Hillary won the New Hampshire debate clearly

[rodeodance]

Forum Name General Discussion: Politics
Topic subject Hillary won the New Hampshire debate clearly
Topic URL http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3967288#3967288
3967288, Hillary won the New Hampshire debate clearly
Posted by Tactical Progressive on Sun Jan-06-08 06:57 AM

She did what she had to do: made her case for the reality of the hard work that actually effects change - not speechifying about change - and made the case that she's not just the candidate that 'will' change things, but has been working to change things all along. And she made it well.

I thought Edwards did very well tonight too. He was attacking Hillary a fair amount, but I didn't sense any cheap shots. I like his message. I think he improved his stock with his performance. Obama, who hasn't done exceptionally well in any of these debates so far, was weaker tonight than usual, though still not bad in any sense. I think he diminished himself, especially coming off of Iowa and his NH crowds and the big expectations that came out of them. High expectations, which is its own pitfall, combined with middling performance, makes a negative. Richardson, a nice guy, was still pretty boring, not that that has anything to do with the ability to run a country. I was getting a little tired of his 'Now, now kids, let's behave.' routine, but his Wizzer White answer was a nice, self-deprecating touch of humor to end the debate. Overall it was a good debate all around, made poignantly moreso following the mindless Publican snot-fest.

Back to Hillary.

Her specific answers were notably more comprehensive and clear, revealing a broader and more nuanced understanding of both the issues and the mechanics of governance than either of the others, starting right off with the al Qaeda / Pakistan question. Don't get me wrong, both Obama and Edwards had good answers too, as did Richardson. Hillary was just so much better. Her job was to show that she isn't the, as John Edwards is now trying to paint her, 'status quo' candidate. How absurd she made that seem with every answer she gave. She got the message right tonight, though she knows she's probably not going to win New Hampshire no matter what she does.

Understand this: her job wasn't to convince the Hillary haters on the net, like those here on DU that were rabidly dissing everything she said and did tonight, from her voice to her looks to anything else they could spew about nearly nonstop. Nor, as surprisingly as it sounds, did she need to convince New Hampshire 'independents'. They are, more than not, 'libertarian' right-wingers who weren't going to like anything a Clinton was saying. Libertarians often call themselves "Independents", like when they call into C-SPAN, but they're not far from Publicans in most of the important areas. NH is a notoriously libertarian state, trying to become blue. But they're not there yet, and Hillary probably won't be the one to win them over. That's not her target audience.

Hillary is playing to a national audience - appropriate for a national candidate don't you think - about what she stands for and what she brings to the table. She was smart, sharp, tough, feisty, even a little combative against Edwards' attacks. Funny too when put on the spot about likeability. And she made "change", as Obama and Edwards use it, look like empty rhetoric. There probably isn't a single word that politicians have used since the Roman Empire to get elected more than "change". For Obama and now Edwards to think they've coined the word is an absurdity. Hillary made that clear tonight, turning the word into deeds and leaving them with empty labels twisting in the wind.

Hillary is our girl, and I believe she's going to win this election, as she has earned and as we deserve. Obama's rhetoric and Edward's righteous anger are already starting to wear thin for all but the partisans. It's ironic, but John Edwards' largely unworkable threats to destroy corporate power will probably be better done by Hillary bending corporations to their responsibilities with deft use of political power, and Obama's aspirations to a 'new politics of hope' and a promise of a broader society will almost certainly be done better when a representative of the most politically disenfranchised constituency in America, the woman, is elected to the Presidency. Hillary will, ironically, bring to America the things which both Obama and Edwards talk about.

Hillary remained the center of attention tonight, even after all of the overdone hullabaloo out of Iowa over a few extra points for Obama. And she'll remain the one to beat even after New Hampshire voters have their say, whether they follow in Iowan's footsteps or not. This remains national politics, even as it starts off in small states.