Clinton first out with debate videos

Posted: Friday, November 16, 2007 10:49 AM by Domenico Montanaro

From NBC's Domenico Montanaro
Clinton is the first out with post-debate videos, splicing moments from last night. And, of course, there's a Contribute link.

Here's a quick overview of the videos:
Video 1: Clinton hitting Edwards with her "mud," "Republican playbook" and staying positive comment.

Video 2: Clinton hitting Obama on Obama's health care plan. They leave out Obama's response.

Video 3: Clinton saying she's not "exploiting the gender card," she's "playing the winning card." But then she repeats her "kitchen" comment and then, what's not seen, is Clinton going on about how happy women are to see her running for president.

Video 4: Clinton talking about how she's running to be "president of the entire country" and talks about working with Republicans. Just a thought, then why is her new slogan "Turn up the heat" on Republicans, as she said at the Iowa JJ Dinner?

EMAIL THIS

Comments

I guess I don't know who "Van" is, but I can't think that you hardcore Clinton supporters are too happy that Obama and Edwards supporters are pretty much aligned because our candidates are very similar. We're also aligned in our dislike of Clinton as she is making a mockery of the Democratic party.

When Iowa rolls along and Obama and Edwards supporters are at their caucuses, I am pretty confident that they will trade allegiances between the two to ensure that Hillary doesn't win anywhere. She may have roughly 25-29% of the support (right now), but Obama and Edwards have between 43-50%.

She will be lucky to finish third in Iowa. Laugh all you want now, because I guarantee you, you won't be laughing the day after Iowa!

BTW Clinton supporters, Hillary lost touch with all midwestern voters when she tried to argue that $97,500 is middle class. You have fun with that one in Iowa! Ha Ha

Edwards/Obama or Obama/Edwards '08

Jesse, Burnsville, MN (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 12:56 PM)

Video 3: When asked if she was using the gender card but then in the same breath she said her "comfortable in the kitchen" line. Isn't that playing the gender card?!?!? I'm a woman and insulted by these remarks. I hope other women do not vote for someone simply because they are a woman!!
Steph, Nashville, TN (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 10:57 AM)

Steph, it's called a JOKE. You know, something not to be taken seriously, meant to lighten the moment. It was a tongue-in-cheek reference to her playing the gender card.

Carrie, Eastern Iowa (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 12:58 PM)

Ya know, I just have to say it and it is ridiculous that this is even part of the conversation.

Hillary Clinton is not fat. She is of average size for a female. But what in God's name does that have to do with anything? Does a woman with a few extra pounds somehow become incompetent?

Carrie, Eastern Iowa (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 1:03 PM)

"If you can't stand the heat then stay out of the kitchen" is a quote from President Truman (who btw was a man!). This quote is what Clinton is referring to when she says that she is comfortable in the kitchen (she can take the heat…get it?). Folks, this is not playing the gender card. If it is, then President Truman (who was a MAN!)Played a rather odd gender bender card back in the 1940's. ALSO, in case you haven't noticed Clinton is a WOMAN. Therefore, Clinton's life experiences are as a WOMAN (surprised?). So of course Clinton's rhetoric now and then will reflect her experience as a WOMAN (surprise). BTW, men play the gender card everyday using their machismo and standing in our patriarchal society to get ahead. Folks, anytime you hear a male politician use a sports analogy (especially if it is football) he is playing a gender card. Clinton kicked butt last night and she just may have more testosterone than Obama or Edwards. Get used to it.Go Hillary.

Hillary Fan, Phoenix, AZ (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 1:06 PM)

Some poor Clinton hater (SourGrace?) is trying to take out their frustrations by putting my name to, FAT INSULTS against last night's debate winner that they obviously think are jokes. If that is the depth of your abilities...
It smacks of someone with the emotional age of 12.

Hey Chuck Mark et al at the politburo; You censor MY posts, refuse to even reply to emails and allow my screen name to be hijacked on a fairly regular basis.
Great job.

Van

vanreuter, NY NY (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 1:07 PM)

In truth, new anti-Hillary bloggers is very telling. There are names here that you don't see everyday- many are Hillary supporters- MANY are not.

The debate just may not be the best thing for Hillary since sliced bread- MANY are disappointed with the debate: the questions, the format, the allowed booing, the spin...

