The Running Ticket Blog: The Dem debate live
These comments are in chronological order from the top, reading down.
Share your thoughts with Andrew Malcolm and Don Frederick on tonight's debate. Jump to the comment form.
Well, Don, here we go. The last big rhetorical confrontation between the last two Democratic candidates standing before Super Tuesday, Feb. 5, when all those delegates are picked across the country in nearly two dozen states. Scroll to the bottom for updates.
It'll be interesting to see how confrontational Hillary Clinton is, after all the criticism for her husband's scorched-earth campaigning across South Carolina last week, and how confrontational Barack Obama is, after all the hubbub over his perceived snub of Clinton on the Senate floor before President Bush's State of the Union Monday night.
She has said she reached out her hand and it's still reaching out. She also just happens to bring it up at every opportunity.
Think we can guarantee the debate will start with a handshake?
Obama, it seems to me, has shown a growing maturity and comfort with the debate format. At first, even when he criticized her, he spoke to the moderator and camera. Now, he regularly turns toward her to address his criticism, small but important gesture for people passing video judgment on who might be their commander in chief.
Clinton has always shown a clear command of the wonky issue stuff. But -- yes, it is an unfair double standard -- when she got in her zinger last time about Obama's friendship with Rezko "the slum landlord," some thought she came across as unduly harsh, perhaps catty. (Obama, of course, opened that can of worms by taking a shot at her service on Wal-Mart's board of directors.)
Hard balance for a female to show the strength while remaining feminine. I'll bet she's worked at it since.
--Andrew Malcolm
*
No initial handshake as Obama and Clinton walked onto the stage -- so if it occurred, if was out of camera range. And, for the most part, the pair did not exchange pleasantries as they posed for photographs, though Obama did whisper something into Clinton's ear.
-- Don Frederick
*
Perhaps wanting to nix lingering attention to the "snub," Obama makes a point of saying in his opening statement (a wrinkle not included in Wednesday night's Republican debate, which featured four candidates) that he was friendly with Clinton before the campaign, and would be her friend after it, regardless of how it turns out.
-- Don Frederick
*
Asked, in the debate's first question, to spell out the differences between her and Obama, Clinton predictably mentions that her healthcare policy starts out making universal coverage the goal. Then, she revisits a distinction that surfaced last summer, but had faded from view of late -- Obama's statement that he, as president, would readily meet directly with the leaders of rogue states.
Clinton criticized that remark at the time. And tonight, she said she would pursue a foreign policy that is "realistic and optimistic, but we start with realism." That means, she elaborates, that she would be less willing than Obama to sit down with rogue-state leaders.
-- Don Frederick
*
No disrespect to the Republicans who still have four candidates running, at least for another week. But this debate with only two really allows time for deeper answers and fewer simplified stump answers. Get the feeling I'm learning more about each of them. Instead of the stupid 30-second answers or raising hands when each party had 8 or 9.
Remember the historic Lincoln-Douglas debates for the Senate seat from Illinois in the 1850s? Abe and Stephen got together for a three-hour discussion, just the two of them. Back and forth, making points, arguing, answering back. Maybe they had bathroom breaks, but no commercial breaks. And no moderators like Anderson Cooper apportioning debate time unfairly, as he did so obviously last night to Mike Huckabee and Ron Paul. Three hours they went at it.
And they did seven of them around the state. Not a bad model.
--Andrew Malcolm
*
At the debate's break, the heated exchanges between Obama and Clinton during their get-together last week in South Carolina (when John Edwards was still part of the mix) have been lacking.
There was a minor spat over the touchy issue of driver licenses for illegal immigrants, but it was tame compared to the brickbats the pair were tossing at each other in the Palmetto State.
The bottom line on the immigration topic was that both would seek the type of comprehensive change that Congress has been unable to agree upon.
-- Don Frederick
*
It was about an hour into the debate when a question was asked directly about Ted Kennedy's much-publicized endorsement at Obama. But by that point, Obama already had worked in two references to the Democratic icon -- once during the discussion of health care, again during the discussion of immigration.
The use of Kennedy's name during the health care segment was effective -- Obama said that in backing him, Kennedy believed his prescription for achieving universal coverage, although not as aggressive as Clinton's would work. Still, Obama must guard against using Kennedy as cover too often.
-- Don Frederick
*
Barring a sudden shift in the debate's final minutes, it may be remembered as the night Clinton and Obama targeted Republicans -- more than each other.
