A a whole they made the repub candidates look pathetic. Gavel would be fun to watch in a debate with repubs while the rest would run rings around repubs in intellegence and common sense.

As a group, any one except Gavel and Kucinich, would satisfy me if they became President. While none could be said to shine more brightly than the others, I thought Joe Biden showed to good advantage.

Mark,.....excellent observations about the debate. I thought Hillary looked the most "Presidential," Obama smoked Kucinich on the Iran question, Edwards gave a great answer to the moral leader question, Biden actually came off as a statesman (and had the best tie, by the way), Dodd and Richardson both representd themselves well on foriegn policy questions, Kucinich came off as unreasonable, and Gravel provided comic relief. All in all I would say I'm happy with the group we have running for President. I personally hope either Edwards or Hillary gets the nomination. I won't vote for Kucinich, and of course Gravel stands no chance. Nonetheless the latter two serve the very useful purpose of reminding us that the Democrats are an inclusive party of diversified individuals with varying opinions, and each one deserves to be heard. Overall I thought it was a spirited debate and the Dedmcoartic Party was well represented. I do have to say however, that Brian Williams handled the issue of Giuliani's statement regarding which party would secure the country better, very, VERY poorly. I thought his presentation of Giuliani's statement (as being the country's "general perception"), made an assumption that isn't necessarily true. In that sense I thought/think that Williams was/is somewhat biased, and this is something that The NBC News Department must watch carefully over the course of the next year and a half.

Which one of these candidates was the tallest midget? On the whole, a very unimpressive group. Any in the Republican field is much more eminent.

Everybody is still campaigning against President Bush, whom cannot run again. Everyone of them condemned everything, I did not hear, as for the last 6 years, their plans or recommendations to correct the so called problems with, SOCIAL SECURITY, HEALTH CARE, ETC.

Obama "smoked" kucinich ?! What debate were you watching. The exact opposite is true. Kucinich only brought Obama's very words back to him and pointed out what a danger he is should he be elected.

If you want to see what the extreme fringe of the democratic party represents, just look at Kucinich and Gravel. My god, those two idiots would be the perfect team for Moveon.org. Hard to say who would be president or vice president. Both were equally stupid and Gravel must have come across some bad crystal meth with some of his answers. Of course, all I heard was President Bush and Iraq. Liberals were waiting about the real issues facing americans and of course, liberals being liberals, did not offer anything anybody wanted to hear. A totally useless debate. Hopefully the GOP will have better answers to what americans really want to talk about.

I heard Brian Williams won

as a whole...yes they all "looked good", thankfully i dont vote based on "good looks" or "Presidnetial looks"...as for who got my attention more, i'ld have to say it was Dennis Kucinich, he was the only one to bring up the fact that Dick Cheney had violated the Constitution, while all the others stood there and for all to see ,showed their true support on article 333, so we have a large majority of Dem candidates that will probably willfully break the law just like the Bush administration has been doing now since 2000. as for the debate itself ...i'll wait until the republican debate to make that comment, i suspect msnbc will be very cushy when it comes to time and answering questions... after all every media outlet on television loves those old guys

Overall, I thought Biden and Edwards did the best job. I was disappointed that Richardson did seem very out of place; didn't inspire my confidence, even though I like his experience level.

I do agree and wish the so called pundits would see this, that Obama goes into his professor mode, which he once was, in quieter settings. You see this in the small gatherings with voters. I wish the people on MSNBC would understand this. I don't like Hillary but, give her kudos for her solid performance last night. She was a bit shrill at points but, still a solid overall performance. kudos to Hillary. Edwards I expected alot more from. He seemed off and at times snotty. This was off putting. He is not above it all. I did expect a more stronger performance. Disappointing. Biden was refreshing, commanding of course and funny. He was a surprising breath of air. Who would have thought. I was disappointed by Richardson. I like him and he was a strong second in my choice of candidates but, he really disappointing last night. Kuchinich was as strange as ever and Gravel was the scary but, fun old man. Our new Stockdale.

