The depth of the Democratic field is unrivaled this election cycle, and it showed in the quality of the debate. It wasn't hard to find candidates with nuanced views and to find true insight and experience, rather than 'talking points'.
Stay or go are not likely the significant options in Iraq that the next President will face. We're going. The question is likely to be, under what conditions might we leave and, perhaps even, on what conditions will we go back ... :-(
Hillary did well, but confirmed my old fears about her, to some extent. I don't share AS's visceral distaste for her. She does emerge as a very good listener, I thought. I believe that she sees the Presidency (or would like to see it) as a caretaker and stewardship role. Unfortunately, there are times when it is more. I didn't like her reasons for not taking up hypotheticals, but others thought she handled that part especially well.
Obama came across as sure-footed, but without a "sell", I thought.
The Richardson-Biden exchange on Darfur is an elemental view of the kinds of approaches that need to be seriously weighed in the Oval Office, and why those who pressed the line that Bush-41 would be well advised - not to worry about his lack of depth - should chasten themselves for thinking that so much was sufficient... It's a sad state of affairs that we have to wait for diplomacy or threaten non-cooperation, while genocide unfolds, in this century. It seems to me that the steps needed to get to action ought to be textbook by now, not requiring a "new" policy initiative on the matter ...
Edwards did well in debate, where Richardson did not. He seems to have gotten well past stump speech and is able to leave a clear sense of himself with voters.
I like the focus on health care. I love it that many folks will come to know the difference between single payor and single provider, and all the good things that can come from it!
Sunday, June 3, 2007
Debate Went Well
