Political Radar: Live Blogging from Ohio's Democratic Debate

Subscribe to this blog's feed

« The Blame Game: FEC Nomination Fight Continues | Main | Bill Clinton: Space Program Best in Hillary's Hands »

Live Blogging from Ohio's Democratic Debate

February 26, 2008 6:50 PM

10:48 pm ET: Again, gang -- great comments and discussion tonight. Thanks for participating -- and if this is the last debate of the season, thanks for clicking your way through all of them.

10:42 pm ET: That was an exhausting 90 minutes -- just to watch. Probably as close to a draw as you can imagine -- really, two very talented politicians and debaters fighting it out extremely closely.

On one level -- no clear winner is good news for Obama, the frontrunner, who avoided any significant missteps. But there are plenty of scattered moments for the Clinton campaign to be proud of (though that bizarre reference to the SNL skit, to me, was a low point). All told, she made it substantive, kept the focus on Obama's record (or lack thereof).

They did not break much new policy ground this evening. But for a Clinton campaign that's looking to fight out the final week before Ohio and Texas, maybe, just maybe, there's some pieces here that she can work with. Obama entered and leaves Cleveland State as the frontrunner. But there's a big week left...

Thanks, all, for the fantastic comments and feedback. Check back tomorrow, as always, for a full wrap in The Note.

10:35 pm ET: "I still intend to do everything I can to win, but it has been an honor," Clinton says. "Either one of us will make history. The question that I have been posing is, who can actually change the country." She doesn't say what Sen. Obama has to prove, just puts herself out there as better.

10:31 pm ET: Obama: "She would be worthy as the nominee." That puts her in a tough spot on the same question...

10:31 pm ET: This time it's Obama extending the olive branch! Interesting. "I'm very proud to have been campaigning with her." He's winning -- so this doesn't sound like a valedictory, like her close did last week. But Obama decided to include this, must have been deliberate. How does it play?

10:28 pm ET: Clinton wants to take back her Iraq vote -- no surprise there. I haven't heard Obama say he should have stepped up in the Schiavo matter before. "That's an example of inaction, and sometimes that can be as costly as action," he says.

10:22 pm ET: Meaty foreign policy for Clinton to strut her stuff with. (But she needs some help in pronouncing that name -- and Russert was willing to pitch in, despite the pop-quiz nature of his query.)

10:21 pm ET: This rather silly National Journal ranking is with us to stay, I'm afraid.

10:19 pm ET: From ABC's Sunlen Miller: "Words matter…even in this debate. Obama decided to reject and denounce Farrakhan.

According to dictionary.com

Reject = " to refuse to have, take, recognize…"
Denounce = "to condemn or censure openly or publicly"

10:13 pm ET: Clinton: "I would not be associated with people who said such inflammatory or untrue charges. . . . I was willing to take that stand. . . . I thought it was more important to stand on principle." That's one heck of a suggestion to let linger out there, isn't it? Obama: "I would reject and denounce."

10:12 pm ET: I don't think there were as many questions about the sources of Sen. Kerry's fortune as there are about Sen. Clinton's.

10:10 pm ET: Is Obama good for the Jews? I think he handled this exchange well -- didn't take the Russert bait on Farrakhan, but stayed measured and calm. Sounded reasonable, comforting.

10:06 pm ET: Yes, the point is that loan though - where did that money come from, Sen. Clinton? Why let general election voters see your tax returns but not primary voters? "Word toward releasing" your tax returns? Why not just get your accountant to run off some -- gulp -- Xeroxes?

10:05 pm ET: ABC's Sunlen Miller, who covers Obama, contributes: "When speaking about inspiring the American people Obama says there is "nothing romantic or silly about that" - Obama is addressing the criticism that his supporters are delusional - he's been pushing back against this for a couple days now."

10:04 pm ET: Obama would have so much more of a high ground if he'd just say he'd commit to his word on public financing. But Clinton has a hard time exploiting this weakness because that's not a commitment she's prepared to make.

9:58 pm ET: Clinton brings more attention to Obama's legislative record -- it's late for this sort of thing, but every little bit helps. Some good Obama pushback though -- he's so much better as a debater than he was six or eight months ago.

9:56 pm ET: "I'm not interested in talk. I'm not interested in speeches," Obama said. I'm confused -- I thought words matter, Sen. Obama?

9:55 pm ET: ABC's Tahman Bradley (noticing media bias?): It seems like Clinton is sitting lower than Obama and that isn't helping her.

9:54 pm ET: Obama gives Clinton "points for delivery." Clever.

9:53 pm ET: From ABC's Sunlen Miller: "Here in Cleveland were watching a campaign ad during the first commercial break from former presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich who's now in a new battle: to hold on to his seat in Congress!"

9:48 pm ET: Somehow, Brian Williams managed to cut off Hillary Clinton to get to the break. A tense evening so far -- no clear winner, as far as I'm concerned. Two pros at the top of their games.

