Tape-Delayed Live-Blogging Thoughts

Posted: Sunday, August 19, 2007 11:39 AM by Chuck Todd

From NBC's Chuck Todd
The following were my virtual live thoughts while watching the debate in the Washington, DC-area an hour later than folks in Iowa were watching.

-- Poll Introductions: Seriously, it was bad form in their first debate and it was bad form in this debate. The bad form? Introducing the candidates in the order of their poll ratings. Unless you plan to use the poll to trim the field, was it really the right way to introduce these candidates? Doesn't it reinforce the INCORRECT notion that the media is obsessed with the horse race?
-- Primarily About Obama or Clinton? The first set of questions reinforce this notion that I've argued before: This primary campaign seems to be more of a referendum about Obama's experience, rather than Clinton's electability. I'm still not sure if this is a good thing for Clinton or a good thing for Obama. Ultimately, a candidate does hope a campaign is a referendum on them, keeps the candidate in control of the message. Then again, it's sometimes VERY difficult for a candidate to win a campaign that is a referendum on said candidate.
-- Iowa Nice Watch: This was interesting watching the candidates answer the first question about Obama's experience. None of the candidates wanted to "go there." But the awkward silences and implications WERE there. Both Richardson and Biden, in particular, seemed to WANT to criticize Obama on experience but were uncomfortable taking a shot. Perhaps both are gun shy because they've gotten into verbal trouble a few times this campaign.
-- Always An Eye On The General: Clinton's defense of what she says and doesn't say about her foreign policy on the campaign trail sounds a bit like the Republican criticism of Democrats in campaigns past that what is said on the campaign trail is seen/heard overseas.
-- Favoring The Frontrunners: If I were supporters of any candidate NOT named Clinton and Obama, I would be infuriated with the first two questions of this debate.
-- Take Take Electability Critics: Clinton dropped a little news at the debate noting she would be getting the endorsement of Arkansas Gov. Mike Beebe. AP's Ron Fournier may have found a lot of elected Democrats to say on background they fear Clinton at the top of the ticket but I am struck by the number of these moderate Democrats who are publicly backing her now.
-- Poor Dennis: It took ABC 25 minutes to get to Dennis Kucinich and the candidate let him know about it. Interesting that Kucinich kind of, sort of, took a shot at Edwards by dropping the name Fortress.
-- Free Media: Biden got a favor from ABC by airing his Iraq ad for all the Sunday morning world to see.
-- Halftime Thought: Despite the hype, it appears none of the frontrunners were interested in engaging each other too harshly. ABC tried, but the candidates didn't cooperate. Edwards, about 40 minutes in, underscored this decision by the frontrunners when he praised all of his colleagues on stage.
-- He May Not Be A Scientist, But... While I'm in the camp that Richardson permanently damaged himself over the last 3 months, it should be acknowledged that I think he did his best job yet at a debate, which was a low bar since he had some very poor debate and forum appearances in the past.
-- From Delaware To Delaware County, Iowa: Biden, once again, is coming across as the straightest talker, but the guy just can't get campaign traction. If Biden hangs in there long enough and Richardson fades a bit (due to his numerous gaffes), I wouldn't be surprised if Biden is the guy that surprisingly rises in Iowa.
-- Why The 2nd Tier Matters: Watching these debates for both parties, I am struck at how necessary the 2nd tier candidates are. They represent, in each party, a specific view in the liberal or conservative rainbow and the eventual nominee will be influenced by these folks, whether it's Kucinich on the war and trade or Tancredo on immigration.
-- Late Debate Thoughts: All of the candidates seemed aware of the phrase "Iowa nice." It's something Iowans pride themselves on; they punish negativity and it seems all of the frontrunners decided to show themselves as "Iowa nice."

EMAIL THIS

Comments

It's all about Hillary. hillaryclinton.com see why.

Jeffrey C. Timmons, Minneapolis,Mn. (Sent Sunday, August 19, 2007 12:10 PM)

Lookie here... hillaryclinton.com

Beth Monroe, New Orleans, La. (Sent Sunday, August 19, 2007 12:11 PM)

Richardson finally started to get traction once he started running ads in Iowa. I suspect you'll see the same thing with Biden, now that he's got ads up, too. Remember, his campaign has more of a central, focused message than Richardson's. That was Dodd's problem - he ran ads, but had no central message behind them. So I imagine that now that Biden is out of Committee hearings and has ads on the air, something will start to move.

