Initial takeaway: Obama gets to play frontrunner

Posted: Saturday, January 05, 2008 10:40 PM by Chuck Todd

From NBC's Chuck Todd
The focus on this debate for so many in New Hampshire and the media was twofold -- how would Obama handle being the frontrunner and how would Clinton handle be the challenger. Well, thanks to a subdued format, Obama seemed to pass his test with flying colors. He got to look in command (telling Edwards, politely, when it was his turn to speak); he defended himself against Clinton by lecturing her tone and then got to look like the "normal" one by letting the moderator know who won the 'Skins game.

I'm not sure David Axelrod could have scripted this debate better if he did it himself.

Clinton as challenger? Well, she was dealt a real bodyblow when Edwards decided to defend Obama from the Clinton attack early on in the debate; that exchange will be the one played over and over again, and it's not good for Clinton.

She recovered a bit in the second half of the debate; she warmed up with the "my feelings are hurt" line and she made one of her most effective contrasts against Edwards and Obama on the issue of change. But the damage from that first exchange and the fact that Richardson made attacking each other personally a problem seemed to limit Clinton's rhetorical mobility.

Edwards, btw, had a very good night; he got to look a bit more positive and a little less angry by being the guy who defended Obama. His strategy seemed to be to go for the political kill on Clinton, thinking that he'll have a better chance beating Obama in a one-on-one than beating Clinton. Not sure I agree with him on this strategy but it's clearly his campaign's strategy.

Richardson obviously benefitted from the shrunken field; he got off some of the better lines of the night and probably did himself some good; just not sure who he will woo over to his side since the independents seem so enamored right now with Obama. Still, Richardson showed he could have done well if the formats had been this low-key and the field this small.

Still, the story of this debate is the gang-up on Clinton. It's interesting, Clinton may now be the candidate who needs to get Obama in a one-on-one; Edwards and Richardson are now distractions and are complicating her ability to go after Obama; Obama, meanwhile, needs the extra candidates. Amazing how things change; a few weeks ago, the larger field seemed to benefit Clinton more than Obama. This is how fast things can change in this era of the 24/7 news cycle. Toss in the compressed calendar and realize things could either change quickly again or end a lot sooner than any of us realized.

EMAIL THIS

Comments

It looks like Mark Penn instructed Hillary to take out the knives tonight. Three times she tried to elevate the discussion into a shouting match - and three times she was rebuked.

I understand that Hillary is worried... she has good reason to be. But what is it today... the nice Hillary...then the attack dog Hillary... then, as the polls dictate, the sweet sincere Hillary ? Can't this person be genuine and more than poll driven ?

Barack Obama for President of the United States of America.

PulSamsara (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:19 PM)

I know the MSM will paint Hillary as "angry" instead of passionate. She couldn't just sit back and let the talkers keep talking. The MSM want Hillary to be unscripted and take a stance, and when she did, they will say she is too hard and aggressive.

I thought Edwards had a good night but don't think his message will go far in NH. Obama looked tired and didn't seem like he had any passion for the issues like Clinton or Edwards.

When will people stop to see what the candidates will do and have done instead of listening only to the rhetoric of hope and change?

jmartinez (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:19 PM)

Most memorable moment was Hillary losing her cool. I think I saw smoke coming from her ears. Not a pretty site.

Bob, DC (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:20 PM)

While Obama has strong speaking skills in the right circumstance, he does not have the experience to fulfill his promise to lead change. Not once in the debate did I hear him explain the changes that he has made while in the senate. Rather, he talks in generalities. As citizens, we deserve specifics from all of the candidates.

My main concern is that we have already had a president who had no experience. Look how he has led this country. Do we really want another person who has to learn while in office?

Persuasive rhetoric that evokes feelings of nostalgia for better times and hope is great. However, if those feelings cannot be translated into action, then they are empty promises.

Abby (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:20 PM)

Hillary definitely lost her cool and I agree with others that she is trying to say that because she's so great she can make change without the help of the American people.

I'm sorry, but it's going to take a great leader to give the American people the courage to step outside the box to make the dire changes that are needed and quite frankly Hillary just doesn't have what it takes and she can't beat Huckabee.

Erin, Neosho Falls, KS (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:21 PM)

In order to benefit from this debate, Hillary needed 1 of 2 things:
A) Kick butt in the debate
B) Barack had to do poorly
Neither of these things happened, thus continues the downward trend of Hillary's expired campaign

Kaye (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:22 PM)

Wasn't it Hillary that made some comment about Edwards being so angry all the time? Ironic, when you think about it.