That in itself does not look great for Hillary. She just may have gained more foes than supporters- people want to see a fight, but they want to see a fair fight. Meaning- if you can dish it- you can take it- without needing to resort to a audience of boos.

And although I try to refrain from making personal attacks- which by the way- she did do last night- she should fire whoever picked her outfit last night- or at least require the cameras to not do full body shots

kmnecole, st louis, mo (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 1:09 PM)

NSMSNBC - Yes, she said pantsuit, because she was wearing a patsuit, had she been wearing a dress, she would have said dress. I think the main point of the comment was not the ensemble, but that it was asbestos, as in heat resistant, as in a little joke about the heat she took in the last debate.

As far as Obama, I think the word I would use is irony. I completely agree that it is a very nuanced issue and cannot be answered with a yes or no. And if you look through these blogs for the last week you'll see Obama people completely trashing Hillary for waffling what was basically the exact same answer Obama gave last night. There is a God, halleluah. Amen.

Yes I very much support Cliinton, as I supported her husband when he ran, as I supported Gore and Kerry and will support whomever the nominee for the Dems turns out to be this year, including Obama. I don't think he's the best choice, and I'll never forget the deer in the headlights look on his face when it hit him he was in the same trap Clinton just crawled out of, but I don't hate the guy. He'd be much bettter than anyone on the GOP side.

mike oh (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 1:11 PM)

Van - don't worry, I knew it wasn't really you making the Fat joke comments about her. It was obviously so out of character for you, and your support for Hillary.

pat huntington ny (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 1:24 PM)

That's real mature Natalie. BTW, how much do you weigh?

just asking (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 1:36 PM)

Here was "pat huntington ny" comments on another thread:

"Clinton's fix is the right thing! And for those stating $97K is not middle class, maybe in the backwoods of your hick state that's some serious money, but here in NY, its not enough to buy a house."

Listen Iowa voters, this is what Clinton and her supporters think of you. I live not too far away in Minneapolis, MN (another backwoods hick area, I guess) and I can tell you $97k IS a lot of money here. Pat proves why no NE Democratic candidate will ever win the presidency again. They are truly out of touch with the rest of us! How will Clinton fight for you when she thinks you are the gum stuck on the bottom of her shoe.

Edwards/Obama or Obama/Edwards '08

Jesse, Burnsville, MN (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 1:40 PM)

You appoint a commission, Sierra, because that's the only way to get things done in the real world. A pres can't fix SS unless handed a bill from Congress. W/ things these days, does anyone believe anything will get done w/o bi-partisan authorship? Dems veto Rep bills and vice versa. But put people on a commission, like the 9/11 commission, and w/ the right pres - UNLIKE the 9/11 commission, then things get done
Guess it takes someone who's lived thru the process to know these things tho

commense sense in the real world (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 1:41 PM)

Yo Van, The truth about these forums is that they are all a referendum on Hillary. If she does well, she's untouchable. If she screws up, she's vulnerable. My question is what about the issues and the country? Should the most popular candidate, for whatever reasons, be excluded from giving the Americsn electorate clear and concise answers? Is her position that you shouldn't always say what you really feel during the campaign cycle a valid position? Is her practice of "I'll looke it over and have meetings with my advisors" enough of an answer to warrant giving her an opportunity to be the most powerful person in the Free World?

Maybe theat's good enough for you Van, but not enough foe me. I mean think about it. While Bill was president, is it possible that all she was thinking about was the power he had and that she wanted to experience said feeling as well? In particular after experiencing the most ultimate humiliation courtesy of the Monica Lewinsky debacle. This is clearly a power hungry person that I don't believe has the best intersts of the American people to heart. Hillary only cares about Hillary.

She might win the nomination and the presidency, but she should have to earn it on merit. This entitlement argument based on being married to Bubba are for simple minded followers who suffer from Jim Jones Disease. Not Me. I'll vote for her if she gets the Dem Nomination, but it'll be a anti-GOP reluctant vote for sure.

Kristian O (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 1:44 PM)

I found this account on Daily Kos by a person who is with the democratic party in Las Vegas and what was going on last night with the crowd. Seems this was a stacked deck
http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/11/16/32040/765

diane (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 1:45 PM)

'...Many anti-Hillary posts with names I've never seen here before. Increased traffic? Hmmmm...'

