First thoughts: 'Civil' War

Posted: Wednesday, February 27, 2008 9:18 AM by Domenico Montanaro
Filed Under: First Thoughts

From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, and Domenico Montanaro

CLEVELAND -- Last night’s debate here had a very tense feel to it -- the combination of two very competitive Democratic candidates, two very tough questioners, it being the final showdown until the March 4 primaries, and there being so much at stake. Bottom line: Both Clinton and Obama were put on the spot and survived. Clinton came armed with her own material on Obama’s record (including some new hits like the lack of hearings on his Senate subcommittee) and tried to keep him on the defensive, but he handled the pressure. Obama might have had more negative YouTube moments than Clinton, because of the initial waffle on the Farrakhan answer (though he did clean it up pretty well) and his look to Clinton to answer the Russia question first; it was clear Obama didn't want first dibs on that question. But Clinton didn’t hit that question out of the park, either. She had the chance to show her real foreign policy chops and didn’t. And her answers on releasing her IRS records (don’t she and Bill have an accountant?) and releasing her White House schedules weren’t that strong.

VIDEO: NBC Political Director Chuck Todd offers his first read on how Hillary Clinton's Saturday Night Live comment had a greater point in last night's debate.

*** It wasn’t a game-changer: Given those things, it's hard to see last night’s debate as changing the trajectory of this race, and that’s ultimately good news for the front-runner Obama. He was a bit more defensive last night than last week and had more stumbles than in more recent encounters. But there was a reason for that: He received some very tough questions. The Farrakhan one put him between a rock (Jewish voters) and a hard place (some African-American ones), and the Russia question had the potential of making him look small compared with Clinton -- if she had nailed the question. But she didn’t. Clinton really flubbed that "SNL" line. Like the “Xerox” one from last week, it seemed rehearsed. And to echo NBC’s David Gregory, what’s wrong with getting the first question? It allows one to set the tone of the debate…

VIDEO: MSNBC’s Chris Matthews tells Keith Olbermann that Sen. Barack Obama’s thrill factor is missing in his debates and is only visible in his speeches.

*** A “civil” war: It was a contentious but civil debate (South Carolina seems so long ago). And no matter who ends up winning, both will probably be better nominees for it. It's hard to pick a winner. Clinton was more prepared, but Obama survived under some tough questions from the moderators and volleys from Clinton, and that's probably the name of the game for him at this late date in the campaign. And a final point: Obama being seated really helps him. He doesn’t have to shout into a microphone. He can deliver his subtle zingers, but with a calm, collected tone. Now on to the contests in Ohio, Texas, Rhode Island, and Vermont

*** Obama's financial advantage: Watching local TV here in Ohio, it feels like Obama has a 4-to-1 advantage -- with SEIU, UFCW and Obama just blitzing the airwaves compared with Clinton. It's happening in all four states. In fact, per TV ad expert Evan Tracey, Obama has outspent Clinton $23 million to $14 million in the last 30 days. How is she expected to hold a big lead if she gets outspent this badly? The third party groups are like salt in the Clinton wound.

*** I’m sorry, so sorry, please accept my apology: McCain apologizing yesterday after a radio host who introduced the Arizona senator referred to Obama as “Barack Hussein Obama” was another reminder of how many apologies we’ve seen in this race -- many of them to Obama. Off the top of our head, there was Biden (for the “clean” and “articulate” remark), Billy Shaheen (for wondering if Obama ever sold drugs), Bob Johnson (another drugs reference), and now McCain (for the shock jock’s “Barack Hussein Obama” line). It reflects just how hard it is to run against Obama. As Peggy Noonan wrote earlier in the month, “Hillary is the easier candidate, Mr. Obama the tougher. Hillary brings negative; it's fair to hit her back with negative. Mr. Obama brings hope, and speaks of a better way. He's not Bambi, he's bulletproof.” NBC’s Abby Livingston also makes this observation: While some Clinton surrogates were late to apologize to Obama, McCain did it very quickly. If the Clintons -- of all people -- can get into trouble with African Americans for statements about Obama, then just think of some of the troubles McCain might have.

VIDEO: A campaign speaker's attack on Barack Obama before a John McCain rally prompted an apology from the Arizona senator. NBC's Kelly O'Donnell reports.

*** On the trail: Clinton attends an “Economic Solutions Summit” in Zanesville, OH, then campaigns in St. Clairsville, OH; Obama holds a rally in Columbus and then campaigns in Duncanville, TX, and San Marcos, TX; McCain also campaigns in Texas, including town halls in Tyler and San Antonio, and two fundraisers in Houston; and Bill Clinton makes five stops in the Lone Star State, hitting early voting events in Houston and Austin and a rally at the University of Texas at Austin.

Countdown to Ohio and Texas: 6 days
Countdown to Election Day 2008: 251 days
Countdown to Inauguration Day 2009: 328 days

Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639 to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.

EMAIL THIS

Comments

What did they expect to happen in the debate last night? A fistfight? Swearing and screaming at each other? Was Chris Matthews waiting for Obama to call her a bitch? It is called a debate. I have been to a few debates, and they are all pretty dull.