ER, Omaha, NE (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:22 PM)

Obama said at one point that he had never said that Edwards wasn't electable (paraphrasing). The word electable wasn't used, but the implication is clear:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxSUvvkMGp4&feature=related

How about the many times both he, and his wife Michelle, have said that he is not electable because Edwards won't have the funds to compete?

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/01/01/elizabeth-edwards-disappointed-with-michelle-obama/

At one point, Obama said that he would "enlist the people for self government". Exactly what is that supposed to mean?

Edwards was by far, and away, the winner.

Terre, Sandy, OR (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:22 PM)

Hillary has spent such a long time defending herself and Bill against the right-wing machine that she become entrenched in the "horizontal" debate. She is either the victim or the attacker. Unfortunately, she will not be able to effectively govern from the middle of the spectrum. if she is elected, it will be the 1990s all over again and nothing meaningful will get done. It is time for Mrs. Clinton to set aside her desire to be president for the good of the country. I don't think we can expect the right-wing to be adult enough to let it go.

HOW ABOUT AN OBAMA/EDWARDS TICKET??

PAOLO PASTORE, LIVERPOOL, NY (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:23 PM)

Edwards did some good for himself, no doubt. That works for Obama, for now. I hope the media shows the real Hillary. She lost it. And the "let's talk reality" (back to earth) type comment, Argghh. She just reminded a lot of us why we are taking a good look at Obama after supporting her. It all depends on the media. If they run those two and comment on it, she is toast!

Alan, Boston (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:24 PM)

Finally, a candidate who will sit back and carefully think through a question and then speak in an authentically intelligent way!!! Of course, I'm talking about Obama.

Clinton kept looking up and to the right, meaning she was searching for the "right" answer (what will hit the right voter buttons). Obama really seemed to want to answer the questions honestly rather than rely on handler-fed rhetoric. It's about time for a President who thinks things through before jumping to old partisan lines.

I thought Edwards did exceptionally well, but looked more like a perfect VP for Obama.

Dr. Brad Burke, Maricopa, AZ (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:24 PM)

Hilary Won. Obama looked like he had the flu. No energy--no specific actions-- very general words. Boring..... Since the people of New Hampshire are very well educated I'm assuming they will see through his general words and figure out that he talks a good game--but has not delivered. What is his previous experience besides appearing on Oprah's show-- running a soup kitchen for churches in South Chicago. He has such limited experience--it's very sad that so many people in Iowa(many with questionable residency for the Iowa caucus) fell for the celebrity show. Hilary showed that she has a command of issues and has sound judgement. Hopefully, the people of New Hampshire will see her sound judgement and common sense and vote for her. Obama is a great orator--however, not tonight. A great orator does not make a great leader. I fear for this country if someone who is so poorly prepared to be president is elected. Hilary Clinton was the only candidate to bring up the economy and the possibility of recession -- including what needs to be done. Obama sat there like a lump. He does not have original ideas-- nor the executive experience to lead this country.

Sally Henry Port Washington, New York (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:25 PM)

hrc defends herself and everyone puts a negative spin on it. edwards is perpetually angry...hrc displays a momentary flash of anger...and gets slammed for it. the usual double-standard against women/hrc. barak...we're in trouble if people fall for his pretty talk and elect him as the condidate...hrc was right about bush being the best guy everyone wanted to have a beer with...no analysis from anyone there at the irony of what barak is now offering in much the same way....substance...only hrc has it among all the candidates with the exception of bill richardson.

osvelia deeds (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:25 PM)

Edwards sealed it for me tonight-- I'm voting for Obama. His defense of Obama against Clinton was a political suicide: he helped destroy Clinton but only solidified Obama as the anti-Clinton.

Anonymous, Belvidere, IL (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:26 PM)

What odd comments. i thought hillary clearly won.

John smart, Los angeles, CA (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:27 PM)

Typical clintonian machine and talking points. Just adding in some anger. Nice how she played the gender card too. Obama is above the frey and deserves the nomination.

t, nj (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:27 PM)

Edwards -- was pretty good, although he's still mad about spending his "hard-earned" "ambulance-catcher" legal fees on a lost effort in Iowa.
Richardson -- still bucking to be a secondary figure in a Democratic administration -- pretty much a "one-note Johnny" about getting the troops out of Iraq.
Clinton -- "35 years of change" -- but still nothing to show for it -- did anybody pick up on the "10 years ago WE tried" to launch a strike against Bin Laden -- didn't mention the aspirin factory, however.
Obama -- gave good and specific answers -- came across as one who really could inspire the American public and lead a coaltion government of democrats, republicans and independents -- the winner of the debate in my view.
(By the way, I'm an independent who is fiscally conservative and socially moderate --- and, in the past, more of a Republican than Democratic voter.)