A lot of new Hillary posters, too Van
Typical of Clintonistas, accursing others of doing what they do.
Hillary whined about 'mud slinging'....
HUH ?
Hasn't Mark Penn been doing that ?
Isn't Mark Penn using tactics out of the Republican playbook ?

If you think THAT was a victory by Hillary last night
You set the bar pretty low for her

She didn't answer questions, she seem weak and whiney, she was a little too cute....

Mark Penn has set her up for defeat...
Evasion and lies ?
There's a winning strategy
Flip flopping on IDs for aliens ?
That'll play in Peoria

Game on, van (and bb and g and z and Stu and BionicWoman and your latest alter ego Tofun,Disney)

Sierra, SF (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 1:48 PM)

Hillary clinton is the most communist candidate this country ever had. She has more positions than the Kharma Sutra. Her BIG government ideas are dangerous to this country and unconstitutional. If Hillary becomes our next president, global warming would be a small problem in relation to her weak national security policies. Remember, it was the Clintons who gave neuclear technology to North Korea. Hillary's scandalous past will only lead to a scandalous future. Two families ran this country for the last twenty years, Bush '88, Clinton '92, Bush '00, we do not need another four, or God forbid eight more years of the same families in control. It's time to bring in someone who doesn't have financial obligations which will comprimise the integrity of our great nation. If hillary were to run against the Devil, I'd vote for the Devil because he's not as dangerous. It makes me wonder what documents Sandy Berger took from the National Archives incriminating the Clintons of Impeachable offences. Hillary has no leadership experience, and has not even wrote a bill in the Senate. Her quest for power is the only thing that drives her for the presidency, and she would be a bull in a china store as president. I implore all Americans, Not to vote for Hillary. The warning signs are up, it's up to you to take heed. God Bless the United States of America and all the people therein. May we all be wise and choose a candidate who has the best interest of the people in mind, NOT THE LUST FOR POWER.

Jeff Hoffman, Cleveland, Ohio (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 1:52 PM)

I for one am proud of Obama, yes, he got tough questions ( even according to Chuck last night) so what.

What he didn't do is go crying to Drudge yelling the "RACE" card. "Wolfe picked on me because I was the only Black candidate...he should be killed, blah, blah blah, poor me they are picking on me'

TAKE NOTES HILLARY.....

It's called "Class"

Lyn, MD (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 2:02 PM)

"Many anti-Hillary posts with names I've never seen here before. Increased traffic? Hmmmm...

Van

Van
vanreuter, NY NY (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 11:22 AM)
------------------------------------------------------
But of course Van the trolls will be a bashing as always. I scroll by the unknowns, read the ones I want."

As opposed to the unknown pro-Hillary "trolls" who come on her to profess their support for her? Are those the ones you are talking about when you say you "read the ones I want"?

CitizenJ (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 2:06 PM)

Just asking....enough so little I would fly away in the wind but not so much I could be used for an anchor

BTW being FAT is a choice...or are you saying poor Hillary she has some health issues that she can't close her mouth. If you want to be the Healrhcare President ...then set an example. None of the men are overweight except Richardson and Obama gave up smoking which is harding than to stop eating.

Stop making excuses, she is overweight...buy her a treadmill. And please take away those "belts"

Natalie (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 2:10 PM)

Iowa general election polls are always more useful than other states: Deficit of name recognition are much smaller in this state since every candidate is there campaigning for the caucuses, so it is easier to draw comparisons between candidates. And the bottom line of this new SUSA poll: Obama is surprisingly stronger than Clinton, and McCain is the most solid Republican.
• Clinton leads Giuliani 47% to 43%, Romney 49% to 43%, and Huckabee 49% to 43%. But she trails McCain 48% to 44%.
• Obama is remarkably stronger. He has a double-digit lead against Giuliani (52-39), Romney (53-39) and Huckabee (56-35) and even wins against McCain outside of the margin of the error (50-42).
http://www.campaigndiaries.com/2007/11/in-case-we-forgot-that-mitt-romney-is.html

Van...we know you love polls. Where they know the candidates (well)whose the REAL winner for the democrats?

Natalie (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 2:20 PM)

Hillary for President - PLEASE!! Talk about a liar! She can't even run a campaign without planting people in strategic locations to make her look good. Guess it's not working. This country will be in dire straits if she does win. As said before - she can't keep track of her own house - how can she run a country!