Obama got off a good line about Mitt Romney, when discussing expertise in dealing with the economy. Romney, of course, has stressed his skills in that area. But Obama cracked that Romney "hasn't gotten a very good return on his investment" in his presidential campaign.
Obama also took a swipe at John McCain's remark that America might have a military presence in Iraq for 100 years.
Clinton got the biggest response of the night when she reprised a line she's used before about the prospective Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton White House tenures. It took a Clinton to clean up after the first Bush, she said -- clearly knowing it was a surefire line -- and it might take a Clinton to clean up after the second.
A bit odd she said "might." A show of modesty, perhaps.
-- Don Frederick
*
Who knew that CNN's Wolf Blitzer would present Clinton's with perhaps her trickiest moment?
Blitzer cut to the chase after Clinton, for the umpteenth time, explained why she voted for the measure authorizing military force in Iraq and why she wasn't inclined to apologize for that vote. So, Blitzer interjected, you were "naive" in trusting Bush?
Clinton, obviously, disagreed with that characterization and it earned Blitzer some boos from the crowd. But it was worth a try.
If the start of the debate -- when healthcare was dwelled on -- played to Clinton's strengths, the discussion on Iraq gave Obama a chance -- again for the umpteenth time -- to stress that he got it right (from the Democratic point of view) in opposing an invasion of Iraq from the start.
-- Don Frederick
*
Then came the inevitable question about an Obama-Clinton or Clinton-Obama partnership for the general election, what CNN's Blitzer called "a dream ticket."
For either to answer that would mean they'd contemplated defeat. So clearly neither would. Obama jumped in first, acknowledged that anyone would want Hillary on their ticket and said it would be "premature and presumptuous" to speculate on a vice president with so much of the nomination campaign yet to occur.
But then, surprisingly, and showing his maturity and new deftness in recent months as he matured in the debate process, which had been difficult for him at first, Obama took the question and twisted it into a mini-speech on the kind of people he would want in his administration "to restore hope" (there's that Obama word again) for millions of Americans at home caring for their children and struggling with their mortgages, etc. He got applause.
In the past, as when he, Clinton and John Edwards were once asked their greatest weakness, he answered the question directly: he keeps a rather messy office. The others took it into areas like feeling too passionate about changing America. For several days Obama himself told that story himself on the trail as an example of a lesson.
Clinton tonight said she agreed with everything Barack had said and did a little riff of her own on how united Democrats would be when the primary season is over and they face the Republicans.
--Andrew Malcolm
*
Wolf asked a question on many people's minds tonight, a question that Clinton has been asked before and was prepared for. If she can't control her husband on the hustings of South Carolina, how could she control him in the White House? (No, not that kind of control.)
Clinton let out that increasingly famous laugh. Then proceeded to not answer the question. She said, "Both Barack and I have very passionate spouses who promote and defend us at every opportunity." She said how much she appreciated that and that when she was in the White House she would seek advice from a broad range of advisors but would be the final decision-maker.
Of course, none of that answer acknowledged that Obama's spouse is not a former president with the public podium that brings and that, so far, Michelle Obama has not injected Bill Clinton's lily-white race into the campaign, nor compared him in a demeaning way to past ultimately unsuccessful candidates of his race like, oh, say, Harold Stassen.
--Andrew Malcolm
*
Well, they may not have started the evening off with a much-watched-for handshake, but they proceeded with decorum. And ended happily ever after.
Throughout the evening as Clinton answered or didn't answer her questions, Obama, who used to stand and stare straight ahead, would turn toward his opponent and listen intently, sometimes tilting his head with interest and sometimes jotting down notes with, did you notice, his left hand. Another left-handed potential president like four of the last six actual presidents--Clinton, Bush I, Ronald Reagan and Gerald Ford.
At the end, smiling, perhaps because it was over, Obama stood, towering over the minute Clinton. He turned toward her again and placed his hand on her chair back to politely pull it out as she rose.
Then, no doubt completely unaware of the millions of people and cameras watching, the two warring candidates leaned into each other's ears and exchanged words that must have been hilarious because they were both smiling and laughing and patting each other's arms. Really good friends obviously.
Now come a few days of furious campaigning and the Big Day, Tuesday.
--Andrew Malcolm



Why wait, as Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama can work in 2008 to fix the problems they talk about, NOW!
Posted by: Mr. Smith | January 31, 2008 at 05:51 PM
I heard alot of great ideas but are these just empty promise like everyother person running for president that came before you?
