Okay, here we go. The key debate before the New Hampshire primary for the Democrats with Clinton, Edwards, Obama and Richardson on the stage.
As a backdrop, a slew of polls came out today.
CNN/WMUR shows the race tied between Clinton and Obama. The
Concord Monitor has Obama up a point.
Rasmussen gives Obama a 10 point lead.
Zogby's daily tracking, most of which was done before Iowa, shows a Clinton lead with movement towards Obama.
Mark Penn says there is no bounce. Given his abject failings as Clinton's pollster and his complete misreading of the Des Moines Register poll, anything Penn writes these days is pure spin and probably wrong.
I won't be doing a lot of blow-by-blow on the Democratic debate -- unless things get really ugly. I want one of these candidates to be president. And, like most Democrats, I don't want the Democrats to get too ugly, negative and vicious with each other. AJ did live blog -- and did an excellent job.
10:42 PM: So, it's over. There were some fireworks. Not too intense. And, the comparison between the Democrats and Republicans is amazing. The Democratic candidates just so far surpass the Republicans.
AJ's liveblogging is after the break.
9:05 From AJ: I'll try to do some live stuff as long as I end up watching. Gotta say, this terrorism question should be T-ball for these guys. You know why we didn't get OBL? Bush and Iraq. Let's see it. . . . And hey! Nuclear proliferation. Somewhere, Matt Yglesias just woke up.
Richardson again says Musharraf should step aside -- and apparently that we have the leverage to make him do so. Richardson is like a walking advertisement *against* voting based on experience. Clinton should ask *him* to step aside so he doesn't diminish the "experience" brand any more.
P.S. Musharraf would roll out the red carpet for us to get OBL, so this line of questioning is totally ridiculous (as is the idea that Islamists will overthrow the entire armed forces and take over the nukes).
9:10 This nuclear question started out sounding like fear-mongering, but it actually turns out not to be a bad one. I'm gonna bet that Edwards does well on this, as he did a little-known project with Jack Kemp on Russia the involved a lot of nuclear safety stuff. (. . . I wish there were time-stamps on this -- actually, I'm adding them now -- but I assure you, I posted before Edwards made me look like a brilliant prognosticator!)
9:25 Hahahaha do I know my foreign policy bloggers or what? Yglesias just gushed over the Edwards (and others', now in an even more effusive update) response on nuclear non-proliferation.
9:30 It would be truly hilarious if Clinton just quoted AP quoting one of *her people* criticizing Obama. That said, her health care plan does appear to be better, but it's an interesting question that I'm glad to see raised. But, um, is Obama as a flip flopper gonna stick? I kinda doubt it.
9:35 Apparently drinking makes me smarter: Richardson drives another stake into the experience brand. Also, just on a tactical level, I'm thoroughly entertained by Edwards's attempt to make this a two-person race . . . without Clinton.
9:42 Good for Richardson (and the rest) calling the surge a massive failure, and explaining why. He's (they're) right. And the question is either foolish or disingenuous.
9:58 Great answer from Hillary on likability. A little risky to draw even a slight parallel to Bush, but she was pretty funny -- and likable! . . . of course Obama follows it up by being even *more* likable. Football is eminently likable, and so is being nice.
10:09 In general I think it'd be awesome if everybody could refrain from comparing Obama to politicians have been assassinated (as I furiously knock on wood). This has been a public service announcement.
10:13 Edwards is really unparalleled when it comes to connecting policies with people. I certainly find it very effective.
10:17 Can I just step back to say, for a second, how good these candidates are? I mean, I know only your candidate can win and everybody else is teh suck, but from my perspective, it's nice to see such smart and insightful people on this stage. What a difference from . . . past elections, let's say.
10:28 Shorter Gibson: Rich is the new middle class! Everyone laughs, as they should. Edwards is gonna love this (... aaaaaand there it is -- I say it here and it comes out there).
10:34 Richardson wants a line item veto. Which is a little weird, since it was ruled unconstitutional nearly a decade ago. On the other hand, he's been a governor!
10:38 All of these folks are *giddy* about the prospect of a general election. "What would you change about your debate performance?" "Nothing! I'm just happy to be a Democrat!" Indeed. And on that note, liveblogging is done for the evening. G'night.
Read More......