9:46 pm ET: Clinton accuses Obama of holding "not one substantive hearing" on NATO oversight. A new line of attack, as far as I now.

9:44 pm ET: A big break from last week -- nobody's rushing to say they agree with each other this evening.

9:43 pm ET: I'd score the last chunk of time for Obama -- he's more than holding his own on foreign policy. But the emphasis on substance -- not that it's bad for Obama (he's got this stuff down pat, it seems), but this is the kind of debate Clinton wanted going in. If she can go 90 minutes without having to say "superdelegate," she'll be happy.

9:40 pm ET: And the discussion of foreign policy takes Sen. Obama to friendly territory -- talking about Iraq. (Another measure of how far this campaign has traveled -- remember when that was THE issue?)

9:36 pm ET: Once again, Clinton will not back up what she's saying about Obama's qualifications to be commander in chief. She's ducking by turning to his Senate record. Go back and read that speech she gave yesterday -- she was very strong in suggesting that a President Obama is a risk on foreign policy. Maybe she doesn't feel comfortable saying it to his face?

"I will have a much better case to make" - that's as close as she'll get to it.

9:35 pm ET: "Sen. Clinton, I think, equates experience with longevity in Washington," says Obama. He's used variations on that line before, and it's an effective one because it wraps so many of his campaign rationales into one.

Notice that Obama is the first to try to turn the argument to Sen. McCain -- their battle has already begun, if tentatively, and Obama welcomes it.

9:32 pm ET: An intriguing way into the jobs question, looking at Clinton's Senate record, and promises not fully kept. She blames it on the Bush administration -- and here, you'll notice, she's happy for some reflected glow from the Clinton administration.

9:26 pm ET: Russert read Clinton the record, chapter and verse, on NAFTA. This is difficult for her, with anyone who would remember Bill Clinton with those "NAFTA We Hafta" hats on.

9:21 pm ET: That silly distraction of an SNL reference aside -- it does seem like Clinton has settled on an effective tone this evening. She's mixing substance with style, attacking without seeming overtly negative, sounding like she's playing defense when she's really playing offense.

9:19 pm ET: Clinton: "Maybe we should ask Barack if he's comfortable." Quick reference to that SNL skit. But sorry, but you'll have to explain this one -- why is it media bias, senator, for you to get the first question?

9:17 pm ET: I score the first tussle of the night for Senator Clinton -- but did she need to force herself to have the last word on the subject?

9:14 pm ET: Bottom line on these healthcare mailings, as my colleague Jake Tapper points out, is that they're both misleading.

But clearly Sen. Clinton is glad to be talking substance now -- they do have real differences on healthcare plans, and they've now spent the better part of the first 15 minutes playing that out.

9:10 pm ET: You get the feeling that they could recite each others' lines, essentially verbatim, on healthcare by now?

9:08 pm ET: Sen. Obama seems very subdued so far. No signs of anger -- that kind of smooth response should make the lines of attack difficult to pursue. "Sen. Clinton has constantly sent out negative attacks about us. . . . We haven't whined about it."

9:05 pm ET: I like starting out with the many voices/faces of Hillary Clinton. "But we have differences," she says. She's making it a debate about tactics as much as it is about issues early on. This has been something the campaign has been focusing on -- but will this discussion over tactics really matter? Seems like a Kindergarten style, he started it, no she started it, fight. But Obama should watch that smirk -- caught in the cutaway shot.

8:43 pm ET: Thinking about how this is possibly the last debate -- it seems like so long ago that Sen. Clinton was untouchable on stage, the one being targeted but happy to smile and laugh above it all. That speaks to how the stakes change depending on the position in the campaign -- back then, Clinton could "win" just by emerging unscathed. No longer.

8:35 pm ET: Obama is picking up support among the superdelegates -- Kevin, add to your list Rep. Stephanie Herseth, D-S.D. Clinton still has an edge among the supers, but it's narrowing, even as Obama's advantage among pledged delegates grows wider. That will make the Clinton argument very difficult to make -- unless she can show some real momentum, starting with a pair of victories on Tuesday.

Re Richardson -- I can't get inside his head, though I thought it was telling that he said he didn't feel bound to support Clinton just because New Mexico voted for Clinton, since the margin in his home state was so tight.

8:27 pm ET: Responding to questions below -- the debate is televised on MSNBC -- they control all usage rights, on TV and online.

8:18 pm ET: Any thoughts on how much ANY debate can matter at this point? It is No. 20 -- though you could argue that none have had stakes this big. But the expecations are so high going in for Sen. Clinton -- another reason it's tough to be trailing.

8:11 pm ET: I'm wondering how this theme the Clinton campaign has been rather successfully pushing -- that the media has been going soft on Obama -- plays into tonight's questioning. I've got to think that MSNBC goes out of its way to ask some tough ones of Obama, maybe a little bit tougher, in light of that SNL skit.