Obama may not have been stump speech spectacular, certainly, but that wouldn't have been the right approach to take here. Ultimately, when people think of who should be put in the most powerful position on the earth, two important qualities would seem to be finding the most modest candidate, and the most intelligent. Looking up at that stage and asking who out of everyone had the least sense of personal ego and the greatest aura of perspective, as well as who sounds the most objectively intelligent, Obama continues to make an exceptional case. Edwards was also impressive on both those fronts. His first answer was very strong, the personal story he tied in was very effective, and he clearly outperformed Hillary Clinton, so I agree with you on that. Gravel, in many ways, stole the show with his fireworks. I give credit where it's due here; he brought a lot of important information into the debate and made it a hell of a lot more entertaining as well as informative. Dodd and Kucinich did much better than expected, if not as notably as the above three. Clinton actually had a very good moment talking about Columbine and guns; her voice finally softened, and she came off very genuine. Unfortunately, it only lasted a moment; the majority of the debate she sounded robotic if not slightly yelling, and you can't win a debate like that with positions that sound so rehearsed and packaged. She also sounded way too hawkish on the retalliation question, and Obama one upped her there by putting the welfare and safety of American citizens first before the bluster of vengeance. Biden didn't hurt himself, so in that sense he exceeded expectations, but there's really no gaining ground for him in this debate. Poor Richardson, though. Between discriminating on behalf of race, embracing guns and tax cuts, getting out of Iraq with diplomacy in one day, saying his big mistake is essentially being such a wonderful Democrat, and sounding way too hawkish, this was a TERRIBLE Democratic primary performance. Some of it wasn't his fault, to be fair; Williams asked two questions in a row (guns, taxes) that really helped box him in here, and the recentness of Virginia Tech was also rough timing for the governor, but still - ouch. MSNBC.com's before and after rating the candidates poll shows that everyone can argue that they gained some ground, with the exception of Richardson, who lost considerable ground. I'm actually surprised; I expected him to do quite well in the debates.

No one showed me why I should vote for any of them. Complaining about the republicans is old. TELL ME WHY I should vote for you. If you are going to tax me to death, tell me, "The rich" according to the IRS pay their share. Again, that arguement is old. Why should I vote for them?

Hillary and Joe Biden were the best. And to Jerry from Corpus Christy: The tallest midget may be you. Keep voting for a Republican just so we can screw the country and the world, just a tiny bit more.

I was impressed by Biden, Hillary and Obama, though I thought Chris Dodd was also solid as a rock. Edwards seemed a bit subdued and he seemed like a typical limosine liberal- who talks up poverty issues, then gets himself a $400 haircut. Richardson might do for Secretary of State, or UN Ambassador- even VP. He could pull in Western and Hispanic votes, but doesn't seem to cut it as a front-runner. I did find myself really liking Kucinich's refreshing honesty- but he's probably too much the honest populist to make it to the presidency-these days the winner has to tango with the corporate interests. Gravel just seemed like a blast from the past- an old hippie-type Vietnam war protester brought back to the future.

I guess conservatives must have gotten a different debate than I did. I know there was a lot about Iraq and foreign policy in general, but there were also quite a few questions about doemstic policy, including the candidates health care initiatives. Be patient, people. In an hour and a half, with 8 candidates, you can't cover every topic of interest. I don't think anyone will dispute that the situation in Iraq dominates the political discourse and therefore it rightly received the most attention at this early stage.

Jerry in Corpus Christi and Dave in TN, good thing for most Americans will be voting for one of these men for President next year and not one of your Republican heroes. As for them running against George Bush; he is the reason one of them will be winning despite the fact he can't run again.

I was glad to see that they were not attacking each other, instead focusing on what has gone wrong in the last 6 years and what to do about it. It's important to remember that the others on the stage are not the enemy. I hope the tone of the debates remains respectful and allows more substance to emerge.