It would help, of course, if you people in the MSM gave as much attention to Biden, Richardson, and Dodd as you do the "big" three. Remember, Kerry only had 3% in the polls in December '03.

Nathan E., Hanover, NH (Sent Sunday, August 19, 2007 12:15 PM)

This was an intelligent debate. I actually like what I heard from Biden and Dodd today. While I know they've got experience, I didn't know much about what they stood for in terms of their aspirations for President. Obama and Clinton held onto their frontrunner status, but again Biden and Dodd deserve a second look.

Chris Young (Sent Sunday, August 19, 2007 12:32 PM)

This was a rather weak debate but, one thing has struck me lately.There must be a reason everyone is so threatened by Obama. His presence and common sense approach seems to intimadae people of the right as well as his running mates and the media. If any of the other candidates had his record (voting against the war) they would be spouting it every two sconds and using as a weapon. He seems vey humble aout this. He still may be the cadidate to beat in my book.

Don Short Pasadena. CA (Sent Sunday, August 19, 2007 12:52 PM)

The more debates I watch, the more I realize that I will not vote for Hillary, Obama or Edwards.

C'mon MSM! Shutup about the top tier already. I have a decision to make. And I need to learn more about Joe Biden, because I am liking him more and more.

Jennifer Westin (Sent Sunday, August 19, 2007 1:17 PM)

Sorry, Chuck, but the media IS obsessed with the horse race.

Starting this campaign, I'd actually considered Richardson as a possible number two. He's now in the Gravel, Kucinich camp, as far as I'm concerned. The biggest disappointment of the lot by far.

cms (Sent Sunday, August 19, 2007 1:41 PM)

It is unconscionable and pathetic that Kucinich was not given more time. The comment from Chris Young above exemplifies that the efforts and platforms of the so-called lower tier candidates are being discounted by those who have vested interests in steering the nomination in the direction of Obama, Clinton, Edwards. We as average Americans can no longer let money and media influence override our common sense. Thanks to the internet, we are at least better equipped to learn the facts for ourselves. With it being so far from the actual nomination, this CAN be the year that everything changes. www2.kucinich.us or dennis4president.com - first steps to learn more about the most silenced candidate today. Thank you.

Erica (Sent Sunday, August 19, 2007 1:42 PM)

Hillary won - just as she has in ALL of the other debates. Calm, cool, poised and ready to lead - day 1.

Obama stuttered and hemed and hawed his way through once agian. Totally medicore. Where is this great speaker we were reading so much about? He hasn't shown up at any of the debates.

craig chicago (Sent Sunday, August 19, 2007 2:07 PM)

Obama should welcome the referendum on him if he has the experience to lead. Whether Clinton raised the experience issue or not, it would have been a huge factor in the minds of electorates. Having raised the issue at the this point in the campaign offers Obama the opportunity to address it in a very frontal fashion. That is why Obama is saying that Dick Cheney and Rumsfel have the most experience but how did they get us in this quagmire in Iraqi. Is judgment stupid?

Former President Bill Clinton is a factor and will continue to be within Democrat political power base. Some public office holder Democrats are endorsing Hilary not because of her electability but to avoid crossing Bill Clinton’s power-base within the party that may come back to hunt them. If these people are endorsing Hilary out of conviction, then they will deploy their network machinery into electing Hilary. Else, you can force a horse to the stream but you cannot force it to drink water.

Edward, Sacramento CA (Sent Sunday, August 19, 2007 2:10 PM)

Joe Biden: consistant! Staight forward and honest answers on his positions on the issues! Hang in there Senator,don't drop out. I suspect you have more support than most people realize. Making another contibution to the Biden Campaign!

va. (Sent Sunday, August 19, 2007 3:15 PM)

With the exception maybe of Gravel, I would be happy to evaluate and eventually vote for any of the democratic candidates. As a victim of NJ's superfluous Tuesday, I welcome the chance to see and hear ALL of the candidates, warts and all, in order to make an informed decision from among many choices, not just the choices selected for me by other states and/or the media.

Bring them all on -- let them all speak -- let us hear everything, and then let the electorate make their decision. I will probably still be undecided in January, but it won't be for a lack of information.

520 days and counting . . .

