Debate Last 45 Minutes. My observations.

[Renew Deal]

I saw the last 45 minutes of the debate. I saw from healthcare on. Here are my observations.

Gephardt looked really good. He sounded good on the issues and he took it to Bush a few times. He is a professional politician.

Kerry wasn't great. He just seems like he is faking it. I was not happy with him.

Dean has a lot of one liners, but he doesn't seem like the pro that Gep, Kerry, Braun, are.

Braun was excellent. She is a real pro. She has ideas and she can back them up.

Edwards has some ideas, but he isn't ready. He just seemed like he didn't belong. I think he will get stronger through the years and hopefully take another crack at it.

Lieberman just finds new ways to annoy me. He was talking about how big the Bush tax cuts were and how they were much more than $1000. I got $300 last year and nothing this year. I also didn't like how the threw in "familia" and "patria." It was disingenuous.

Someone needs to check Graham for a pulse.

Kucinich is interesting. I think he is the Alan Keyes of this year’s election. He is a real Democrat. His abortion stance is fuzzy, but if you just forget that he is a real Dem. He is the Democratic Party line. That's a good thing for the party. He will keep these people honest.

I might have missed something but what happened to Sharpton?

Based on the last 45 minutes of the debate (which is what I saw) I think that Graham and Edwards should give up.

These are my observations. I am not bashing anyone. I think overall the debate was a good start. I feel more confident that one of these guys can kick Bush's ass out.

:kick:

[dean4america]

1. the thing about Dean...

is that people LIKE that he's not a "professional" politician. Your observation of Kerry is right on target (though I think Edwards was better than you give credit to).

Watch the fall out and spin -- Dean carries the headlines on point from being attacked (the only real excitement at the debate), and rebuffing, as well as audience reaction to LIE-berman.

Gephardt had such passion on the WH lawn when he enabled Bush....

[spooky3]

10. I also thought Edwards did well.

[lindashaw]

2. His flight was caught in bad weather, and he couldn't make it.

[Monaco]

3. Sharpton

had trouble getting to NM because of lousy weather on the East Coast. Too bad.

[JI7]

4. kerry and edwards did great

both did very well

[rickin]

5. Kerry by a hair

I guess I disagree.

I saw the last half. I think Kerry did the best job. He seemed to be the one most sticking to his plan. I thought Kucinich was a ding-dong, but he has a right to believe in his theories. Dean was weak. I think he made many blunders and wasnt too sure what he was talking about, especially towards the end.

I think Graham could have been better comatose. Edwards I think is gunning for the VP spot (Pull off a GORE thing). And Moseley-Braun still does not have what it takes. Gephardt was solid, and Lieberman had a strong message, but it was coming from the wrong messenger.


I give it to Kerry or Gephardt. I think Kerry by a nose because Gephardt contradicted himself a few too many times and used Clinton when he has supported Bush on a lot more issues.

[leftofthedial]

9. wow! 1 post! Welcome to DU!

What makes you say Kucinich was a "ding dong"?

[Pocho]

13. WELCOME TO DU RICKIN

[newyawker99]

21. Hi rickin!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Gloria]

6. I saw only part of it.....but what I saw of Dean was a little disappointin

the passion he can certainly arouse at rallies and via the internet in terms of fundraising seemed to dry up. He made good points, for example, on immigration, but didn't speak smoothly..He seemed almost too low key. I suspect he was trying to slow down his usually fast speech and it cramps his style.

I'm wondering if I see a "disconnect" in Dean, similar to Gore. Gore was great at rallies (inc. the one here in Las Cruces in 00 and the one I saw Nov. 02), but doesn't come across as well on TV or in front of "debate audiences."

[tedoll78]

11. My main thing with Dean..

is that I'm able to recite most of his stump speech right there along with him, word-for-word. I've seen him really rock on TV, but these 9-candidate formats really seem to not do him justice. (I wonder how he'd do in a one-on-one with The CHimp.)

[spooky3]

15. I thought Dean was good on health care but

didn't have enough time to explain his positions. Moseley-Braun also was good to raise the pay equity issue.

The moderate part of me wishes that someone among the Democrats would differentiate himself/herself on the following positions.

1. While I want to see plans for health care for poor and disadvantaged children, and how they will be financed, I sometimes perceive that the candidates all think that by just mentioning children, we will all happily open our checkbooks. I do not wish to subsidize services any more than we currently do for middle class families, 95% or more of whom chose to have their children. I am not asking for control over who has children, and correspondingly, there is a limit to how much of my income I feel others have a right to take, in order to exercise a more expensive choice than what I made.

2. The debate format is always frustrating to me because it encourages sound bites rather than depth. I want to hear in detail how plans would be financed, not just what a plan would provide. tonight I perceived the Dems doing exactly what the Repubs accuse them of--believing in a free lunch.

[uptohere]

17. going to have to try their web pages, Edwards pretty comprehensive on his

n/t

[gristy]

20. healthcare for children

Some candidates may single out this group for healthcare because it is the cheapest group to provide for, by far. That's what I was thinking, anyways.

[robbedvoter]

7. Kuchinich in the war segment (were Kerry and Dean seemed

to make efforts to sound alike). In the second part - Kerry (on NAFTA), Brown - on medical insurance, Gephardt occasionally and sometimes Edwards. Joe brought the Bible and the "civilization vs evildoers" rhetoric.