Robert Williams, Califon, NJ (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:27 PM)

I really liked the "angry" Hilary tone when she critizised the naive and false hope/change attitude to Obama and Edwards. As newsweek calls it; "Inside Obama’s Dream Machine".
its like alice in wonderland meets the hard cold reality of politics and problems that we face today.

Flipp flopper, dreamer...i cant wait to se the republican machine take on Obama in an election...

sure way to get an republican president

charles (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:27 PM)

Chuck Todd you Chris Matthews are couple suck ups you help lead the media against Edwards and I sick both your like craps. You Clinton supporters, Obama supporters need stop living dream on whom's got the most Experience neither of your Candidates have got more than Edwards nor have better Change then John Edward. John Edwards did the best he out lasted both of them.

Wyatt (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:27 PM)

Marcia from AZ has it right. People want the women to sit back and take what comes and not defend herself. obama sounds like a cheerleader with no substance. he'd get creamed in November. Go hillary.

Rick A (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:28 PM)

I'm not sure whether Barack Obama or John Edwards won tonight's debate, but Hillary Clinton definitely LOST it. She made the huge mistake of losing her temper and allowing herself to show her anger when Edwards accused her of representing the status quo. She didn't look "presidential" at all. That clip is going to be replayed over and over by the news stations. I don't think that Hillary can recover from this.

Rob, Mineola, NY (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:28 PM)

Hillary repeats her "35 years of delivering change" like a mantra, but it simply won't resonate. For one thing, for 16 of those years she was a spouse of an executive. And while she was "First Lady" (isn't this a ridiculous term?) her one specifed responsibility for policy--health care--was a signal failure. For two years she labored and produced a program so horrifically complicated that even her policy wonks couldn't parse it, and it ended up DOA. Arguably that failure helped to lose the Democratic majority in Congress--a point subtly alluded to by Obama when he noted later that "Bill Clinton ended deficits" but did not deliver a workable majority for change.
To me, Hillary seemed peevish and defensive; Obama unruffled and, as other have noted, above the fray. In debating point terms, he may "lose" because he doesn't go tit for tat on every little attack of hers (though he did nicely point out the that "AP report" that Hillary cited about him was actually a quote from a Clinton aide!).
But he understands that voters are not high school debate coaches, totting up points: he tries to project vision, judgment, and leadership. On these criteria, he had a very successful night.

Michael Smith, Lynchburg VA (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:29 PM)

Edwards was the best. He looked and sounded crisp. He can win! We must nominate who can win this time Barack is too shaky in debates. He needs to be more consise. Hillary was really taken back by the Edwards status-quo comment. I think it blew her strategy and she didn't gain any ground as a result. Sensing an Obama/ Edwards alliance that may have pre-existed and is now coming to light. Hmm

Mary, Albany,NY (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:29 PM)

Hillary Clinton did the best today compare to other candidates.best of luck.keep it up.
obama-edward cocus were totally against clinton.But clinton fights back.
GREAT NIGHT FOR SEN.HILLARY CLINTON.

CARL,CHICAGO,IL (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:30 PM)

Edwards really struck a cord with the whole "no special interest groups" and parents "worked in a mill" theme. I bought it as sincere. Clinton was disappointing. Now she is a change agent? I'm starting to think she has too much baggage to be electable. I like that Obama is articulate, thoughtful and poised. The Republicans will have trouble campaigning against him.

Gort, Boston, MA (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:30 PM)

Amazing how small and petty some of you are about the fact that Hillary was passionate during this debate.
Likie Hill said, remeber when we last voted for someone who tried to sell us the "uniter not a divider" bs line?

Hillary stood out head and shoulders above the rest. Too bad the Obama-loving media will probably crucify her by playing 5 secinds of passion, just like they did Howard Dean. For shame!

Chris, Portland, Oregon (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:31 PM)

I sat there watching and wanting to know why everyone is so behind Obama and after watching I still can't figure it out. He dances around the questions and gives no real answer. Not only did Hillary answer the questions, but she delved deeper into the topic. Her answers were well thought out and she genuinely seems to know what she needs to do to get things accomplished. I find her to be a very intelligent and strong woman.

When she stood up for herself in what most of you described as an outburst I clapped for her. Good for her!

She made the greatest point of the night. Obama and Edwards talk a good game, but can they deliver? Clinton can and already has. She has my vote!