6:48 pm ET: Just to underscore the stakes -- another national poll out tonight has Obama up over Clinton. It's 48-42 in the Bloomberg/LA Times survey -- and McCain is ahead of both of them in a head-to-head matchup. Intriguing, no? Not surprisingly, McCain has a huge edge on issues involving national security and terrorism.

6:31 pm ET: Building on that point I made about them having a full week, the Clinton campaign just put out a schedule showing the theme of each of the remaining days before March 4. The message: This is not a campaign in panic mode. Two days on the economy, one on child poverty, one on veterans, than two big days in Texas and one in Ohio. Per the memo, from strategist Mark Penn and spokesman Phil Singer: "This schedule reinforces our larger message: Hillary Clinton is in the solutions business."

5:57 pm ET: My predictions are almost always off when it comes to the tone of the debate. But I'd be surprised if we saw the "kitchen sink" thrown out on stage. First, that's one way to guarantee negative news coverage -- words like "flailing" and "desperate" get thrown around if one candidate takes an overtly and entirely negative tone. Second, the Clinton campaign is very aware of the fact that it has a week to make its case. That's not a lot of time, but it's not two days, either -- so the "kitchen sink" can be unloaded over a few days, at least.

In case you were wondering, I did not make it to C-town. I finally gave up after four hours of smelling stale Subway sandwiches at Baltimore-Washington International Airport. So I'm watching on TV, from home, this evening.

-----------

Rick Klein here from ABC's The Note. I'll be live-blogging during Tuesday night's debate in Cleveland -- alas, not from Cleveland as the weather would not cooperate -- starting at 9 pm ET. It's the last debate scheduled -- and if next Tuesday doesn't go Hillary Clinton's way, it could very well be the last debate of the primary season.

One way to watch the debate: How much new ground will be covered? The more new material, the better for Sen. Clinton, in all likelihood. She's more comfortable on matters of substance, for starters, and Barack Obama has a lighter record and more areas to be tripped up.

But mostly, she can't allow this debate to become a long eulogy for her candidacy -- and if the tone of the questions becomes, "How can you go on, given your setbacks?", this will be a wash of an evening for Clinton. The Clinton campaign is hoping this focuses intensely on the economy -- an area where Clinton can perform at the top of her game.

February 26, 2008 in Clinton, Hillary, Obama, Barack, Vote 2008: Democrats | Permalink | User Comments (271)

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/433071/26554906

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Live Blogging from Ohio's Democratic Debate:

User Comments

Hey Rick - I know you don't like to predict, but do you think the tone of this debate will get more heated? Is it "kitchen sink" time? There's been a lot thrown around the last few days, does any of it keep going; anything with traction? "Shame on you", "celestial choirs" "instruction manuals"

Posted by: Kevin | Feb 26, 2008 5:24:09 PM

I am actually looking forward to this debate. Have a feeling that Hillary is going to lose it (become completely unravelled)here. She just seems unable to find her center. She may have to channel those celestial choirs.

Will be checking in later with you Rick.

Posted by: Maverick | Feb 26, 2008 5:30:41 PM

Am I a bad person to hope that we get to see her head spin around? Maybe screaming in tongues?

Then Obama just sitting there, writing notes.

Like a Coen Brothers version of a democratic debate...

Posted by: BardemsBowlcut | Feb 26, 2008 5:33:16 PM

When it's only two candidates on stage, histrionics never play well. Look for the jabs to be subtle and cloaked in humor or sarcasm. I would expect more talking over each other and the moderators than the last debate, and a reluctance to stay on topic. Clinton needs to land at least a few blows, but there's not a lot left in the arsenal that haven't already been used and deflected.

Posted by: Kevin | Feb 26, 2008 5:38:57 PM

Good bye, Hillary. Enjoy the Senate!
Perhaps you'll have lots of time to watch "the skies open" or to hear the "celestial choirs sign."
Unless, of course, you need to locate Bill. . . . Enjoy!

Posted by: patrick | Feb 26, 2008 5:41:21 PM

I hope one of the questions is about Mr. Obama's voting record of "present" on so many important pieces of legislation. Seems more like a man who wants to play it safe, then someone who wants to fix what is broken about Washington. That takes someone bold.

Posted by: OhioNative | Feb 26, 2008 5:46:44 PM

Perhaps we should focus on how Obama has said in Cleveland "If we are honest with ourselves we have to admit that some of those jobs are not coming back" well I do not agree. and my HOPE will be with a candidate who says they are not giving up on any jobs, and that they will come back with the right choice of candidate. It sounds more like "admit we can't, I'm giving up" than "Yes we Can"

Posted by: GM | Feb 26, 2008 5:50:13 PM

Explan something to me, why the HELL is
everyone APOLOGISING for saying HUSSEIN,
that is HIS name,HUSSEIN OBAMA.
His MUSLIM father gave him that name,am
I right or wrong?Louis Farrakhan the
great MUSLIM leader does't think its
bad.So why APOLOGIZE ?