Posted by: Paulo Cunha | January 31, 2008 at 06:02 PM
Considering that both Obama and Clinton are inspiring so many new voters - how interesting would be a combined ticket?
Posted by: jeff jack | January 31, 2008 at 06:19 PM
I was confused about the "no drivers licenses" issue. Surely, if the government wants to know where people are, who aren't considered "legal", the best way to do that is to let them get licenses - they'd have to give proof of where they live, where they were born, what their legal name is, just like I do. They'd have to submit a fingerprint, just like I do.
They could be a different color or something, but at least the information would be in the system if the person in question did something criminal.
I don't have a problem with licenses at all.
I did find it admirable that Obama was willing to come forward and say that people blaming immigrants (read "mexicans") for the current job situation is scapegoating. Used that exact very word. Whereas, Hillary sorta sketched around the question, to not alienate the angry, without offending her possible demographic.
Posted by: Curious | January 31, 2008 at 06:19 PM
good evening,
I'm portuguese and i'm wacthing the democratic debate on cnn i would like just to know the candidates point of view abaout the strike that is taking place for a few months now, screenplayer strike ibelieve...
By the way i had a relative that faught in vietnam you might find is name at the viethnam memorial
Thanks for your kind attention,
Luis Fraga
Posted by: Luis Fraga | January 31, 2008 at 06:24 PM
How long does it take for political decisions to fully execute?
8 - 2 - 8 - 8 years....
My logic... 8 years of President Reagan & 2 years of President Bush Sr..... of which President Clinton benefitted from....
8 years of President Clinton of which President Bush Jr has been blamed for.....
So, does the next 8 years get the benefits from President Bush Jr???
Senator Clinton is hypocritical in her debate tonight. How can she defend the working class when she in fact benefitted from her work on the board of WalMart while keeping the working class in their place? How can she talk about Morality, when in fact, under her husbands administration, it was bombarded with much inquiry into the Lewinsky scandal and the Whitewater scandal?????
I am an independent just for this reason. I just want someone who will lead this country as a LEADER and not sacrifice our populous for their own agenda.
Posted by: Carleton | January 31, 2008 at 06:27 PM
I have found this a very informative debate...biggest problem I have is Hillary's constant non stop talking...does she ever take a breath?
Posted by: larry prosi | January 31, 2008 at 06:34 PM
This question is for both Obama and Clinton. I am from Louisiana. Down here in the south going to church and learning about God is really important. After all we are the Bible Belt. Our teachers still pray with our students before lunch time. I have noticed that some politicians want to take God out of our schools, out of our government, and out of the Constitution. How do you stand on this issue? Will you pray and ask for Gods guidance to help either of you lead this nation?
Posted by: Kandi | January 31, 2008 at 06:38 PM
I am eighteen years old and a first time voter. This may not be important to everyone voting, would like to ask has anyone seen Sen.Obama say the Pledge of Alliegance? I feel that if candidate is running for President of the United States, the candidate should be able to say the Pledge with Pride and Honor..It makes no sense to me that someone would run and not say the Pledge. We are privilaged to live in the United State. Not many people have this opportunity.
Posted by: Elizabeth Green | January 31, 2008 at 06:40 PM
Obama sounds like he has the same arrogance as Bush. Saying its important to be right when a decision is made is pure arrogance. No-one can be right on every decision. If he really believes that, its pretty scary.
Posted by: Tony | January 31, 2008 at 06:43 PM
I am utterly disgusted with Hillary. She drones on and on in her patronizing school marm voice, using her tired old script, speaking of Me Me Me, avoiding the painful truth such as the fact that she voted for the war in Iraq. She also has a bully of a husband who stuck his cigar up Monica Lewinsky's vagina, humilating his wife and daughter.
Obama is doing fantastic - he is the only candidate to vote for!
Posted by: Jen | January 31, 2008 at 06:44 PM
What is your stance on the government pension offset policy?
Will you overturn the current law, for public employees?
Also, what is your true belief in the so called "No Child Left Behind Act"???
Posted by: Carolyn | January 31, 2008 at 06:45 PM
Obama sounds like President Bush in his comments about Senator Clinton's vote on Iraq. The, "I was right I was right." is getting old. Is he saying like Bush that he will make a decision and stick with it no matter what changes or occurs? I don't want more of that. I want a leader that understands the complexities and ever changing climates of foreign policy. Hillary please underscore this you are not doing it enough!