I disagree with many of the negative comments regarding Bill Richardson's performance. What I saw was some one with well thought out ideas who new exactly what he wanted to accomplish were he elected. I did feel that he may have come across a bit gruff but also showed a sense of humor. I am not saying that he wuold necessarily be by first choice at this time but I do feel that some of the criticism directed toward him was a bit unfair.

This is not a question, but a statement to any and all political leaders on both state and federal level. We as a county have some serious problems to deal with and we need direct answers and responses for those problems. I don’t want to indulge in the problems. We all know what they are. I don’t want to hear about campaign / political finance and parties pointing fingers at each other. If you’re in office, you only have to answer one question. What can I do to help and improve the condition of the people of the United States? We’re the richest and most powerful country on Earth and we can’t even help our own people. So what’s the good news you ask? We have a great system and resources to combat the problems, which we face as a nation. Why doesn’t it work? Four syllables, WIFM, What’s In It For Me. As long as we have people in office who care about themselves and their interests, the problems, which we face won’t get solved. So here’s my challenge for every political leader, from the White House to a mayor of a small town. Do what is best for the people. It might not be the popular thing to do, but it’s the right thing to do.

As a registered Republican who is fed up with his party, I was impressed by what the Democrats had to say last night. They obviously aren't the demons that my conservative bretheren have made them out to be and I truly believe that one of them will win next year. It pains me to say this. But, I am ASHAMED of what the Republican party in this country has become. From what I saw last night, I could easily see myself voting for Clinton, Biden, Edwards or Dodd. I might have some trouble with Obama, and Richardson, and I definitely can't vote for Kucinich.

Rather than an actual debate, this exercise was a meet and greet to the public. Although, most of America doesn't watch one channel, snippets of the gathering will be shown, until the next one takes place. Many, who are not political junkies, have never seen many of these prospective candidates speaking, much less on the same stage. I, as a Democract, am very happy with the slate of possibilities. Personally, I agree with Dennis Kunicich, Vice President Cheney should be brought up on Articles of Impeachment, for lying to the American public, and subverting the American Constiution. Of course, it won't happen...but I would support Impeachment of both President Bush, and the aforementioned Cheney. There should be consequences for criminal, immmoral behaviour, and crimes rising to the level of Impeachable offenses.

TERRY BELLINGHAM WA....."Obama "smoked" kucinich ?! What debate were you watching." TERRY, I was watching the debate that you obviously weren't paying attention to. Kucinich tried to assert that Obama (of all people), had a hidden agenda for war with Iran. Obama merely stated that "all options (were) on the table," with regard to Iran. He never said anything, at anytime about bombing them. Obama clearly and calmly explained that. Kucinich interupted him twice while he was speaking. Obama shot him down both times, the second time telling Kucinich to "let (me) finish." Kucinich pretty much came off as mean spirited and weak on national defense, which is exactly the image of The Democratic Party that republiCANTS have siezed upon for some time, and the image that Democrats are trying to shake. Also, his necktie wasn't tied as neatly as it should have been. Anyone else notice that? (ha, ha)

Sen. Clinton was the hands-down winner of last night's debate. She was smart, prepared and demonstrated she's clearly the best choice to lead the nation in '08. Sen. Biden and Sen. Dodd did pretty well. Rep. Kucinich did pretty well too. Former Sen. Edwards seemed a bit off his game, but will likely perform better in the next debate. Gov. Richardson is not "presidential" enough. Sen. Obama demonstrated he's not ready for prime time. His financial supporters should demand a refund. Brian Williams is a lousy moderator. His voice is grating....

I think it's ridiculous and shameful that you're already trying to uninvite Mike Gravel from the future debates. He was right on one thing: The rhetoric they (namely the top field of candidates) use is dangerous, desperate and a hinderance to moving forward at home and diplomatically abroad. The media are so good at this. They're so good at setting the table for the country, as if they know what's best. Just look at the entry: Clinton, Obama and Edwards get good, positive marks and are at the top and are the only people really given a chance. The media are so fast to get their opinions in, as if, because they're around these people all the time, they need to guide us. Or maybe it's just them needing to feel important. Perhaps all that time following candidates is clouding their minds just a bit too much.