Posted by: baccarattwo | Feb 26, 2008 5:54:49 PM

while the country is sinking in all aspect Obama messages need to stay in Disney Land Parks.Obama has a unreal message

Posted by: johnny s | Feb 26, 2008 5:56:01 PM

I hope Hillary does well in the debate and in Ohio and Texas. Too bad the Media gave Obama a free ride.
When the General Election comes we will lose to the Republicans once again, because the Republican Attack Machine is going to leave serious doubts in people's minds.
Too bad. Since LBJ the only 2 term Democratic President for the the last 50 years is going to be William Jefferson Clinton.

Posted by: Gabriel | Feb 26, 2008 6:02:07 PM

This is true. Times have changed and technolgoy has changed. So some of the traditional (manufacturing) jobs will not be back. Case in point, most of the welding jobs that used be done by workers on an automobile assembly plant are no longer there as these are being done by robots these days.

We need to retrain and retool the workers. We have to come to grips with this reality to solve some the employment issues. Also, a lot of the jobs that are being created require a level of education that was not required previously

Posted by: Rama | Feb 26, 2008 6:09:16 PM

=="If we are honest with ourselves we have to admit that some of those jobs are not coming back" well I do not agree. and my HOPE will be with a candidate who says they are not giving up on any jobs, and that they will come back with the right choice of candidate. It sounds more like "admit we can't, I'm giving up" than "Yes we Can" ==

Regarding the Posting by GM

Posted by: rama | Feb 26, 2008 6:11:56 PM

Atta boy (girl?) rama
Somebody is paying attention. we need the jobs to return. Do we need someone who is trying to convince us that we should admit that the jobs are not returning. Hillary are you giving up on "those jobs"?

Posted by: GM | Feb 26, 2008 6:15:54 PM

NObama: What does his left hand have to do with anything? Don't you know that Bill Clinton is left-handed?

Posted by: GObama | Feb 26, 2008 6:18:37 PM

I'll 3rd or 4th the following comment and add to it.
Good bye, Hillary. Enjoy the Senate!
Perhaps you'll have lots of time to watch "the skies open" or to hear the "celestial choirs sing."
Hillary has shown her true colors lately...a witch on steriods!! Running around making immature comments and acting like a child that has just been spanked. Can you imagine her as a President and something like 9/11 happening? Let's see, panic, no, cry...maybe, yell and scream, perhaps, oh wait I know "shame on you". Boy that'll get'em, and rally the America!! people! Bye Bye Hillary :-)

Posted by: John | Feb 26, 2008 6:20:41 PM

Can we talk about something that matters? There are too many people ranting about meaningless dribble. Does anyone care that Mr. Obama has said "If we are honest with ourselves, we have to admit that some of these jobs are not coming back" What does this mean? Can we focus on how we are going to have the jobs come back. If we admit that they are not coming back what the hel* are we going to do? Sit around and watch Obama's speeches? Maybe we can all bring ourselves together and sing Kumbaya.

Posted by: GM | Feb 26, 2008 6:33:05 PM

if there hope somebody some where has a hope we all know am shure hillray will loose this depate and barak obama will gain alot hopefully he wiil win so she cant stop him obama go on

Posted by: hakiimy | Feb 26, 2008 6:35:46 PM

The apologies regarding the use (misuse) of Senator Obama's middle name do not have to do with simply citing his full name. They have to do with the attitude and implications intended by the person/group citing it. Same as those snarky "slips" of Barack Osama.

And, just as an fyi, the traditional dress thing is not a problem for those of us who look at it, seeing just that. It is a problem for those who circulate it with the intent to portray Senator Obama as a muslim who does not pledge to the flag, etc., etc.

The Clinton Campaign would have no reason to be passing their opponents picture to right wing media (if they did) other than to fuel those racist fires.

I guess I join the "hoping her head spins" crowd, but I'm thinking she's way too controlled and professional for that. Interesting implications about her reaction on the phone to Senator Dowd, though -- "More than just disappointment"!!!

Posted by: Jackt51 | Feb 26, 2008 6:37:58 PM

Do you think anyone will ever address the issue of abuse in the welfare system. Can you get this question into the debate tonight. I am tired of paying for kids that are not mine. I don't have any! When is america going to take charge of this abuse. There are millions of dollars right there if they find a solution to this keep having kids payroll!

Posted by: MELISSA | Feb 26, 2008 6:42:08 PM

Well Obama will be next what a shame Do you really think with three supreme judges maybe ready to retire the republicans won't fall in line and vote thier party they always do. Thats to bad the party is split.

