sozobe wrote:Uh, no, but I have the feeling neither you nor Goldie are really interested in having your minds changed, so I won't pursue it. A question I do have, BrandX -- who, if anyone, looks good to you at this point?
---
I finished reading the debate transcript. It didn't seem like there were any real breakout moments, positive or negative. It does seem from the "boos" and "cheers" notations that there were a lot of Hillary supporters, which isn't necessarily nefarious (polls show that Hillary claims the most supporters among Democrats, after all, if things are shifting a bit).
On paper, I was happy with Obama's performance, especially in catching and responding to stuff Hillary said about him.
Edwards said some good stuff but I'm worried (since I like him) that he's painting himself into an angry, strident corner.
Biden had some zingers, he's good at this stuff. I think he's positioning himself pretty well to be a VP, we'll see though.
Clinton... sigh. When this all started I was extremely worried about what would happen if she were the Democratic nominee, but I liked her well enough. Now those two positions are reversing, a bit... I'm not quite as worried (though still worried) that she will spell automatic defeat for the Democrats if she's the nominee, but I'm liking her less and less. If anyone played dirty last night, it was her, as she cried wolf to Wolf.
It's interesting, Soz that what was done to Hillary last debate was exactly what was done to Obama this time. I don't approve of it for anyone. The press needs to make some news, so they exaggerate and quote things out of context, or ask trick questions.
If you get a chance, do try to watch the debate. I'm impressed by the different feeling I got when watching the event as opposed to only reading the transcript. Body language is so important.
I think the "mud slinging" Hillary was referring to was Edwards saying some things about her plan that were not true. And she didn't want to leave it like that. She wanted to correct the impression. And of course she did it with force and using a phrase with a negative connotation. All politics.....but if one side is going to do it and it lowers her poll numbers, then she should not be criticized for doing it in order to defend herself.
The press seemed pleased. It was a good show. It will get people watching the news for the opinions of the talking heads. Sponsors will be happy.
I agree about Edwards. I hate to see him in this unattractive corner. I like him too.
And Biden was hilarious. Several times he got a huge laugh from the audience as well as the press, including Blitzer who in one instance was the target. It served for comic relief. I've been a Biden fan for years, I think since the Clarence Thomas hearings. I think he's fair and well spoken. He doesn't resort to cheap tricks. Maybe that's why he's nowhere in the polls. And there's something about the way he looks that appeals to me too. I wish he would run for Vice President.
I started in the middle of the debate and then, when they repeated it, following the commentary, I watched the first hour too. I agree with Watts or Gergen or whoever said that all the fireworks happened within the first 10 minutes. The reactions from the audience did influence the debater's style. The "mud slinging" was not playing well in Las Vegas. Hillary is favored there almost 2 to one.