I was disheartened at the "moral leader" question. This was clearly designed to elicit either a response of "Jesus Christ" or "my wife." I thought Edwards finessed it well, but I hate, hate, hate this notion that only someone who ostentatiously wears religion on his sleeve is capable of being moral. Maybe those who believe this need religion in order to keep themselves in line, but some of us live our lives quite morally without religion, thank you very much. It's like the people who call C-SPAN and say they support Bush because he is a "Christian man." A drunk who makes jokes about soldiers dying in Iraq; a man who talks about the sanctity of human life while his policies allow tainted food and the killing of civilians in Iraq? This is Christian?

I, for one, believe that Edwards was the best performer last night. It was clear that he had taken time to develop specific proposals. I pretty much don't agree with any of this plans but at least he has put some together. Most everyone else seemed to try to speak as generically as possible. Obviously the loser of the night was George Bush. Unfortunately for them, they can't run against him.

For those who haven't been keeping up with the latest fashions, the dunce cap has been replaced by a T-shirt that reads "I Voted for Bush twice and would do it again." We have a couple of them on this thread. One of the candidates responded to a question about losing the war in Iraq by saying that war was lost the day we invaded. I think it was Gravel, but I'm going to watch the whole thing again and pay closer attention.

I'd have to say that the loser in this debate was California and the Pacific coast. I got home at 6:00 pm PST and it was already over. What's the big rush MSNBC ? Why can't you stage these things at a reasonable time for the Pacific time zone? I did see the sommentary afterwards. It did validate the leading candidates refusal to participate in a Faux Newz sponsored debate. Imagine the Faux bozos giving commentary on the Democratic field.

I wonder what would happen if America refused to vote for any candidate until something was done about the war and about the major oil companies raping of America

I agree with you, Ryan (Michigan, I don't very well agree with Edwards' policy, but I sure as hell thought he did a fine good job. Richardson looked stressed unfortunately because I like him.Kunich def impressed, and Gravel surprised me when he cursed at Obama. Overal, highlight was when Kucinich pulled out Constitution.

Which one of these candidates was the tallest midget? On the whole, a very unimpressive group. Any in the Republican field is much more eminent. MikeV, Johns Island, SC (Sent Friday, April 27, 2007 10:15 AM)..........Oh really Mike, like who? Mitt "Big Game Hunter" Romney, or "Rappin' Rudy 'G' The Gigolo of The G.O.P.", or John "Bomb, Bomb, Bomb, Bomb Bomb, Iran" McCain, or maybe even Fred "Scooter Libbey is innocent" Thomspon. Tell us which one of those MENTAL midgets do YOU want. Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha.

Can anyone tell me what looking "presidential" means?? What is that code for? I think that is one of the most ridiculous terms I've heard before in my life. No one was the hands down winner. It wasn't a debate. It was a fancy Q & A and not really all that fancy. I'm leaning towards Obama--but after last night I could vote for any of them as it's not much difference between the top 3 candidates (Clinton, Edwards and Obama). I don't think anyone hurted or greatly benefitted from anything that was said last night.

JJ: so, tell us how you REALLY feel about Christians.I thought America is a place for EVERYONE, regardless of race, CREED, or political conviction. I know plenty of Deists and Atheists who are moral and upright, and are not the least bit intimidated by Christ's teachings, or His followers. Would that qualify you as a religious racist? Sure smells like one.

I was watching the debate in which Obama and Hillary had more questions AND more time and more tv coverage, which was completely unfair.Pre and post game analysis (cough cough) was mostly all about them I also watched debate in which Kucinich very PROPERLY pointed out what what Obama did say."all options" He should not have said that if he didn't mean it.He has on many times brought up attacking Iran.The CIA itself said they don't have any weapons. He voted AGAINST a resolution which would have pulled the troops out by July 2007.Antiwar Dems cannot see the utter PHONINESS of Obama's position...they are blinded by this ridiculus hype the media give to him. He supported Lieberman over Lamont.He bowed down before the Israel war machine practically and is is just another corporate war politician. Kucinich challenged his views properly and if the Democrats actually believed in half of what theu SUPPOSEDLY stand for he'd be leading in the polls among them.