Carol, Long Valley NJ (Sent Sunday, August 19, 2007 4:17 PM)

that was one of the WORST debate setups yet (along with CNN of course). George S. shows why he really is a hack, the network showed their true colours by posting the poll numbers, and the question positioning was so blatantly skewed.

Why is Richardson running btw? He has nothing to offer. And why is Kucinich so ignored? He is adding substantive content to the debates.

This one gets an F on my report. And I will also be making a point of boycotting ABC and their sponsors from hereon in.

stephen, Niagara Falls, NY (Sent Sunday, August 19, 2007 4:21 PM)

I recorded the debate and just watched a portion of it again. I'm impressed with the quality of the candidates and lamenting that the GOP field is not in this same league.

Suprisingly, I was most impressed with Joe Biden and his well thought out position on Iraq. I've known a little bit of his background and reputation as sometimes being a little long-winded. He brought that up and rather joked about it which I liked.

The press, and all of us, have to stop looking almost 100% at the troika at the top of the polls and examine the rest. I agree that Senator Biden's support will go up in Iowa. He would be a great President with his years of experience in not only foreign but domestic policy. A good running mate would be Barack Obama.

Joe Mathews, Manchester, VT (Sent Sunday, August 19, 2007 4:33 PM)

But, Clinton's endorsements come from their little club known as the DLC in which she is queen of.
progressives do not endorse or support her. Check out the member list.
though I thought ABC made this more of a clinton and obama debate I must say I got a kick out the second question. About how she is causing the party alot of concern of electibility. I also loved that they put those headlines on the air!
I really liked it when Obama pointed out America cannot be the ones to partition iraq. this is something I am impessed with for it's common sense.

diane (Sent Sunday, August 19, 2007 8:29 PM)

Richardson said this, Hillary passed gas, John picked his nose, Obama was drunk, Biden ate a doughnut. Oh, so what!!! It is 16+ months before the election. We're going to be sick of all these staged events from the Democrats by Thanksgiving.

Lil Stantson, Indian Shores, FL (Sent Sunday, August 19, 2007 10:20 PM)

Today's debate was a preview in how the Democrats could lose in '08 by being too cautious on Iraq and out of touch with the American voter. Clinton, Obama and Edwards aren't confident enough in their judgment and lack the foreign policy expertise to order a complete withdrawal should they get elected. We saw this today again at the debate in Iowa. They'll keep forces in Iraq for years to come.

What difference then will there be on the most important issue of the campaign between the Democratic and Republican Presidential nominees? No Republican will be advocating an endless commitment to Iraq. Everyone will be critical to a degree of how Bush has prosecuted the war.

The path out of Iraq for Clinton, Obama and Edwards will be long march spread over years. That will be true as well with any Republican Presidential nominee.

I am supporting Richardson in part because he has the best plan for leaving Iraq, and the diplomatic experience to see that we leave without the region descending into further chaos. William M. Arkin who writes on National and Homeland Security for the Washington Post recently commented:

"It is on Iraq though, that Richardson really shines. "I believe that we need to withdraw all of our troops within six months," he writes. "Other than the customary Marine contingent at the embassy, I would not leave anyone behind. And if the embassy isn't safe, they're coming home too. No airbases. No troops in the Green Zone. No embedded soldiers training Iraqi forces, because we know what that means. It means our troops would still be out on patrol -- with targets on their backs."

We are spending $10 billion a month on Iraq, Richardson says. "Of the many ways in which Mr. Bush's ill-conceived war has distracted us from our real national security needs, this is the most dangerous," he concludes. "There is not a single sign that Iraq is improving. To the contrary, every indication is that it's getting worse, and a smaller force will do nothing to change that."

And so Bill Richardson says something that the other candidates evidently can't or won't: "A regional crisis is worthy of military intervention. A true threat to our country's security is worthy of war. But a struggle between a country's warring factions, where both sides hate the United States, is not worthy of one more lost American life.""

Stephen Cassidy, CA (Sent Monday, August 20, 2007 12:42 AM)

Wow, there really isn't anyone who debated today that is more in tune to what America needs right now than Dennis Kucinich. Don't fall for the poll numbers, folks, Dennis is rising, his message is getting out, and he truly is the only democratic candidate worthy to lead this nation. No one but Dennis 2008! Check out dennis4president.com for more information.