Kelly, Fort Collins (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 2:30 PM)

"Very comfortable in the kitchen". yeah right. Hillary, you can't even boil water and resort to making kitchen references. Please.
Kristian O (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 12:48 PM)

Kristian, I saw you boiling water in the microwave:-)

Mark, IA (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 2:30 PM)

Everyone kept mentionning IA, Did anyone remember like 2 or 3 months ago, Hillary was third or second in polls. she came from behind, Just remmber that, and please anyone can loose or win IA, stop predicting, Jan 3 is month and half away.

seib (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 2:31 PM)

I see that my first comment has been written by someone else: HARRY TRUMAN said the kitchen quote, so it's not about gender.
And, as my husband said, don't any other guys cook? He loves to cook.

Re: "Seriously, what is Hillary's position on Social Security? She wants to balance the budget (who doesn't) and sit down and talk." Mark (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 11:45 AM)
(1) FIRST, she thinks the sentence "Social Security is in crisis" in a Republican meme. She refuses to use the word "crisis." So, if YOU think SS is in "crisis" you probably want a different candidate.
(2) She wants to re-lock the lockbox that Bush burst open to borrow for Iraq from China. She calculates that the interest saved gives us about a decade beyond what we now have under Bush.
(3) She says that all the answers for a fix are on the table. The next step is a bi-partisan group to agree to a fix that both parties can agree to. She will defend the recommendations they give her.
Does that help?
I will say, though, if you are looking for more than 30-second sound bites, you might want to try her website -- www.hillaryclinton.com.
She has tons of detail, including how she will pay; and her staff actually returns answers to questions sent, if her site doesn't answer them for you.

re: "How many starry-eyed 95 year olds does Hillary know, anyway?" Pete Caloger Bushkill, PA 18324 (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 11:46 AM)

My mom is an 85-year-old Democrat. My aunt (her sister) is an 83-year-old Republican. They are both giddy about voting for Hillary Clinton.
They tell me they can still remember how excited their own mother (my grandmother) and their two grandmothers (my great-grandmothers) were, all through the 1920's, about being able to vote.

So... I'd make fun of this voting demographic at your peril.

Jan, Nashua, NH (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 2:32 PM)

Tune in tomorrow for the next edition of " What Not To Wear" starring our fashion police expert Natalie.

What difference does it make what she wears? And how is her weigh germaine to the issues as hand? There are legitimate issues to call her on, but her clothes or her physical appearance? Might that not be a bit shallow?

Dot, Illinois (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 2:33 PM)

Um, hello, no! I wouldn't vote for someone who I think is manipulative. Obama tells you what he thinks straight up and he doesn't change his message based on his audience.

Steph, Nashville, TN (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 12:16 PM)

Obama changed his message on Social Security 3 times this year.

Obama changed his message on Iran Revolutionary Guard 2 times in 12 months. (Obama supported IRG as a terrorist in the Senate last year. But this year, because of the election, he changed track to say what the people want to hear. Even Obama's friend, supporter and his first endorser Dick Durbin voted with Hillary on IRG).

Read the interview with Tim Russert with open mind.

Obama said he will not withdraw troops till 2013 in the previous debate. Now he changes tune to say I will move troops out quickly. Just to appease american voters?

Well intelligent thoughtful American voters cant be fooled by Obama's politics of deception.

Iowa for Edwards.

Mark, IA (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 2:40 PM)

Natalie (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 2:46 PM)

I have one question for HRC supporters. In regards to her "plan" to fix SS by having a bipartisan committee come up with solutions. Please for the love of God, name 3, just 3 meaningful bipartisan bills she has sponsored with Republicans in Congress. If elected, she will not be able to get anything moved through Congress with any significant Republican support. They (and their base) despise her too much. Any Republican who supports anything with her will have a problem with their base.

So, why again do you trust that she will be able to get anything done if she is indeed elected?

James G., Oak Park, MI (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 2:49 PM)

I would like to see the candidates stand up for social security. I would like to see the federal govt. stop being able to borrow form SS to fund anything the Americans have paid into since FDR first put it in force for our future retirement. Who gave the federal govt. the right to use this money, since it does belong to the american people. I would like to see all the money returned to SS by the Federal govt. If George Bush has his way he would spend all of it. Americans need to stand up and be counted.

