiqui | Jan 5, 2008 7:12:12 PM
I would like the question put to them all: Who do you most trust to provide best health care, the Government or the Insurance Co?
Posted by: Beverly C Bennett | Jan 5, 2008 7:14:48 PM
"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross."
Hucksterbee the Christian Council on Foreign Relations Socialist
Posted by: Kent Anthony | Jan 5, 2008 7:15:26 PM
Mike Huckabee... the right choice for America!
Posted by: ezekiel | Jan 5, 2008 7:15:28 PM
In the 1950s, Nikta Kruschev of the old Societ Uniion predicted: "Your grandchildren will live under socialism."
As President, would you work to make his prediction come true or prevent it?
Posted by: Arthur Melanson | Jan 5, 2008 7:17:24 PM
To Judy:
Senator Obama was NOT sworn in on the Koran..he is now, and always has been, Christian. It is not helpful to spread incorrect information about ANY candidate.
Posted by: suzanne f | Jan 5, 2008 7:17:53 PM
One more Bush or Clinton type (Council on Foreign Relations - One World Monopolist) and the Republic is completely and undeniably toast.
Posted by: Kent Anthony | Jan 5, 2008 7:18:05 PM
I like the format. More fair and balance and directed towards the issues
Posted by: Barry E. Magee | Jan 5, 2008 7:18:31 PM
Rudy pick everything that was wrong with the Bush adminstration......
Posted by: John D | Jan 5, 2008 7:19:03 PM
Mike Huckabe - the One World Monopolist phony Socialist Christian choice for Evangelical dupes who know little about anything beyond their Bible...assuming they even know their Bible.
Posted by: Kent Anthony | Jan 5, 2008 7:20:06 PM
Rommney thinks he is going to "move" the muslims in their line of thought/way of thinking....he's nuts!
Posted by: Barry E. Magee | Jan 5, 2008 7:22:04 PM
RON PAUL is RIGHT. They attack us because we nose around on their turf. They don't attack us because we are a free people. Norway is FREE. I can't recall the last time Norway was attacked. Can you?
Posted by: Handy Andy | Jan 5, 2008 7:22:13 PM
What will you do about gas and home heating oil prices. No American should have to choose between medicines and heat.
Posted by: Barbara | Jan 5, 2008 7:22:20 PM
CFRed Thompson, please do tell us about how you buried Chinagate when it was in your Senate Committee?
Another CFR fraud...
Posted by: Kent Anthony | Jan 5, 2008 7:22:31 PM
Go Obama! Your a winner. You can do it. When the Debate. Get a piece of cake.
Posted by: Veronica Hillsman | Jan 5, 2008 7:22:38 PM
Hilarious! Romney describing "moderate governments such as Pakistan".
Musharraf describes A.Q. Khan a national hero. Musharraf won't let the FBI question him about what nuclear secrets he gave to Iran.
A.Q. Khan is largest proliferator of WMD nuke technology to rogue states ever. He lives in splendor and Musharraf calls him a national hero.
What makes that moderate?
Who are you kidding?
Matt
Posted by: Matt | Jan 5, 2008 7:23:53 PM
Barbara, oil was what? $20/brl before Iraq? It's what? $100/brl now?
Anyone here want their son or daughter dying for the Middle Eastern Union see European Union see North American Union.
Posted by: Kent Anthony | Jan 5, 2008 7:24:33 PM
Osama Obama, another Council on Foreign Relations dupe. No thanks.
Posted by: Kent Anthony | Jan 5, 2008 7:25:37 PM
amazing
thanx
Posted by: Atil | Jan 5, 2008 7:25:37 PM
thats it attack each other..... may way for Clinton
Posted by: John D | Jan 5, 2008 7:25:54 PM
Matt, no joke. We haven't met a Middle East Dick Tater that we haven't supported.
Posted by: Kent Anthony | Jan 5, 2008 7:26:40 PM
Looks like this is going to drag down between a sword fight between Chuck the Huck and Hit and Mitt.
Posted by: Barry E. Magee | Jan 5, 2008 7:26:53 PM
Mitt Willard RINO Romne: is there one core position you haven't flipped on within 5 years of running for President of the united States of America??????
Posted by: Kent Anthony | Jan 5, 2008 7:29:04 PM
I think Giuliani is wrong. He calls the Munich massacre and the killing of Klinghofer as Islamic terrorists.
They were terrorists of course. But they were supporters of Yassir Arafat, who clearly is not your classic Islamic terrorist.
Matt
Posted by: Matt | Jan 5, 2008 7:32:32 PM
Ah, A noun, a verb and 9-11 Geez Rudi and et al, what forward thinking!