Posted by: Bishop | Feb 26, 2008 6:44:41 PM

MSNBC promises tough questions tonight. Sure. Obama will get the soft floater pitch and Tim will be waiting for Hillary. I wouldn’t count Hillary out just yet. Is it possible that we Democrats will elect a George Bush clone, someone who knows very little and depends on “advisors” to assist him? His statement about bombing Pakistan in a debate caused a major uproar in Pakistan. I think that’s not the kind of foreign policy or lack of negotiations with foreign countries I’d like to see. You know, yikes. I forgot they were listening to the debates. Is he who we want sitting there with his finger on the button…? He, who admits to “bone head” mistakes, a lack of organization and the inability to find things? Can we all just come together and love one another become a foreign policy, really? Hmm. I think we did that in the 60’s. I’d like a smart president for a real change. But men will decide this election, again, so...

Posted by: AmazonTraveler | Feb 26, 2008 6:53:19 PM

watch the brave MEN take out the female it is so wrong!!

Posted by: Bishop | Feb 26, 2008 6:56:10 PM

I wish we could see and hear these debates. I'm sure you're a wonderful reporter but, there's nothing like first hand knowledge, taking in body language, etc. ! Any chance this will be video taped in it's entirity?

Posted by: soose | Feb 26, 2008 6:57:55 PM

In reality, Hillary Clinton has won every debate so far ... but unfortunately most of the Dems don't want to be told that we have "work" to do ... they want to sing ... "hold on I'm coming" ... in celebration of their savior, Obama! sick.

Posted by: Jackson | Feb 26, 2008 7:00:36 PM

As I recall some of those same polls had Obama up by double digits in New Hampshire. The polls are irrelevant. America needs to wake up--already been asleep at the wheel for seven years.

Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | Feb 26, 2008 7:05:49 PM

Hil ary!!!!!!!!

H I S T O R Y!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Rigel | Feb 26, 2008 7:16:31 PM

Some of you people dont even know what is going on in this election and have the nerve to post here. Like: hillary-is-president says: "Hillary Clinton already has won the debate..How many more debates does she have to do? Why is obama continually trying to prove himself? Could it be that he lacks experience substance ?" Are you a moron? Hillary is the one who demanded and did not get Debate after debate after debate. She wanted one a week nd Obama had to agree to two! This is just one example of the smearing lies being spread and belived by some people. Please, unless you know what you are talking about, let this forum be for serious discussion. This election is important and just typing to see yourself in print is wasteful and stupid!
Thank you!

Posted by: krenz | Feb 26, 2008 7:18:27 PM

Geaux Hillary!

Posted by: Bonny | Feb 26, 2008 7:27:12 PM

This is a bad situation! We as a country are making a big mistake. We are letting our frustraions allow us to get behind someone that has no real reason to be even close to becoming our president. I am not an Obama hater but a realist. Im 40 years old and my parents always educated me on the election process and politics. In my lifetime I have never seen the media so one sided, and our young voters acting as if this was there college pep ralley! I have 3 children ages 10 and younger and for me this is by far the most important Election of my Lifetime!!! and to see backers of Barrack not even able to state any of his polcies or voting history is just mind bogling to me. Its time for America to put there personal feelings beind them, and look at the facts of the people running and out of the 3 Clinton gives us the best chance to recover from some of the worst times in our Countries History!!!! Please I live in Florida where my Vote isn't even going to get heard! due to a republic govenor. Please those states still left to vote please re-think your issues and research the truth about the candidates, and ont rely on the media alone for that info. Take your vote seriously because our Countries future depends on it.
Thank You
A proud American and Concerned Citizen!!!

Posted by: True American | Feb 26, 2008 7:27:59 PM

Can some one tell Why Hillary didn't divorce Bill over Monica scandal?
Will she after she returns to NY?.

Posted by: Jay | Feb 26, 2008 7:29:51 PM

I agree. Hillary Clinton will be our next president!!!!

Posted by: Bonny | Feb 26, 2008 7:30:40 PM

Jay-because some women and men choose to do the right thing for their family. It's harder to stay and work it out then it is to leave! I respect her for trying to save her marriage. If more families tried to do that--I wouldn't see so many screwed up children in the classroom!

Posted by: Bonny | Feb 26, 2008 7:34:30 PM

Boony- True. I agree if it is for us, not for people looking for power and not letting the family values ruin their career because of unfaithful husband. I would have support her decision if she decided the other way. The decision was career not family. But It is not my personal life is stack. And I have not decided yet to vote.

Posted by: Jay | Feb 26, 2008 7:40:52 PM

Good luck Rick, keep your ears and eyes open (don't forget to describe some telling facial expressions!), and thanks for always doing such a good job with the live debate blogging. Have an exciting night out there!

