Clinton stumbles a bit in Democratic debate

A heavyweight bout that goes the distance isn't necessarily determined by the early rounds, as tonight's debate among the Democratic presidential aspirants vividly illustrated.

Hillary Clinton was unfazed by initial attempts to knock her off stride.  But as the forum proceeded, some points actually may have been scored against her. Not enough to seriously jeopardize her front-runner's standing in her party's contest.  But enough to keep this race interesting.

Clinton easily parried the opening efforts by Barack Obama and John Edwards to rattle her by pressing their arguments that, on the key issues of Iraq and Iran, she is not the candidate who can be counted on to dramatically redirect the Bush administration's policies.  She was aided when Obama stumbled in responding to what obviously was going to be the gathering's first question: specifying, as part of his recent pledge to more aggressively challenge Clinton, the issues on which they differ.

"Well, first of all, I think some of this stuff gets over-hyped," he said -- hardly the punch the political world had awaited.  And the rest of his answer lacked precision and focus.

Edwards did better out of the gate, offering solid examples to buttress his case that Clinton is an unlikely agent of change.

Clinton basically ignored the slings and arrows, coolly and calmly touting her record and promoting various plans she laid out.  She also studiously avoided attacking Obama or Edwards, which would have given them ...

greater stature than she wished to bestow.

Still, for perhaps the first time during this year's plethora of debates, Clinton hit some rough spots. When the discussion turned to two topics -- the release of records of her activities as first lady and driver's licenses for illegal immigrants -- she gave answers that, at the least, allowed her rivals to effectively challenge her candor and consistency.

The records issue -- though hardly a burning concern for most voters -- lingers as a potential problem for Clinton, as we have previously noted. She did little to defuse the matter.

Tim Russert, one of the debate's two questioners, noted that her husband, Bill Clinton, is an obstacle to the release of communications between the pair during his administration.  The ex-president, Russert pointed out, has specifically requested the National Archives to delay any such release for several years.  "Would you lift that ban?" Russert asked.

"Well, that's not my decision to make," she responded.  She added: "But certainly we'll move as quickly as our circumstances and the processes of the National Archives permits."

An answer guaranteed to make most eyes glaze over.  But Obama effectively jumped in, noting that on one hand Clinton stresses her experience as first lady, while on the other she takes a passive approach to allowing a thorough examination of her activities during those years.

"Part of what we have to do is invite the American people back to participate in their government again," Obama said. "Part of what we need to do is rebuild trust in our government again.  And that means being open and transparent and accountable to the American people."

As the debate was winding down, Russert asked Clinton about her apparent embrace, based on her recent comments, of New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer's proposal to grant driver's licenses to illegal immigrants.  She responded by praising Spitzer, saying he was trying to "fill the vacuum left by the failure of [the Bush] administration to bring about comprehensive immigration reform."

But after Chris Dodd interjected that he opposed the proposal, Clinton felt compelled to say, "I just want to add, I did not say it should be done."

Could have fooled Dodd, as he made clear.  And, chances are, most who heard her were left confused, as well.

Republican Mitt Romney's presidential campaign was quick to spotlight the moment.  Within minutes after the debate ended, Romney spokesman Kevin Madden sent out a statement saying that Clinton's "troubling answer on providing driver's licenses to illegal immigrants was emblematic of someone who is both dismissive of efforts to enforce our nation's immigration laws and entirely unwilling to offer a straight answer to a very direct question."

Clinton's Democratic foes won't be taking many cues from a GOP aide, but that part about providing a straight answer to a direct question is something we expect to hear more about from them as the Iowa caucuses near. The Times' Mark Z. Barabak and Peter Nicholas have the news story here on this website and in Wednesday's print editions.

-- Don Frederick

Comments

[Lance]

EXACTLY why this police officer took it upon himself to write 14 politically CONSERVATIVE songs and take on Hillary, Gore, Ward Churchill and the whole lefty crowd. They have no autheticism, so I put it in song. One of a kind stuff.

[OneifbyLand]

Didn't Californians recall Governor Grey Davis because
he gave drivers licenses to illegal aliens?

[Steve Gaghagen]

Wow! ... "autheticism" ... whatever that may mean, it looks great. When you figure out what it means, let the folks over at Webster's know, ok?

[Oscar]

Edwards was the clear winner. He was forceful, and full of conviction and intelligence.

His polls numbers will go up in the following days.

[Gary Schidt]

Hillary did a great job. On the subject of releasing information on what she did while first lady, that is not her choice to make. On drivers license - maybe not a bad idea. Then we would know where illegals are located. We would have their name, address, age, all the vitals. Maybe then we would know our motoring public would be safe. I am an Iowa Democrat that has participated in precinct caucuses since 1976. I have also led them and been a Democratic leader. Hillary has all the right stuff! Edwards and Obama looked like 2 howling little boys crying foul. It is Hillary all the way here in Iowa!

[Melina]

Wow now we can have a grownup ticket...Biden/Dodd....

Wow...

[Rickie L Fenne]

Your grtting hit in the face from all sides, even your own
Hillary. Stand strong and hard, they can't touch you! Go Hillary!

[Happy Camper]

The argument Hillary Clinton presents about giving illegal aliens driver’s licenses is as big a fallacy as can be proposed. It is the worst idea I've heard yet. The fact that they drive our roads without licenses only means they are driving illegally. The implication of her proposal is that the roads would be safer if they had driver’s licenses. If they are poor drivers without licenses what is to say they would get better at driving with licenses. Or that our roads would be safer because they have a license when before they did not. Furthermore it would be a defacto amnesty for 12 to 14 million people who are in the United States illegally and would encourage more to come in. If they were to get driver’s licenses they would have to further get auto insurance if they are driving. That is unlikely to happen and legal citizens would still be at risk of auto accidents with illegal residents without auto insurance. Also to get a driver’s license they would have to have a social security card, which would then mean they would have access to our social security funds. It is an insane idea. This latest piece of politics by Senator Clinton just put me out of her camp. I’m not sure who I am for at this point, but it definitely is not her.

[Edward Goldstein]

Happy Camper: you need to do some research. The program that Spitzer is proposing would make it so that a SSN is no longer required to get a driver's license. So when you say ". . . to get a driver’s license they would have to have a social security card, which would then mean they would have access to our social security funds", you are incorrect. This is not to say that I support the program; I don't. But you need to be clear it entails access only to a state issued identification, (which would be different from the ID that citizens get) not to social security or any other government entitlement.

It's nice to hear that you're out of the Clinton camp, though. That makes me a very happy camper.

[Heidi G]

Hillary's just clarified her Healthcare plan by stating that it would be affordable because she incorporates "healthcare tax incentives". That makes me feel like she's talking out of both sides of her face again..

The very folks that CANNOT afford to BUY it NOW whom she says would be ignored under Barack's plan are the same people that DO NOT PAY TAXES thus, her planned tax credit will NOT APPLY TO THEM!!!

Barack's plan lowers ACTUAL monthly healthcare prices AND DOES NOT expect you to pay high costs all year and WAIT for a rebate at the end of the year…