JAMES HOPPER, GERMANTOWN,TN. (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 2:54 PM)

From the latest SUSA poll in Iowa:

"Clinton leads Giuliani 47% to 43%, Romney 49% to 43%, and Huckabee 49% to 43%. But she trails McCain 48% to 44%.
Obama is remarkably stronger. He has a double-digit lead against Giuliani (52-39), Romney (53-39) and Huckabee (56-35) and even wins against McCain outside of the margin of the error (50-42)."

That says everything that needs to be said right there.

Ron, TX (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 2:57 PM)

Ask Natalie about shallow. While she commented on the other candidates' weight when pushed to justify her ad hominem attack on Hillary, I notice that she and so many others are constantly commenting about Hillary's weight (just listen to Mark Levin - no poster boy himself), dress, voice, laugh, etc. - but no one ever - in this race or any other - has EVER critiqued those categories in a male candidate and would be a laughingstock if they chose to.
So who's playing the gender card?????

just asking (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 2:59 PM)

Carrie, Eastern Iowa (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 3:05 PM)

Most of the Senator Clinton supporters on here are beyond reason, but I will try anyway. Please note that I am not going to just call something stupid or whatever, rather I will endeavor to keep my points on fact not on emotion (please try to do this if you disagree with me).

1. I keep hearing Senator Clinton say that "everyone knows" her positions. Well... to be honest no we don't... rather we know that you keep telling us that we know.... but still haven't heard you give any firm foundation. Sorry Senator Clinton supporters, but if you were really honest with yourself you would say that she did not state any position clearly during the debate.

2. Once again... if you are honest with yourself you will note that 2 seconds after she said that she was not using the gender card... she went ahead and did it (again).

3. It is not "mud slinging" to point out differences in a campaign or debate. If elected will you come back from the UN saying that all the boys were picking on you there as well? Please note that Senator Clinton did not really refute any of the statements, all she did was call the others a liar (but offered not explanation for the obvious contradictions).

4. If you honestly think that Senator Clinton will ever be able to have a bi-partisan anything then you have not been paying attention for the past 16 years.

5. Experience. I want to give Senator Clinton the benefit of the doubt here... but she won't release any documents of her time as First Lady... so to be really honest we have nothing to back up her claims. If I claim it on my resume I must be able to back it up with documentation... same goes for politicians.

I will leave it at those simple points. No name calling involved, just facts as I see them. Of course I have things that I think... but without real facts to back them up I am leaving those items off the table for now.

Richard, Clarksburg WV (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 3:11 PM)

she didn't even include obama's response on healthcare. gimme a break. she's just trying to mislead by scoring cheap political points.

jim (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 3:24 PM)

Yes, I believe I can fairly conclude that Natalie, as someone who chooses to focus on someone's fashion and/or physical characteristics rather than policy, is not worthy of any further responses from me.

By the way, Natalie? I had a BIG cheeseburger and a disgustingly good milkshake for lunch and I thought about you! *patting my full tummy*
Carrie, Eastern Iowa

Birds of a feather flock together...still doesn't make it healthy or right, overweight is a major health problem for this country. Lead by example Hillary. Isn't she always trying to get Bill to eat carrots...maybe she should eat a few too. Pratice what you preach...join him on that treadmill

Natalie (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 3:35 PM)

I forgot this in my last post.... has the election already started? Senator Clinton said that the others were ganging up on her because she was winning. Correct me if I am wrong but how can you be winning an election before the votes are cast? Or was she accidently revealing that the election is a sham and that the political bosses behind the scenes already had the election finished? Personally I think the others were getting on her because nobody else seems to call her on her ever changing positions.

Oh and for the record, I think I will go ahead and vote on election day anyway, even though according to Senator Clinton the election is already over.

Richard, Clarksburg, WV (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 3:37 PM)

My mother always used to tell me that haste makes waste and it appears she may have been right. Hillary's videos may have been out first, but Joe Biden's "Joe is Right" video is hilarious and right on the money! I'm a lifelong Democrat but attempts by the party elite to handpick the candidate (whether it's Obama or Hillary) is getting a little old (and is particularly suspect since it was that very model, employed by the Republican Party, that led to the election of George W. Bush). All the candidates are intelligent -- this time let's go for an experienced concensus builder like Joe Biden.

Gayle, Emporia, Kansas (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 3:55 PM)

Tune in tomorrow for the next edition of " What Not To Wear" starring our fashion police expert Natalie.