Posted by: Rainer | Feb 26, 2008 7:45:41 PM

obama is nothing but a bunch of hollywood hype. H-Y-P-E. Its like all of a sudden its 'trendy' to vote for him, but no one really knows why they are voting for him--its just the cool thing to do... i'd, personally, like to see some accomplishments behind his speeches..

Posted by: 4hillary2008 | Feb 26, 2008 7:52:22 PM

I don't mind a woman president. I don't mind a black president. What I care about is someone HONEST. I'm certainly not calling Obama Honest Abe but the Clintons have showed time after time THEY CANNOT BE TRUSTED. A president who lies to the entire American public. White Water, Monica Lewinsky, Paula Jones, and the list goes on and on to give affirmations America does not need another CONNIVING president. McCain vs Obama is the ticket!!!

Posted by: Thomas Kelton | Feb 26, 2008 7:52:55 PM

maybe if talking heads like george stephanopoulos would stop referring to hilary as shrill she would actually have a chance.

Posted by: carol | Feb 26, 2008 7:56:53 PM

Jay-Do you honestly think Hillary Clinton wanted her husband to humiliate her in front of the world? Just because they are public servants? I don't buy into that. I believe some things should be off limits. Do we really want to know everything about them. I don't! JFK was a great presidnet--but he had Marily Monroe. David Vitter was in the book of a prostitute here in New Orleans, which he admitted to associating with. It is between them and our God.

Posted by: Bonny | Feb 26, 2008 8:01:01 PM

Why is America so biased against women? Any time a man attacks it is so macho for both men and women alike (shame on all you women, I am a man), but, when a woman goes on the attack she is shrill to even women.Even my dumb three sisters who are caught up on the mania think so.It is good that I have my wife and three daughters on my side. Can I tell you a simple fact.This is beacuse I love my wife and three daughters, and I know what they are against.Women are the most discriminated in this country.I want my three daughters to feel pride when they say, we can do it too.

Posted by: VPNathan3 | Feb 26, 2008 8:03:06 PM

My vote is with Hillary, if I get a chance to cast it. My concern is the media appears to want us to think the race is over and Hillary just needs to concede. With that attitude some people will jump on Obama's bandwagon. The race is not over, the candidates are neck to neck. Clinton is clearly more experienced, proven tough in hard times, and knowledgeable about foreign affairs. Obama sounds good, but what is he really about?

Posted by: Denise | Feb 26, 2008 8:06:10 PM

Why can't an awesomely smart woman be the president of our great country? I truly and sincerely believe that she will be one of our best presidents,even better than her husband.
When Obama and Edwards attacked Hillary in Nov/Dec, were they shrill or simply macho?

Posted by: VPNathan3 | Feb 26, 2008 8:06:57 PM

Getting back to issue of jobs, as stated earlier, we need some new ideas and some innovative approaches to crating new jobs. The old ways of thinking will not work. Trying to bring jobs relevant to the last century will not work. We need some fresh ideas and people will have to realize that they have work to do also. Just expecting some politician to bring those jobs of the 50s, 60s or 70s back may not work. We also need to change some of the infrastructure. eg., some of the automobile manufacturing jobs have gone to Canada as the companies do not have to pay workers health insurance which costs them around $3 - $10k per person per year. So we need to make some fundamental changes in this country. There are lots of forces that resist changes due to selfish motives.

I think both/either Clinton and Obama will make a wonderful president. Clinton has experience and Obama will bring fresh ideas. We need to let the process work and get behind the person who wins. Getting emotional will just make things work. Either of these will be great presidents compared to McCain who will be just like Bush. He is trying to appease all fractions of the Republican party and will focus on the 3 Gs (Gays, Gods and Guns) and not solve any of our problems.

Posted by: rama | Feb 26, 2008 8:08:59 PM

Why isn't the Ohio Dem debate started yet? Are they not airing it or what?

Posted by: xastrid3 | Feb 26, 2008 8:11:21 PM

Could someone PLEASE tell me where I can watch the debate online? A link would be greatly appreciated I have searced everywhere but nowhere seems to have any details onwhere i can watch it! Eternal thanks to whoever can help!

Posted by: Emmet | Feb 26, 2008 8:12:12 PM

With gas prices going up and up, why hasn't any of the canditates considered speed limits. And I mean under 70mph. Calif. did it in the '70's This would save fuel immediately without hurting anyone.I would think someone in Washington could figure out the savings from driving 70 and 75 down to 60 or 65

Posted by: Genna | Feb 26, 2008 8:12:28 PM

I wish America would step back and take a look at who as implemented action and lead life that involves fighting for change in American life. Children's health care in Texas, Senate Arms Committee, recently asked to join and Armed Forces committee by leading military leaders, has been involved in diplomatic exchange in over 80 countries and is highly regarded as a humanitarian and change force throughout the world, has a real plan to support higher education and control loan costs after college, and a universal health plan that involves everyone like most other progress power countries in the world. What exactly--please someone tell me--has Obama done for the better of a nation? Maybe its time to elect a woman's perspective on problem solving and lets run with the rest of the world's great female leaders? But I bet those running on the coattail of words can't even name them nor could the candidate for that matter. Besides, I am not sure why anyone would be line to support a candidate who has been endorsed by Farrakhan--I don.t care what ethnicity or religion you hail from--this man this one of the world's greatest racist, bigot, descructive idiots to walk. Please step back, take a breath, and examine the real issues and the candidate's proposals before running with the lastest craze and hype. Remember all fads come to an end and then what?