Jasmine, Long Island, NY (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:31 PM)

Experience!? Look at Rumseld and Cheney and Bush the former head of state. Let's look at not so far history: JFK and Clinton was governor of Arkansas, need I say more? He was a great president, I even like Hillary, she is just not the best at this time. Hillary for 2016, I actually will support that. We are all tired of Bush and Clintons. If she clinches this one, I will vote for any republican minus Huckabee. She only gets my vote if Huckabee wins. Never mind, Bloomberg would jump in and who knows then Bloomberg/Obama, that would history, a third party winning.

James (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:31 PM)

Totally agree with Marcia, Gold Canyon, AZ – Hillary was great!
Barak is only repeating the same meaningless slogan –I will bring change!
There is no depth in his words. I don’t rust Obama.

Viki, Portland, Oregon (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:31 PM)

Three men gang up on a woman, and when she fights back, she's a shrew.

WAY too many jock sniffers posting here . . . .

David, Boston, MA (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:31 PM)

Hillary was the star of the evening. Substance, style, wit and self-effacement. At one point in the debate, Obama claimed that some website he helped create which showed what lobbyists donated to whose campaign "changed the lives of ordinary people." We all nearly fell off the couch laughing.

People are falling for this fluff?

Hillary was great when she got tight with Edwards. A guy does it and he's forceful. A woman does it and she's shrill. Huge double standard, people.

If you want a change agent with a proven record of implementing change, Hillary Clinton is that agent.

You want slogans and fluff from a Kumbiyah Candidate, pick Obama.

Wordy Guy, Greenville Wisconsin (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:32 PM)

Hillary took it to them. Edwards showed his hand, gang on Hillary. he'll pay for that. Obama sounds like a cheerleader and a preacher. For that I'll go to a football game and then to church.

Rick A (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:32 PM)

Interesting comments. From a neutral observer: it would appear that Obama won this debate.

Albert Monger (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:32 PM)

It seems like the Clinton campaign has begun the angry black man vs poor white woman with the "That hurts me" comment...I have never seen her act that girly...anyhow Obama saw that and said albeit a smart remark back...then the ABC anchors say that was small of him ( the angry black Obama) I really thought race wasnt going to matter boy was I naive...

Ghanja, Alanta GA (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:33 PM)

You peole are idiots. I am a strong republican and I can't stand Hillary but she was the clear winner. Obama said nothing the whole night. He stammered and his words had no substance. Hillary articulated her experience well and all obama could say was change change change. At least you all could be honest with yourselves.

Huckabee 08

Shawn, Cincinnati, OH (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:34 PM)

I see a big double standard here in the article as well as the comments - when a man like Edwards attacks then it is "very impressive and forceful defence" and when
a woman like Hillary does it she is looking "shrill and angry" etc.

I thought that Edwards was the least impressive, basically recycling his stump speech no matter what the question. Barack looked tired and a little shaky on one or two questions - especially the Pakistan one. Richardson was substantive but long winded at times; he did repeat his executive experience line a lot (some of which he owes to the Clinton administration). Hillary made some good contrasts between doers and talkers - after six years in senate and no accomplishment to speak of for Mr. Edwards. She did let slip an opportunity to answer the tax increase on wealthy question more substantively.

Rocky V (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:34 PM)

Hillary is DESPERATE! She resorted to the gender card.... And, threw a temper tantrum in the face of Edwards suggestion that she is status quo.... She played right into his hands...

The moment reminded me of Dean's concession speech... His rant was excess for what the moment called for... At first glance, it seemed only awkward... but as it repeated, it became the most ridiculous clip of the season...

I'm not saying Hillary's angry retort is quite to Dean's rant, but it came awfully close... As far as her logic, in what she said, I'd say it was worse. To suggest that hope for lofty goals is not realistic, is as if she told my kids that there is no such thing as Santa Claus... Even if that is true, don't spoil it for my kids... If you don't believe you are going to go 100 miles, then you won't even make it halfway. That's the essense of hope....

What she said in response demonstrates that Hillary doesn't understand "Change" or "hope"... Change is inclusive... She's still saying "I" way too much... Hope is about believing... You need both to change.

Ryan M. (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:34 PM)

"Edwards and Richardson are now distractions and are complicating her ability to go after Obama;"

Always minimizing John Edwards, Chuck, John Edwards and his message is a force in this race, and deserves more respect and consideration than you seem to be able to give him. An honest, intellegent, and dedicated candidate and you imply he is just in the way, I say, status quo Hillary is just in the way.

DeeW (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:34 PM)

She gets angry, uses the gender card, talks about 35 years of experience (which I assume she is including 8 years of first lady). Seriously, did she say people needed a reality check? That words don't inspire? She needs a reality check.