The times that Hillary tried to score points, such as with the pillow comment, or the interjection on the use of the term "denounce", she not only lost the points, but they went to his side.

If one was to score this debate like a boxing match, Obama didn't land a knockout punch, but won on points. The result is the same. A win is a win.

John Mack, Fairway, KS (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 10:56 AM)

Thank God these debates are over for now. If I have to listen to another 2 seconds of HRC's voice and look at her foul face I'm going to puke.
Senator Obama won hands down. He is more presidential every day. I hope and pray that Ohio, Texas, Vermont and Rhode Island are landslides for Senator Obama. Then, if HRC has an ounce of self respect and any respect at all for her party; she will concede.
I'm a 48 year old white male, divorced, shared custody, college educated, a veteran and make 50 to 60k per year. I am not drinking any kool-aid or out of touch with the realities that face our nation. For the first time in my adult life I am excited and hopeful at the possibility of something new in our government. President Barack Obama!

Chris, Dorr, MI (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:01 AM)

Maybe I'm just not reading closely enough - but WHY is no one talking about how Obama has surpassed ONE MILLION people donating to his campaign. This is a huge story. I may be wrong, but I think this is unprecidented. Don't campaigns generally have only around 100,000 to 300,000 donors? I'm not being sarcastic, I would actually like to know.

Yesterday before the debate there were about 992,000 donors - this morning there are nearly 1,002,000 - that means 10,000 NEW people donated to Obama in LESS than 24 hours. I think this goes a long way in the people taking back ownership of their government.

That is not a story?

MKD (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:01 AM)

Obama is smart enough to know the difference between inspiring a large crowd of supporters and engaging in a sit-down discussion with reporters (it's not really a debate). Too bad Chris Matthews doesn't appreciate the different speaking skills required. I'll also bet Obama gives one heck of an inaugural address.

Phil Garrett, Georgetown TX (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:02 AM)

I found Clinton's SNL comment about the press very interesting. SNL did a parody of it because its true, the press does favour Obama. In that respect, Clinton had a point.

However, complaining about the situation being "unfair" is never, never a winning argument. One always comes off as a sore loser, making excuses when they say something like that. Clinton is, as the analysts put it, being petty now.

Furthermore, I don't think this is any different than at the beginning of this race when all the news outlets were proclaiming, "Bow to the inevitability of Clinton!" Boy, it really sucks when the situation is reverse, huh Clinton?

Jay Hoegh, Andover MN (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:05 AM)

Okay, what's up with Chris Matthews and his questioning of Obama's substance without a private audience and a teleprompter. Matthews has been the biggest Pavlovian dog throughout this whole campaign -one mention of Obaman's name and he is the biggest salivator/drooler of all of them. NOW, he thinks "people better pay note of it while we have this chance"!!?? People have been saying this all along - he just chose to not listen to them, his only objective was slamming Hillary and exalting Obama. Again, what's up? Or, are ratings down?

I doubt this makes it through MSNBC's biased moderating. Remember always 7 positive Obama comments to 1 positive Hillary comment - you have your reputation to uphold.

Jules (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:06 AM)

I did not expect MSNBC-Obama Central to think Hillary Clinton did enough to change the momentum Obama had, but I would disagree. She proved he had no original ideas - agreeing on every position she actually detailed. Forced him to not only denounce Farrakhan's words, but to reject him completely. Bravo! It may be time for some of these cable stations to re-think their blind support for one candidate over another - with the exception of Dan Abrahms, who actually practices what he preaches.
Hillary Clinton for President

MJ,Ho-Ho-Kus, NJ (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:16 AM)

I think this "can't say anything about him without being called a racist" is nonsense, same applies to Clinton and sexism. If folks want to disagree with Obama or Clinton, own it. If what you've said comes across to others as racist or sexist (fairy tale? No. "shuck and jive"? You bet.), then, hey, maybe you should evaluate your intentions. Just because this country hasn't yet been in the position to offend a candidate on the basis of race or sex doesn't mean that it's so outrageous for the public to react when something is said that seems innappropriate.
Sure, use Obama's middle name, there's no law against it. You're welcome to do whatever you'd like, rightwing radio. And people are also welcome to evaluate your tone and infer intention. Lots of folks don't even realize when they are being offensive, or they do and don't care, so what's the trouble with letting them know? Having these candidates running have really let people's true colors show, so don't complain about it. Clean up your act or brace yourself for criticism, that's how it goes.

squintz, philly, pa (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:18 AM)

Moderator: BLAH BLAH BLAH (Hillary you go first)
Hillary: (gives a well thought out, articulate answer)
Obama: Yeah, what she said....
If Obama is the democratic nominee, I will be a life long democrat who either sits out the election or votes for MCCain. (which is what all of the republicans who voted in the democratic primaries for obama WANTED).