Posted by: Shane | Feb 26, 2008 8:13:21 PM

Hey VPNathan3 thanks for the link this is very interesting. Can someone explain to me how those two people gave 10000 dollars each. is not the max 4600 2300 for the primary and 2300 for the general. This is something worth looking into. This is what we hillary supporters mean by vetted.

Posted by: joshua bradshaw | Feb 26, 2008 8:13:22 PM

I want to know Mr.Obama is not requiring everyone get health care. I am sick and tired of paying for those who don't have it. We pay in the form of higher rates, higher co-pays and higher taxes. I have to go to a clinc at our local charity hospital--only place my insurance will let me go--and the people getting out of Lincoln Navigator's, BMW's, with their $200 shoes, their Coach or Dooney & Burke purses with thier expensive cell gizmo's and gadgets. It's utterly disgusting! I have to pay for those who choose to do without because they rarely get sick! No, thanks! It's like car insurance--everyone should have to have it!!

Posted by: Bonny | Feb 26, 2008 8:14:12 PM

Its the Chicago real estate deal

Posted by: al | Feb 26, 2008 8:14:13 PM

VPN, i think the limits are for matching funds. IE, if a candidate opts for matching fund (from the taxpayers) there is a limit. But if no matching funds, then there is no limit. I'm a Hillary supporter but at the moment, I am trying to get my contribution back!

Posted by: Poorah Goy | Feb 26, 2008 8:17:18 PM

Yes - I have the same problem. Please someone help with info on where thedebate can be watched online. It's nearly impossible to find info on search engines!

Thanks!

Posted by: James | Feb 26, 2008 8:20:19 PM

If the state of Ohio with its over 50,000 jobs that have been lost due to transfer of those jobs outside of the United States and its impoverished economy can not understand that the US free trade policy needs to be addressed, I feel sorry for the ignorance of the American public. The US trade deficit is going to reach a 3 trillion dollar deficit needs to be addressed. The only candidate that has voiced addressing and modifying any part of a trade agreement has been Senator Cliinton, who has been against NAFTA from day one when her husband got it passed during his administration. Senator Obama said he will not do anything on NAFTA and McCain is all about free trade. Does the American public not understand how not doing anything makes the American dollar devalue?

Posted by: John | Feb 26, 2008 8:20:29 PM

Yeah, The Sous Chef at the White House has more experience in the place than Hillary and he's not running for President. Frankly, I don't want a Menapausal maniac in the White House with her finger on the button of a nuclear missle...do you?

Posted by: Mr. Big | Feb 26, 2008 8:21:45 PM

CAN SOMEONE PLEASE TELL ME WHY THE DEBATE IS NOT ON CNN OR CNN.COM YET? WASN'T IT SUPPOSED TO START AT 7PM CENTRAL!

Posted by: xastrid3 | Feb 26, 2008 8:23:00 PM

the debate is at 9 p.m. on msnbc

Posted by: dennis | Feb 26, 2008 8:23:26 PM

You know folks, I read through quite a number of your comments. I was star struck by Obama after his Dem Convention Speech back in '04. In the last year, my infatuation for him has eroded, I am definitely in the Clinton camp now. I am reading Obama's book, Audacity of Hope and realize now that he is quite the politician and also admits early on in the book what a cake walk his Senate seat was.. So I am a little concerned that things came to him too easily and now the media has practically handed him the primary by drugging students and young voters with seductive incantations of "yes we can" from Obama.. If you peel away at the layers, which the Republicans will force us to (there are no further Clinton layers to peel, certainly Obama's a blank page and the Pubs are going to have a field day tearing him to shreds.) I can just see Karl Rove. I hope Hillary wins, if she doesn't I will vote for Obama in the fall but with great trepidation for his safety.

Posted by: Sean Somers | Feb 26, 2008 8:24:03 PM

I can't find a site to watch the debate on. I have checked TV listings websites and its not there either, PLEASE someonehelp with info on where online it can be watched!!!!!!!

Posted by: happyman | Feb 26, 2008 8:24:38 PM

I believe, we as Clinton supporters, need to do everything we can to help her win the nomination. If by some horrible set of events she doesn't win the nomination--we need to write her in. We can do it! With Florida and Michigan, she is ahead of Obama. I hope we can do what we can to help her win! Geaux Hillary!