[thom1102]

8. My thoughts... in a nutshell

Lieberman was the first to attack (and went for Dean) Dean was allowed to respond and thought he knocked it out of the park. I was impressed with Edward's and Moseley-Braun' demeanor. Both were eloquent, reserved and civil, without resorting to shrieking. Kucinich came off as extremely angry and a bit hysterical. Sharpton was unable to attend due to east coast weather delays. Kerry was funny and relaxed. Dean started off shaky, but seemed to find his voice as the debate went on. Lieberman struck me as a man who is on the ropes looking for the easy cheap shots (was the only one who got booed). Graham was unremarkable, and Gephardt was on the stump (kept refering to * as a miserable failure, which was great, but his responses seemed canned while delivered with fire).

Winners: Braun, Edwards, maybe Kerry
Loser: Lieberman. (I wouldn't be surprised if he withdrew very soon... I expect his poll numbers to continue to plummet in the coming days)

In the interest of full disclosure, I am a Deanie, and while I thought he did fine, he could have, and should have done better.

[alphafemale]

24. Lieberman got BOOOOOed. Details please.

:wow:

What exactly did the annoying republican say?

[sendero]

12. I agree with alot...

... of what you are saying, but I have to disagree about Kerry. (I'm a Dean man myself and have taken a few swipes at Kerry here before).

I think Kerry did pretty well. He came off with a lot more personality than I expected, and for the most part I felt he had cogent answers (tho not necessarily exactly the ones I would have chosen) to the questions.

All in all a good kickoff to "plant a shrub in Crawford, 2004" :)

[uptohere]

14. nuts. not shown where I live

and we seem to have most of the usual partisan stuff showing up here.

hopefully CSPAN or someone will rebroadcast and I can get a chance to see for myself.

[SaveElmer]

16. Disagree on Kerry and Lieberman

I'm a Deanie. He is better in forums where he can speak for a longer time. It takes him a bit to get his rapid speech pattern under control. I thought he did very well in his response to Liebermans barb on trade. Other than that though, I thought Lieberman did pretty well, especially near the end. I also thought Kerry loosened up near the end and got some good jabs in at Bush, and showed flashes of humor. Moseley-Braun was very articulate. Kucinich was a little to strident for me, and that comment about Vermont not having a military was stupid. Graham was a snorer though I agreed with most of what he said. Edwards was a bit too polished.

[PurityOfEssence]

18. Love your take on Lieberman

he's just a sanctimonious, prissy little snit. Just when I think he can't bug me any more, he finds new and amazing new ways...

I disagree on Edwards, but just saw the end, as did you. It wasn't his best night, but he's still got something special. He didn't answer the Emergency Room question directly enough before going into his health plan, either, but they all did their share of that.

[mountebank]

19. Kucinich on abortion.

I know this has been posted several times, but I think Kucinich's past position on abortion makes some sense in light of his veganism and feeling that all life is sacred. It's a very idealistic vision of the world, I know, and I think his evolution on the subject has come through his acceptance of the reality - in this world, a woman needs a right to choose.

I don't think he was ever anti-choice, though you might say he was pro-life. Hm. It's complex, but calling his position "fuzzy" misses the complexity.

[newyawker99]

22. Hi mountebank!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[DemNoir]

23. As a Dean supporter

I thought he really did not look good at all. He completly lost his train of thought on the first Iraq question, his answer didnt make sense.

Its been a few times now and it is quite apparent that he doesnt do well in any type of question and answer format; I have not seen any improvement yet. All of Deans answers in the debate where nothing more than word for word replays of his stump speech, which is starting to get quite tired.

So, you can color this Dean supporter and contributor very dissapointed in his performance last night. I am begining to wonder if he has the right stuff.

As for the others, I thought Kerry looked very at ease and confident answering questions with ease. Edwards may yet become a huge factor before this is over.

[Egnever]

25. As another Dean suporter

I would have to agree with you it was not his best performance. It wasnt horrible but definately not his best.

I think pert of the problem is the time to respond given in these debates. When he has the time to really respond to the questions in a question and answer session he does great.

Listen to this interview on NPR if you want to hear a good Q/A session.

http://stream.realimpact.org/rihurl.ram?file=webactive/radionation/rn20030312.rm&start=

But you are right he needs to work on his answers when rushed he seems to trip all over his toungue trying to get all the things in he wants to say to answer the question.

[blm]

26. Oddly, though, the CNBC and MSNBC pundits

gave Dean and Lieberman the high marks while dumping on Kerry. I just saw Russert on MSNBC and he dismissed Kerry, too.

[Zuni]

27. my opinion

Gephardt did the best during the debates. He was cool and nailed every question.
Dean seemed kind of lost, but he is still the man I think has the best chance of beating bush.
Kerry needs to liven up a bit. Bob graham needs to wake up--I actually like the guy but he seemed to be lost in the crowd of stronger personalities.
Moseley-Braun did well too.
Kucinich seemed a little ...well...creepy. He needs to mellow out, but many of his positions are good.
I like John edwards, but he fell right in the middle.

Lieberman gave the GOP a great line to use against Dean in 2004. That was a cheap shot--he knew he can't win and decided to help bush? I don't know but that was nasty. I think the DLC wants to discredit Dean.

Overall, I am for dean and hopefully he will be better at another debate.