The Kodak Theatre Debate
I thought latest Democratic debate was fairly even. I don't agree with many of their positions, so I may not be the best person to judge what kind of rhetoric most appeals to Democratic voters, but on substance and tone, I'd call it a wash.
Most people say Obama won, but most of them, well, really like Obama. They both came off extremely well. If Obama had an edge, it's that he was much clearer, and almost always gave a direct answer to the questions he was asked. Clinton gave a few politician's answers, but was cordial and collected. I came away from the debate feeling as if the two of them could plausibly share a ticket; something I think many had ruled out during the race-related rhetoric two weeks ago.
They both took shots at McCain (each predictably misrepresenting his "100 years" comment), and one each at Romney, just to be on the safe side.
One thing I found particularly amusing about the debate is how much name-dropping it featured. Obama and Hillary both mentioned John Edwards about as often as the Republicans mention Ronald Reagan. Am I the only one who thinks he's destined to become the next generation's Ralph Nader?
It's very shrewd of both of them to play up their similarities to Edwards, as his support could provide a crucial tipping point in what remains a very competitive race.
» February 1st, 2008
|
|
Calendar
More Entries
Blogroll
Instapundit
Andrew Sullivan
Tom Maguire
Decision '08
Patrick O'Keefe
Categories
Blogging
Democrats
Economy
Elections '04
Elections '06
Elections '08
Entertainment
George W. Bush
Iraq
Media
Miscellaneous
Republicans
Social Security
Supreme Court
Technology
War on Terror
Email Me
|