Posted by: Bonny | Feb 26, 2008 8:25:51 PM

The debate is on at 8 central.

Posted by: Bonny | Feb 26, 2008 8:27:11 PM

Here is what qualifies Obama to be President?

Experience..................1%
Military service............0%
Articulate..................3%
Ethnicity...................18%
Religion....................8%
Oprah/Endorsements..........12%
Nothing..............58%

Posted by: Tom | Feb 26, 2008 8:27:47 PM

it will be streemed on msnbc at 9 p.m. eastern time

Posted by: dennis | Feb 26, 2008 8:28:08 PM

Thank you Dennis!

Posted by: Emmet | Feb 26, 2008 8:30:32 PM

no problem

Posted by: dennis | Feb 26, 2008 8:32:50 PM

Rick - I read today that BHO picked up the two Shadow Sen.s in DC plus Dodd this AM, and John Lewis was supposed to make some sort of announcement today or tomorrow. That superd. count is pulling closer. Also Richardson may soon endorse (but whom?).

Posted by: Kevin | Feb 26, 2008 8:34:39 PM

Rick:

I think the same question was asked last week, and the answer then, as now, has to be that it won't count for much -- unless one of the candidates "self-destructs" and/or the other candidate reponds badly to the self-destruction or aborts the self-destruction by responding badly before it is complete.

Again, this is Hillary's debate to win or lose, and -- despite all the Hillary-optimists and racists commenting above, it's hard to see her winning. More likely either a draw, with a coherent and relatively polite debate, or a loss with a "kitchen sink" debate.

A lot, of course, will depend on the questions, and how both candidates respond to things like last week's continued efforts to bait Hillary into a negative attack.

Thankfully, this should be the last debate. Thank God, the Clinton push for four debates didn't work!

Posted by: Jackt51 | Feb 26, 2008 8:36:07 PM

The Rezko trial link above led me to this information:

"Prosecutors have not alleged any wrongdoing on Obama's part"

So thanks for that.

Posted by: RMP | Feb 26, 2008 8:40:12 PM

Will the ask any questions tonight about . . .

1.) the death penalty

2.) the environment

3.) support of the Palestinians

Posted by: ctravel | Feb 26, 2008 8:44:46 PM

Surely folks think about the very difficult times we are in.We are in two wars,fighting fanatical extremists,homeland security is tops on the agenda,the economy is in a worse shape than 9/11,the worst housing crisis in history,homeowners are losing their american dream, the poor are getting shafted,jobs are being lost and nearly 1oo millions are either without health insurance, or are undersinsured/losing coverage. Not since Harry Truman's time have we had a more daunting beginning for a president.

Posted by: VPNathan3 | Feb 26, 2008 8:53:06 PM

Hillary is done

Posted by: robert | Feb 26, 2008 8:55:07 PM

continuing from my last post. Who do you want in the white house? Can we really really take a chance? What will you tell your children? I took a gamble and it did not pay off.Oops I did it again? I care about my wife and three dauhgters. I want to give them the best chance. That is Hillary Clinton.

Posted by: VPNathan3 | Feb 26, 2008 8:55:14 PM

If a guy buys a portion of a yard for more then its worth and you buy the house for less then its worth and then you buy a portion of that yard for $100,000 from the guy who bought the yard what does that look like.
Answer: A real Bone head move, but add that it was made by a graduate of harvard law school, yea it was a bone head move alright.

Posted by: al | Feb 26, 2008 8:57:10 PM

Enough with the Health Care Plans. We get it already. Mandatory vs affordable. Can we move on.

Posted by: Maverick | Feb 26, 2008 9:17:36 PM

A Summary of Hillary's Great Leadership:

Siding with George Bush to invade Iraq. This war has cost nearly 4000 US lives and half a trillion dollars.

This war, which was unnecessarily started in 2003, is still costing our country 10 billion dollars a month. We and our children will be paying this bill long into future.

If this is what experienced leadership is, then I don't want it.

Posted by: Mark | Feb 26, 2008 9:36:32 PM

having watched the meet the press since it was black and white, i've seen a lot of fair reporting. not since russert took over. even if he's just holding up one of his stupid delegate counting board/scribbles, he can't help but look like he's about to devour his prey. i hope he's fired soon.

Posted by: so saddened | Feb 26, 2008 9:36:33 PM

Virginia from N.C. Totally! You said it!

Posted by: irma | Feb 26, 2008 9:45:04 PM

Twin, so I guess you can't blame Hillary for voting with Bush on Iraq and Iran now can you? I guess we can just chalk her disastrous judgement up to Bush too. Whatever. Her disastrous judgement is inexcusable. We can't afford to extend Bush's foreign policy.
We can't afford Hillary.

Posted by: kings2beat | Feb 26, 2008 9:45:18 PM