ER, Omaha, NE (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:35 PM)

If I were advising Obama, I'd reassure him that Hillary has already lost; she just doesn't know it yet. But I'd caution him to be nice and respectful because it never pays to alienate potential voters and many Democrats with little or no education as well as women over the age of 50 think well of her.

Stephen Kemp (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:35 PM)

edwards was the best. yes, i am cheerleading him of course, but he did not let us down. he showed the most focus, the most energy, and the most conviction.

sorry, hillary, but the $100 million that the health insurance et al lobbyists spent fighting health care last time tell me you need to get out from under their leash. the $5.1 million lobbyists spent last congress means edwards is right, and you only serve to prove his point further by denying it.

we need edwards for president. i live just outside dc, and trust me, the lobbyists own the place. it's either money, or votes. we must use our votes, go to johnedwards.com, check him out, and show your support!

kenshin (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:35 PM)

Hillary came out with her fangs and claws bared and then tried to soften things with that terrible laugh. She showed her true colors when her guard was down - legendary temper was on full display. Her spin doctors are already choking on how to spin this. Barack did more than fine and his performance will certainly propel him further in the polls and will garner him votes on Tuesday.

Tae Kwon (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:36 PM)

I just can't believe that the Clinton camp still don't get it! Well, lets show them what we mean again on tuesday. Fired up...Ready to go. Obama 08.

Chris, Nashua, NH (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:38 PM)

Wake up guys. Obama reminded me of 2000 election campaign when the current talked about Change in Washington. You all know the rest of the story. For some reasons, I don't know why you all get offended when Sen. Clinton tried to explain the flip flop of Obama especially with his changing positions past and present. Patriot act etc.

Listen guys, I like Obama but the point is you all try to make it a choice of change over experience. I think both are important. I also think, with the way things are going, voting for Sen. Obama may be the best gift for the Republican party.

Sarah, Batimore, MD (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:39 PM)

Clinton has the most foreign policy experience. She is light years ahead of Obama. She also has more experience with health care and other domestic issues. Edwards and Richardson are ok, but Clinton is the most seasoned and the most qualified candidate. She is "The ONE"!

Lee, Cooper City, FL (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:40 PM)

Why is it that most voters acknowledge that Richardson is the most experienced and tested candidate but then they say they support one of the others? I also believe Richardson scares the Republicans the most.

dan des moines, iowa (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:41 PM)

I didn't mind Hillary's reaction to the Edwards attack. In fact, it humanized her a bit. But Obama won the debate, with Edwards a close second. They seemed to be (unintentionally, I think) positioning themselves as running mates. This would be a great ticket--with Obama as president, of course.

Bill (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:42 PM)

So Stephanopolous is a racist for calling a churlish remark churlish? I'd say the racist is the David Copperfield wannabe who started talking about "the angry black Obama." (People who create things out of whole cloth generally vote GOP.)

David, Boston, MA (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:42 PM)

From the above, it appears that we have many female Mrs. Bill Clinton fans signing in with male names.

Ralph Duffy, Seattle , WA (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:43 PM)

Hillary's whole "35 years" mantra is pretty tired and pretty dishonest. Edwards has a year less experience in elected office than her, and Obama has four more years in elected office than her. She is not worthy to be compared to Richardson in terms of experience (actually, Richardson has more experience in public service than all the other three combined). Obama actually won elected office in '96 - four years before Hillary. And, for her to just co-opt the time she spent as a first lady of a state or the nation as legislative or executive (line management) experience is downright dishonest. No one believes that - don't they get that?

The experience argument doesn't wash for her, so we are essentially left with who would be more effective at building good teams and cross the divides and bridge the gaps on issues. Hillary has nothing on Obama there.

Her message is hollow and not credible, and people are not stupid. I love our ability as a nation to get on outlets like this and talk about these things - there was a time a generation ago when we had not the opportunity to read anything other than what the major new outlets carefully vetted for our viewing. Great tool for democracy, and media like these will bring out falsehoods and bring down the hollow Clinton shell. There is no "there" there and it has not taken much "vetting" by WeThePeople to see that.

Prediction for NH: People have enough doubt about Clinton to take the chance on Obama, and he beats Clinton by 8% on Tuesday. It will be viewed as a crushing blow to the Clinton campaign, who even then will not "change" their tactics. They themselves will prove to us in SC and MI and others leading up to Super Tuesday that there is no "there" there.

Mark S, Fairfax, VA (Sent Saturday, January 05, 2008 11:43 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=551919