Posted by: Ed K | Jan 5, 2008 7:32:38 PM
My forebears came to America in 1756. They were revolutionaries who chose to define a nation in terms of who we could become and not who we have been. The recent politics of divisiveness has been deeply disturbing to me. Republican or Democrat alike, my question and concern for the candidates is what positive steps they will take to help us take our nation back, and then to take it forward as a people with a common purpose and a shared vision.
Posted by: Ross Burke | Jan 5, 2008 7:33:33 PM
Well, as usual we get to miss another debate. The local ABC affiliate has decided that "Classic Skiing" is more important than a debate by presidential candidates.
Posted by: Roger M | Jan 5, 2008 7:34:35 PM
Governor Hucksterbee: "Why would you choose Richard Haas, PRESIDENT of the GloBAAList Council on Foreign Relations, as your Chief Foreign Policy Advisor?"
+++
Time Magazine recently reported that Mike Huckabee, former Arkansas Governor and current Republican Presidential Candidate, has been widening his circle of advisers when it comes to foreign policy. This may come as a relief to some who have seen his famous congratulatory words to Canada on the preservation of their National Igloo. Who has Huckabee turned to for wisdom regarding America’s position on the world stage?
Meet Richard Haas. You probably have not heard of him, but he is very influential in the world of international politics. With Richard Haas’ guiding, Mr. Huckabee has written a scathing attack of President George Bush’s “bunker mentality”. This article will run in Foreign Affairs, a magazine published by the Council on Foreign Relations. Richard Haas is the President of the CFR.
To understand what sort of advice Mike Huckabee is receiving from Richard Haas, one needs only to read his published papers. One such article is entitled “Rethinking Sovereignty.” Here are some excerpts.
“Our notion of sovereignty must therefore be conditional, even contractual, rather than absolute.“
“For 350 years, sovereignty – the notion that states are the central actors on the world stage and that governments are essentially free to do what they want within their own territory but not within the territory of other states – has provided the organizing principle of international relations. The time has come to rethink this notion. “
“Moreover, states must be prepared to cede some sovereignty to world bodies if the international system is to function. “
“Globalization thus implies that sovereignty is not only becoming weaker in reality, but that it needs to become weaker. States would be wise to weaken sovereignty in order to protect themselves, because they cannot insulate themselves from what goes on elsewhere. “
In a cursory investigation of Mr. Haas’ work, one can surmise he is a globalist with no regard for national sovereignty as we would define it. It is troubling to think that Mr. Huckabee does not check the views of his advisers. It is more troubling to think that he did investigate– and agrees.
Posted by: Kent Anthony | Jan 5, 2008 7:34:54 PM
Rudy is about to take a hit from Rommney on illegal immigration.
Posted by: Barry E. Magee | Jan 5, 2008 7:37:45 PM
We've spent trillions of dollars on a post cold war mentality of feeding those war dogs and the large corporations that are so exasperated that the world has a chance to come together on a few issues (global warming for instance), and those who deplore isolationism in protecting jobs yet won't share in the responsibilities as a world partnership. Yea.
Posted by: Ed K | Jan 5, 2008 7:37:56 PM
Ruby: "Ronald Reagan...blah blah blah"
Posted by: Kent Anthony | Jan 5, 2008 7:38:00 PM
You say, "Unfortunately, we at the network can't make a live stream available until all our ABC affiliates (including those on the west coast) have aired both debates."
Unfortunately, we don't get to see the debates in the Reno, NV area. KOLO 8 has decided that a Classic Skiing program is more important.
Posted by: Roger M | Jan 5, 2008 7:38:02 PM
Democrat observation: Only one truth teller in the entire Republican field on the cause for Islamic terrorism - Ron Paul. The rest are engaging in a George Bush lovefest
Posted by: Joetex | Jan 5, 2008 7:38:10 PM
Principles? Rudy is giving a resume of 9/11. Mitt is talking about his great family. John at least makes sense about his guiding principles and is consistent. But John, if you believe "we are all created equal," I hope you can keep those principles.
Posted by: Jeff | Jan 5, 2008 7:38:31 PM
Both McCain and Romney responded well. McCain is the Uncle sam of the United States. romney suggests Mom's stay home with the kids....I agree. when social security covers a stay at home Mom, we will have more of them.
Posted by: JudyTJ | Jan 5, 2008 7:38:51 PM
Love this format so far as long as they don't talk over each other.
Posted by: Jolene | Jan 5, 2008 7:38:57 PM
Are they all going to read the constitution? Then let's not CHANGE this great document they revere. What do they think about an ammendment on marriage?