Brian, Carmel, IN (Sent Monday, August 20, 2007 12:46 AM)

The treatment Kucinich received is contemptible and demonstrates how the corporate media has come to believe that it has a right to select candidates for the population. Dennis Kucinich is the only candidate with an established record of voting against the war in Iraq and the appropriations that have allowed it to continue; he best represents the wishes of American voters-- if only the media gatekeepers would let the people hear.

EKSwitaj (Sent Monday, August 20, 2007 1:37 AM)

No matter who is "in the lead" I want to hear from all the candidates. Kucinich could have been a cardboard cut-out for the amount of time he got to speak. It would have been obvious to a first grader that the latest ABC debate was totally biased.

Jennie McBride (Sent Monday, August 20, 2007 9:03 AM)

I viewed the Iowa debate, and after viewing Joe Biden's 30 second spot, I sent him a contribution for $50.00. His use of the killed young solder in the C- 130 carco plance was emotionally powerful. And yes, I do not want to see any grand children being killed in Irag.
Biden's global understanding of our nation's friends and enemies will give us a President with proper, thoughtful judgment.

Jack McGrath, Valley Village, CA (Sent Monday, August 20, 2007 2:59 PM)

After watching all of the debates to date, I must say that Senator Biden has impressed me the most. As an Independent voter I am leaning strongly towards Biden.
I must also agree with other viewers that the debates seem to be somewhat bias in the airtime for each candidate.

Turner, Spokane Washington (Sent Monday, August 20, 2007 4:22 PM)

FINALLY! Biden is getting the respect he deserves. He is the candidate best positioned to take on ANY of the Republicans.

With all the debate discussions why is it that no news program counted the number of times one of the other candidates said "Joe is right."

To donate go to: www.joebiden.com

Biden/Obama 08
Today, Tomorrow, Together

Elizabeth Sullivan, San Diego, CA (Sent Monday, August 20, 2007 6:54 PM)

They've gotta get a few of these candidates out of the debate so they have more time to have some back and forth exchanges between a candidates where they can really get into some details about issues. As it stands now the few times they actually get a good exchange going (Biden & Richardson), they've got to stop it and bring all 8 candidates in and then the momentum is lost.

Gravel, Kucinich and Dodd all have ZERO chance so they should drop out now for the good of the party. They just cloud the issues by having too many people and all that will do is help Hillary remain the front runner, and that is not good for the Democrats.

Gravel seems like he might be getting senile. He knows the issues and speaks the direct truth on many issues, but he's not sharp enough to make coherent points without going off on all kinds of irrelevant tangents.

Kucinich has repeatedly said he would not give the order to kill Bin Laden if he were president and had the chance. This disqualifies him. Also, he's like a little boy scout who's just having fun trying to get attention for being a good little boy scout. Sure - he's a good, honest guy who means well, but in a Brady Bunch sort of way; and who really thinks we're going to elect The Brady Bunch to be Commander-in-Chief and fight against terrorism.

Dodd is a good, solid, experienced senator; but he's Biden lite. It's good to have an experienced, pragmatic, long time senator in the debates; but we've got one in Biden - and he's better, more experienced, more intelligent, more of an authority on the issues, more charismatic and more of an original act than Dodd, so what does Dodd bring to the debates then?

If we could get the field down to 5 or less than we might start to really see some good exchanges and more substance at these debates.

Chris, Morristown, NJ (Sent Monday, August 20, 2007 9:16 PM)

I am so glad to see that I am not alone among those of us who are interested in (obsessed by?) the campaign/candidates who is vehemently bothered by the media's bias toward their "back-story" favorites, to the detriment of the other candidates...and was surprised to see such comments made by a member of the media itself (altho' MSNBC does seem to be more even-handed than most of the other outlets.)

As a fervent fan of JOE BIDEN's, I am also heartened to see that others may be joining his band-wagon. He is, without question, the most qualified candidate. Period... And pair him with Bill Richardson as VP and you've got a real winning combination, both demographically, geographically, and "resume'-ically"!

BTW, Biden For President bumper stickers can be had via the CafeExpress website (no $ to Biden campaign, but it gets his name out there)

"I'm sidin' with BIDEN"

Meline Baron, Harpers Ferry, WestVirginia (Sent Monday, August 20, 2007 11:30 PM)

SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

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

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.):

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private) Remember me?

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=323105