Sierra: you rant against MSNBC insensitivity in not accommodating voters on the Left (West: sorry) coast, and then somehow disparage "Faux news" for their hypothetical lack of impartial commentary ability, that never took place???? "FAUX news" scheduled their debate so that you could have seen it. Snubbing of an entire Coast by MSNBC, so that the newsmakers in NewYork/Washington D.C. can benefit, is that what you like in your news source? Better figure out who is getting scr----d by whom, my dear.

Brian Williams owes Katrina and Rita survivors and all who care about how they're faring and about storm recovery in general an apology. Were it not for the fact that Obama began his response to the question about how a simultaneous terrorist attack which obliterated 2 American cities would be dealt with by bringing up how the Administration had mishandled a hurricane's hitting New Orleans, that beleaguered city never would have come up at all. For Williams to forget about Katrina as he did is unconscionable--and doubly shameful is the fact that no candidate other than Obama had the moral courage to bring it up. It's time for a reality check: Over a year-and-a-half after the storm, Louisiana is still fighting to survive, and Mississippi still needs a lot of help to become whole. People in those states who are still dealing with Katrina's aftereffects, struggling to rebuild their homes and lives in the face of the magnitude of the devastation and tight red tape and other signs of Bush Administration lack of compassion are still in a world of hurt. This is not the time for Brian Williams and the majority of the Dem candidates to forget all about Katrina and Rita. In fact, it seems as if Williams has stopped caring about what happens to New Orleans, the Mississippi Gulf Coast, and the rest of the storm zone. He no longer cares that many innocent, law-abiding storm survivors--families with children, the elderly, etc--in Louisiana and Mississippi are now stuck in cramped, uncomfortable trailers in FEMA trailer parks which have become festering sores of drugs, prostitution, and violent crime. He no longer cares about the fact that infrastructure and other systems such as New Orleans' school and justice systems are inadequate even for a city of her diminished size. He no longer cares about the areas of Louisiana and Mississippi that still look as they did a day after the storm. Williams seemimgly no longer cares if the beautiful, historic city of New Orleans dies and her one-of-a-kind culture vanishes. And here's why Williams must have felt it would not matter if he forgot all about Katrina and Rita survivors and the importance of storm recovery: He knows they have no K Street lobbying groups nor well-oiled, well-moneyed special-interest groups sticking up for them and pulling for their cause. (In fact, if you think about the domestic topics that had been discussed during the debate, they seemed a catalog of topics pushed by various special-interest groups with direct lines to NBC's network news department.) Nor do Katrina and Rita survivors, many of whom are poor people of color, have a voice of their own. And Louisiana and Mississippi are not only the 2 poorest states in the nation--but they voted Red in the last election and have precious few electoral votes between them, so to most Democrats they don't seem worth fighting for. Hence their silence on Katrina recovery. Maybe to Williams and most of the Democrats Louisiana and Mississippi don't matter because they're flyover country. I strongly doubt that, had a similarly-bad disaster hit someplace like New York, it would be neglected the way Katrina and Rita have. In fact, it still would be a regular topic in the news. And I have news for Williams and all the Dems except Obama--the last time I looked, Louisiana and Mississippi were still part of the United States. It's time to start treating them as such instead of remaining silent on the need to rebuild and to help Katrina and Rita survivors lift themselves up.

The debate made me proud to be a Democrat. All of the candidates were intelligent, informed and articulate. Even those who come from the far left of the Party and probably will not be finishers showed a level of patriotism and passion for American ideals that was inspiring. I think Senator Biden, who well represents my State, is a real statesman and probably should be our next Secretary of State if not President. While I would be comfortable voting for almost any of the candidates, I think Hillary has the most knowledge, experience and common sense. She has mellowed since her Health Care days and will be an excellent President.