Posted by: Grisella Ramos | January 31, 2008 at 06:52 PM
Who is running for President besides the candidates we see on TV? Does anyone know? I guess the media really does have a BIG roll on who becomes President! Sad...
Posted by: Brian | January 31, 2008 at 06:53 PM
Wow, Head to Head at last, and both proved themselves class. Obama won by about 4 or 5 points. Please vote for him because our primaries in Kentucky dont' come until May!
Brian
Posted by: brian l | January 31, 2008 at 07:06 PM
GO FOR HILLARY!
I have followed the democratic debate live to night on the CNN Europe and are higly impressed by Senator Hillary Clinton and I think she is doing very well in the debate. I do belive that the USA now is ready for a woman in the White House and for us in Europe it's not unusual at all, with a woman in charge in any goverment position. I hope that the american voters this time will go for a woman, for Hillary Clinton, not just because she's a woman, but simply because she is the best candiate. It took a Clinton to clean up after the first Bush - and USA need a Clinton to clean up after the second Bush as well! Good luck and a good election on the super tuseday - I'll watch carefully!
Posted by: Odd Inge Matre | January 31, 2008 at 07:08 PM
Hillary was brilliant tonight. Even my Obama friends admitted it.
Republicans are shaking in their boots at the prospect of a Clinton-Obama. 16 years in the White House for one party? Sayonara GOP!
Posted by: DJK | January 31, 2008 at 07:38 PM
Hillary had the best line of the night.
She was warm, engaging, intelligent, funny, and on.
Obama was stiff, hesitant fairly often, had a few funny lines, but pretty boring most of the time. Definately not his best appearance.
It's too bad he keeps saying he was write about the war from the beginning and criticizing Hillary's vote about the war. Obama did not vote!
Just as she did in Florida, Hillary is going to clean up on Tuesday.
Obama was campaigning, not just for President, he was campaigning for vice-president.
Posted by: terry fisher | January 31, 2008 at 07:51 PM
I was so happy to see both of them act with some class. Although I think HIllary had the best performance, Obama had some great things to say too. I am so happy with the Democratic choices!
Posted by: Jenna | January 31, 2008 at 08:24 PM
Heres how Bill & Hillary get the power back. Florida & Michigan don't count, until Hillary loses - Then McCaulliffe goes into action - the courts finding ultimately shows the no count makes for a "disenfranchisment".
Billarry wins!!!
Posted by: Steve | January 31, 2008 at 08:26 PM
Hillary as usual shows the smooth expertise of a woman who has seen so much in her life both good and bad...We need that experience and brilliance badly at this very pivotal time in our history...Lets see this woman clean up after the mess the men have made in the past 7 years....
Posted by: steve | January 31, 2008 at 09:04 PM
Hillary Clinton caused a problem in the past - many people were hurt by 911 - our country's security was almost totally destroyed by her and her husbands handling of the international issues- I say get Clinton out she didn't even divorce her husband when he enticed a young girl for sexual favors i say hillary get lost
Posted by: lm | January 31, 2008 at 09:29 PM
So after the war, everybody is invited to tea and crumpets?
The Hillary campaign is FINALLY getting the message and they need to PRETEND they're non-contentious. Yes. Hillary's campaign realizes that the general public comprehends they've divisively polarized the party as a means to serve the Bill/Hillary ticket. Mind us, not the nation's ticket, but CLINTON's ticket!
In today's debate, Hillary's cheesy nice personal is pure persona. She's a good actress. She's playing "Obama" nice.
Edward's camp is moving towards Obama and Hillary's desperately trying to emulate Obama. Guess what? It's too late.
SURPRISE! we want UNIFICATION - Obama said CHANGE, but in fact, the people want UNIFICATION. Hill, you BLEW IT! We're sick and tired of polarization. And Bill??? Oh, YOU totally blew it!!!
Posted by: SK | January 31, 2008 at 09:40 PM
I think both Hillary and Obama showed their best tonight. Hillary came out on top though. She was warm, funny, intelligent, and poised. I though she was spot on about the immigration iissue. Nieither one of these candidates want to settle for a vp slot so I doubt we will see the dream ticket. John Edwards would be a good choice of a vp for either Clinton or Obama.
Posted by: Stacey | January 31, 2008 at 10:08 PM
Barak said he would be "right on day one" and then at the very end of the debate he said he won't always be right. Well which is it? You can't staunchly say you'll be right and then say you have to surround yourself with good people because you won't always be right.
Posted by: Jo Ferguson | January 31, 2008 at 10:25 PM