From a guy's perspective, I liked her eye shadow. It was subtle enough so she didn't look like a LV hooker. But the purple brought a spash of color. Strangely enough, purple is by far my favorite color.

I could do without the mullet-like hair though. Of course I won't based on somebody's physical appearance, too much--sorry Kucinich, but I do believe that a person's physical appearance and how they chose to present themself speaks volumes about that person. Back to the hair, what she has now says more, and I put this in quotes, "women's libber." Or ... it's like the cross between Presidential and lesbian (certainly not trying to start that rumor again). Before, I dig my hole too far, I would recommend that she shorten the back up off of her neck, then she would still look Presidential, but also more feminine. I'd actually be curious whether she could garner more male votes by doing such, idk.

I honestly didn't notice her suit, because I was too busy watching the candidate's faces and making eye contact with the TV.

I'm suprisingly straight.

BTW Carrie: "I had a BIG cheeseburger and a disgustingly good milkshake for lunch and I thought about you! *patting my full tummy*" You should watch what you eat better. I only say this because if we wind up with universal health care, I have a vested interest in you diet and health to keep my mandated premiums down. : )

--NSMSNBC, I'm too much of an idiot not to post this. (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 3:56 PM)

With regard to Kareen McCarthy's comment about not understanding why some women are threatened by a strong, detemined woman (meaning Hillary). Enough of this kind of B.S!I was a strong, determined woman getting my Ph.D. in a totally male-dominated discipline in a public university in Michigan when Hillary was a student in her all-female college. I worked in a male-dominated field for years. And I come from a family of strong, determined women (my Mother is a 91-year old farmer). For me, Hillary Clinton's problem is her lack of ethics, not her strength and determination. And I do not applaud arrogance and "triangulation" in any candidate -- male or female. Your implied suggestion that women who criticize Hillary Clinton are threatened by her is completely unwarranted!

Hillary critic (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 3:56 PM)

"Most of the Senator Clinton supporters on here are beyond reason...."

Beginning with a conclusion designed to turn off those you claim you are attempting to reach is far from reasonable.

You are deluded if you think the opinions you express are facts They are parroted accusations of dubious merit that have been refuted EVERY time they are posted here.

Experience. I want to give Senator Clinton the benefit of the doubt here... but she won't release any documents of her time as First Lady.
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-hillarydocs8aug08,1,5121338.story?coll=la-politics-campaign&ctrack=1&cset=true

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gsy14Oyb5bobIZ1z7kR1BJQ2LyhgD8SLPRUG2

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g1ODQLNvFWeMc-ymk45DQA0QjbTAD8SLPNE80

When you read how many pages of her papers including almost everything from the health care period have BEEN RELEASED already, and are honest enough to admit the inaccuracy of your contention (one that would have taken 5 minutes to confirm) I would be happy to help you become more reasonable in your other (I assume equally well researched) contentions.

Van
(You lost me at, "hello")

vanreuter, NY NY (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 4:00 PM)

This whole thing is depressing. We are actually SCORING who won the debate as a requirement for president. I can't even think of a presidential situation where a person's debating skills are used. I hate these debate formats. I'm not even going to comment on the candidates, because everyone acts like a two year old. The Dems are going to lose this one. We are divided already. I don't even need to say why. The only thing I will say is we need to make sure the candidate will appeal to Americans and not just Blue Americans. I have friends in different parties as well as many here. I care about ALL of them and I'd like to see a president that can heal these wounds and stop the food fight.

In a food fight, resources are wasted, everything is messy and no one wins.

Stop the maddness. :(

Marc, NC (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 4:58 PM)

"This whole thing is depressing. We are actually SCORING who won the debate as a requirement for president. I can't even think of a presidential situation where a person's debating skills are used." - Marc

Unfortunately Marc, debate skills are highly important when it comes to becoming president. Look at Gore's numbers in 2000 before and after the 3 debates which everyone (man I worry about American citizens sometimes ) said Bush won. Same thing in 2004, Kerry was trailing untill the debates, then tied and took a small lead after 'winning' his debates.
Strong debate skills are important to being president.

mike oh (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 5:20 PM)

NSMNBC:

I thought her make up was great, too! I had a friend watching it with me, and he said "She looks almost hot!" I can't for the life of me think of what her hair was like, but I just recall thinking from the beginning that she looked the part. Was her jacket a little longer? I think the longer jackets are more flattering for her body type.