And just why did Obama bring up Katrina ? Because he was AVOIDING the question and changing the subject. I simply do NOT understand this Obama mania. He does not have the COURAGE to not vote NO on war appropriations.He is just more talk.

Mike Gravel and Kucinich NEED to be at every debate just to make the other cookie-cutter candidates squirm! Gravel was correct - we did lose Iraq the day we invaded because the imbecile-in-chief never should have invaded in the first place! They were involved with 9/11 because it gave them carte blanche to do whatever they wanted. Google vide: 9/11 Press for Truth

Everybody got what they wanted.... From http://www.solidpolitics.com Edwards is the winner according to the Daily Kos poll, Obama wins a poll of South Carolina debate viewers, Hillary wins the media pundit poll and Biden, Dodd and Richardson scored well in debate wrapups in local newspapers in South Carolina and Iowa. In the end it will come down to who has the best television commercials.... It always does....

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8OP3PA00&show_article=1 "I think America is ready for a multilingual president," Clinton said LMAO

To TERRY BELLINGHAM WA; Obama didn't deny saying "all options". He denied having a "hidden agenda" to bomb Iran, which is what Kucinich, rather foolishly, accused him of. All options means just that. ALL OPTIONS. It doesn't mean that Obama would use the military option first, he clearly explained that. He said he would sit down and talk with them and try to work things out. But, Iran in possession of a nuclear weapon is a very bad thing for that region, and the rest of the world. If we are to negotiate with them, the military option can't be take off the table until an accord is reached. THAT's what Obama said, and he didn't backpeddle one bit as Kucinich repeatedly interrupted him. The problem with Kucinich is that he exemplifies the stereo type that CANTservatives & republiCANTS have hung on Liberals & Democrats, that they are too soft on Foreign Policy and National Defense. We, who've read history books and kept watch over current events these past few years, know that isn't true. But, Kucinich makes it hard to convince "crossover" voters that we aren't what the repukes say we are. Still and all, I do believe that his voice should be heard, no matter how foolish he made himself look last night.

TERRY, BELLINGHAM WA--Katrina needed to be brought up. It was wrong--wrong--wrong for Brian Williams not to ask about or even mention this disaster which still affects so many and it was cowardly for the other Dems not to bring it up themselves. The only thing wrong with Obama's mentioning Katrina is the fact that he did not say more about it. The way Katrina and their aftermath have been handled is a national disgrace and the fact that the mainstream media (exemplified by Williams last night) has mainly been keeping it out of the news is despicable.

I was a Obama supporter but I was disappointed with his all talk and no substance performance. His ability was greatly exaggerated by the press, and I was very disappointed. However, I was very impressed with Joe Biden's performance. He appeared to have the most common sense, and his theory on Iraq may turn out to be the only correct way to handle the war. Go for it Biden!

I have said all along, that I will vote for the first candidate that has a real plan to fix health care in this country. I think Edward's is the best so far. I must say though,that I would vote for anyone over Bush.

jerry, you said, "Of course, all I heard was President Bush and Iraq. Liberals were waiting about the real issues facing americans." There you go again with the "REAL" problem. If Iraq and Bush aren't "REAL" problems, what in your mind are the real problems? In your last sentence you say, "Hopefully the GOP will have better answers to what americans really want to talk about." There's that word "REAL" again. I'm surprised you didn't use the word to modify "Americans" as well. But, then again you did that the other day; don't want to repeat yourself maybe. While not all Americans want to hear about Iraq and Bush, I think most Americans would like to. Finally, please show your respect for your fellow Americans by captitolizing the word.

I meant "capitalize" in my previous post. I didn't mean the building. My error.

I don't think any major candidate did anything last night to make you NOT vote for them. What did you expect Clinton, Edwards or Obama to do? Walk on water last night?? It was a Q & A. I don't think the format bode well for Edwards or Obama. Everyone should keep an open mind at this point. It's still really really early!!

When was the last time you guys went into any kind of negotiation saying "all options are on the table in case I don't get what I want? (hint, hint, that means leaving the option of killing you)"

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):