PRESENTATION AND TECHNICAL MERIT
Hillary wonked hard on both of 'em, even being so bold as to tell Edwards that he hadn't answered a question and making a move to "steal" his votes/support for herself.
She was well spoken, but not great. Edwards was about the same as he's been. Barack was nether hesitant or forceful, but just "okay". He really lost it, however, with long, long strings of "and...and...and".
Obama seemed timid. Agreeing too much. Unwilling to raise the bar on the competition (see prior post for reference). He seems (to me) to want to rely on the refs to call the game too much, although maybe that is what endears him so greatly to his "core" supporters (I don't know). For me, a little too self-effacing. He seemed more like he was contributing to a discussion, than in a defining battle of his career.
The "tough" questions broke Clinton's way, by letting her 'explain' her modus, rather than truly having her feet held to the fire for it. Other questions, like the 100 men, broke her way and she dusted the competition. "Green collar job" was the unexpected applause line from her rallies, so she wonked it three or four times, at least.
THE ISSUES
The Energy Policy 'debate' was ... deeply incomplete, filled with platitudes. They all need more game, before taking on the GOP.
The ROTC - I don't think any of them really understood why ROTC isn't allowed on campus. NONE of them mentioned don't-ask-don't-tell. Good grief. (Of them, we can fault Hillary the most, as the eggspert most likely to be fully aware of what her reply implied as member of the Armed Services Committee).
Hillary seemed off-base by injecting some stylized notion of "the black-brown debate". No one asked her what exactly she meant by that.
Economics seems like a soft spot for Obama - he doesn't seem as comfortable as Hillary. The ideas on how to help kids from dropping out of school seemed somehow too stock to hold back the GOP onslaught. (I think Obama missed a BIG opportunity here to press a Jesse Jackson like message of hope and economic justice ...)
THE PRESS
Iraq questioning showed the weakness of the press (does Russert just have a penchant for tidy red-line issues)? How fast we withdraw is hardly an interesting question or competition to run, is it? The real questions center on the notion that withdrawal is not necessarily a conclusion.
Nothing on a pardon for Bush-Cheney.
WHAT ELSE WAS ON DISPLAY
I agree with a lot of Andrew's criticisms, surprisingly. Hillary is showing risk-averting behaviors that I do not want to see.
- She's not taking risks with her 'image', showing her husband's unwillingness to take on water, to be self-critical. Some amount is warranted. She seems unwilling to laugh at herself - is she like that in person?
- Refusing to acknowledge that an opponent is qualified - that's a hard political discipline, to keep the pressure on like that. It's not generous. You could argue that now is not the time to be generous, but does she have the skill to know when to 'back-off', rather than knee-jerk it?
- Not taking Johnson more to task - it is showing the wrong instinct at the wrong time. For an electorate hungry for moral leadership, it was a big swing-and-a-miss, on my accounting.
[btw, "he issued a statement" didn't escape my notice as a clever way to put the issue aside, exhibiting a kind of acumen in a politician - just maybe one we don't want right now. It basically says, "Oh, that, it's in the details now, Brit, if you want to go look it up, and I'm not responding directly in my capacity as President-to-be".]