And are you sure that you are completely straight? That eye shadow comment was very Queer Eye for the Straight Guy.

Mark Thieme - don't hate me for writing this! :)

Carrie, Eastern Iowa (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 5:24 PM)

Marc:

A debate tests a candidate's ability to think on his/her feet, and to give a short response to a complicated question. It also allows people to see how they respond to pressure. A president must master these things.

Carrie, Eastern Iowa (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 5:27 PM)

Bee,

Shall we say once again that Obama is toasted!!

As a fellow republican like Bee, I am happy Democrats are fighting amongst themselves and giving the Republicans everything to cheer for.

Sierra, sf (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 5:38 PM)

Shall we say once again that Obama is toasted!!

As a fellow republican like Bee, I am happy Democrats are fighting amongst themselves and giving the Republicans everything to cheer for.

---------------------------------------------------

The only thing i like about Democratic party is Obama and anything short of that is not worth my attention. I'll consider Biden if he win but Hillary is way polarizing for me.

Hillary is toasted....

Bee (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 6:37 PM)

I propose something even bolder (I know it is kinda late in the game and I will have little success):

No more cable news presidential debate!

The reason is these corporate media entities are intertwined with the washington power brokers and any body running as an outsider have the deck stacked against them. I came to this conclusion after being disappointed day after day with the disservice of what the corporate media does in misinforming the public and finally today when I learned why Mitt Romney pulled out of the FOX debate. The reason is Guiliani's closeness to FOX and Roger Ailes. I can see why a case could be made based on how CNN is widely staffed by previous Clinton staffers and sympathizers and we have seen how that played in yesterday's debate and post debate spin not to mention the message transmitted to CNN through Drudge.

Election of the POTUS is too important to be left decided on these types of corrupt schemes.

Just like republicans are pulling out of FOX debate because of the favoritism of FOX towards Guliani democrats should say no to CNN given their favoritism towards the Clintons.

The future debates should be done on PBS or CSPAN. These debates should be a forum of competing ideas and not a venue to promote glitter and glamour of anchor people or worse to spin and prop up faltering candidates by loyalist pundits masquerading as "experts".

mike, dallas, TX (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 11:57 PM)

She is disingenuous and if the moderating hadn't been so poor and the crowd allowed to shout down reasonable retorts everyone would have seen this. Her comments about what constitutes the middle class and her non-thoughts on social security left me feeling disillusioned. Thank you for all the thoughtful posts here. They, with others on the First Read site, have helped me come to a conclusion......Obama 08!

Jim L. Irmo, SC (Sent Saturday, November 17, 2007 12:13 AM)

The whole debate is designed to lift Hillary up from her stumble two weeks ago ...
1 - Blitzer did not even bother to ask a follow up question to her response about the illegal immigrants' drivers license issue
2 - He never asked her about her campaign planting questions during her town hall meetings.
3 - The gender question was a planted one.
4 - Blitzer immediately decided to go into break while Obama and Hillary had a heated exchange over social security - thus preventing other candidates to weigh in on the issue. This is critical because Hillary's position on social security is considered to be one that she is not really comfortable with - thus attracts attacks from other candidates. All other candidates supported lifting the cap, similar to Obama's position. So, if Wolf gives any other candidate a chance to weigh in, they are basically going to criticize Hillary on that issue.

Check out Rolling Stone's piece on Wolf Blitzer bias towards Hillary ... Blitzer: Wolf or Lapdog
http://www.rollingstone.com/nationalaffairs/index.php/2007/11/16/blitzer-wolf-or-lapdog/

Eljah (Sent Saturday, November 17, 2007 6:38 AM)

Nevadans weren't the only ones attending the debate - included were corporate Hillary supporters from other states that stacked the audience for her.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/11/17/84954/402

Richard, FL (Sent Saturday, November 17, 2007 12:07 PM)

Hillary and Obama are NOT FOR ME. They both SPEAK OUT OF BOTH SIDES OF THEIR MOUTH and will always vote for big corporations. Their stance on illegals answered that question for you.

VOTE FOR JOE BIDEN OR EDWARDS

Marion (Sent Saturday, November 17, 2007 6:03 PM)

<< Previous

Next >>

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=470328