« New Hamsphire Predictions | Main | The suspense is killing me »
January 23, 2004
My Debate Thoughts
What a terrible debate. I don't think that the candidates performed poorly, but the debate's structure was tedious and didn't really shed light on anything substantial. Peter Jennings' inane questions about the Muslim faith (Edwards) and the Federal Reserve (Sharpton) weren't really that much worse than any of the other questioners' relentless focus on the CW to the exclusion of questions that actually matter.
I've got to give it to Dean. He's resumed the mantle of the kinda-Babbitt candidate of this election year, returned to running on the successful record of a small state governor. He stood up proudly for his signing of the civil unions bill, probably the main thing that garnered him much of his early, pre-war support. He said he'd support whomever got the nomination. The Democratic Party will be the big winner of the Dean campaign, no matter what happens.
Clark had some good lines, especially the one about inviting former AG John Ashcroft back to Congress to testify about the abuses of the Patriot Act. But Clark's in trouble, as I think he's starting to hemorage support to Edwards. Edwards doesn't have the resume of Clark, which is important before people actually start paying attention, but Clark doesn't have the slick style of Edwards, which is important when people do start paying attention. Clark got a lot of easy questions last night and didn't answer them as good as he's capable of. Compare that to Edwards who easily got the night's worst questions and handled them competently.
Kerry got the best questions (he's the frontrunner) and showed strength and forcefulness. He's the frontrunner. Kudos for highlighting Max Cleland's support. If Bush is going to use re-authorization of the Patriot Act as this year's Homeland Security, it's right to bring out a figure like Max who can expose the ruthlessness of the administration in advancing it's partisan goals at the expense of genuine security concerns.
Posted by Chris at January 23, 2004 10:20 AM
Comments
I've always considered the power of persuasion one of the most important qualities in a President. (Of course, using that power rightly is fairly important too!)
That may be why Edwards is so appealing, and seems (at least to me) Presidential.
Posted by: zachary d smith at January 23, 2004 11:53 AM
You make two great points! Power of persuasion and the ability to use it "Presidentially."
I think Bush is pretty vulnerable on both fronts. Which to me seems to make questions about the war valid -- even though you can't turn back the clock on the war and it's debatable whether you'd really want to, it's the future's problems that matter and I think a lot of the population views Bush (or his cabinet secretaries) as the boy who cried wolf.
Posted by: Chris at January 23, 2004 03:17 PM
Hey Chris, which one of the moveon.org ads did you like the best? Found at http://www.bushin30seconds.org
I personally like the animated one.
Posted by: Matt at January 23, 2004 03:45 PM
Your analysis is interesting, Chris, but who are you? Is there any personal info on you, or anything about your credentials?
Posted by: Mark at January 24, 2004 03:12 PM
Just a Democratic Party Activist with a journalist background analyzing this race. Anything else you want to know in particular?
I'm 23. Been voting since '98, been active in Georgia politics since '01. Ran unsuccessfully for state Representative (nominated in Dem primary, lost in general election) in '02.
Posted by: Chris at January 24, 2004 08:12 PM
Cool, you can run for US Senate in 7 years, since you might be the last brave Democrat left in Georgia. Hold down the Democratic fort down there.
Posted by: Mark Spreitzer at January 25, 2004 12:01 PM
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)