Lynn NY (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:18 AM)

This Obama guy is pretty slick. He has been very good at stealing and ducking behind clinton's idea and unfortunately the press has been helping him by putting the tough question first to clinton. All that Obama does was to always agree with clinton and spins it to always look like that is what he has been saying. Clinton was right to complain about it tonite. Notice that whenever a tough question is put to him first, he stumbles only to comback and co-op clintons answer with a spin. I don,t know why Clinton is not hammering on this Obama,s Iraq speech when he was an Illunois senator and did not have the burden and responsibility to cast a vote. Or even get the false inteligent briefing that was giving to them by George Bush. When he did have the responsibility and burden he voted like everyone else. We all know how to call the right play while sitting on our couch and watching the game on the big screen. But one thing is for sure, we did not have the responsibility and burden of the quarterback who is in the middle of that game.

Kristoff, Phoeneix AZ (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:18 AM)

The Best is OBAMA BLAMING the people who put the bus in the ditch,DEMOCRATS DODD AND KENENNDY AND KERRY thats you ,and republicans unite with obama because he thinks HILLIARY and the democrats of OLDE NOT BUSH put us there,convuluted at best but so is OBAMAS message enjoy the show.NOT VERY HOPEFUL SAYING WE ARE IN A DITCH

kenn (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:20 AM)

Why is McCain apologizing? Is that not what his name is? Barrack HUSSEIN Obama? Nobody ever apologized for calling the than first lady Hillary RODHAM Clinton. It's your name, wear it proudly. The people who gave it to you did so for a reason. I can understand why Obama does not want that name and it reflects poorly on him. Politics is no reason not to honor your ancestors.

Opa2 (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:21 AM)

I would agree with Mitchell Feldman on this one. Barack is much more disarming and collected than Hillary at every question. This would be a large asset to any President. When building consensus, negotiating with allies, and communicating with the American people. This is an essential trait of leadership that Hillary does NOT have at all. She is agitating, divisive, and sometimes the need for her to speak up and battle outweighs common sense. I like the fact that Obama only fights the battles that can be won and conceeds pettyness. Take the "denounce" and "reject" argument. Rather than bicker with her on semantics, he conceeded her argument (which by the way she was flat wrong) and was able to handle it with a calm, cool, and collected answer...

I think we have seen the last political debate Hillary Clinton will ever attend...

Chris DelGross (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:22 AM)

McCain is going to be apologizing an awful lot when Obama becomes the official nominee and the right wing attack machine starts mudslinging in earnest. You can bet that the conservative 527's will be running all kinds of racist, lying attack ads and the we will hear the name Hussein more times in this election than we did in the run up to the Iraq war! McCain is in a catch22; he probably cannot beat Obama if he runs a clean, honest campaign focused on the issues but attacking Obama is proving to be very dangerous and will backfire if there is any way his attacks can be construed as racist.

Tim M, Ithaca (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:24 AM)

MIKA IN THE MORNING was hillarious when she was trying to think of a woman orator who was as good as a man lets face it they shouldnt be in the work place never mind the whitehouse,yes im like the women voting for OBAMA I know whats up sorry I say it out loud.NICE POM POMS thats what she should be a cheerleader for OBAMA

kenn (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:25 AM)

The Iraq War? I give this one to Sen. Obama because he is stressing judgement. We should have never gone after Iraq and if people remember correctly everyone was too whipped up after 9/11 to question. Our problems at the time were in Afghanistan (still are) and Sen. Obama is trying to make the case that it was bad judgement. His voting to fund the war? What -would you have all our troupes over there with nothing?
Minister Farrakhan: I honestly don't know if this was a fair question. Sen. Obama handled it well and Sen. Clinton looked like a fool. No one can tell another person what to say or do. Sen. Obama has made his position clear on the "endorsement", how he feels about the Jewish people in our country and Israel, and his denouncing of the vile spew that comes out of Minister Farrakhans mouth. What more can be done? Will Sen. Obama have to answer for every black individual in this country? Come on.
Sen. Clinton got her point across regarding Nafta. She really was never for it in the first place.

Dawn Johnson, Las Vegas, NV (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:25 AM)

Last night Hillary Clinton (and Barack Obama nodded his approval) promised to opt out of NAFTA within 6 months if her demands for labor and environmental protections weren't added to the agreement. What amazes me is this isn't the headline in every newspaper and lead story on every cable news network in the country!
This is more of a commentary on the press than on pandering politicians. Isn't it their job to actually investigate into the actual impact of such a move?
People should ask if the manufacturing sectors in Mexico and Canada are better off than in Ohio -- they're not! US jobs have gone to India and China and they aren't part of NAFTA. Why do you think all those Mexicans are trying to get into the US in the first place!
A few facts concerning the trading relationship between the US & Canada:
- The US exports the equivalent of 12% of it's GDP, much of which is manufactured goods, to Canada.
- NAFTA allows the US to import, tariff-free, oil, natural gas, pulp & paper and electricity (to name a few).
- Much of the Canadian retail, manufacturing and resource sectors are controlled by US companies who would be adversely affected by tariff costs.
- Trade imbalances between the two countries are generally affected by commodity prices.
- Canadian labor laws are generally stronger than US labor laws.
- Canadians are already upset about the outcome of the softwood lumber issue and would love to opt out/reopen the agreement for their own reasons.
One last thing. What the Canadians have is in huge demand throughout the world and there is no law that says they can't sell it elsewhere if doing business with the US becomes less economical.

Ian (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:27 AM)

H I L L A R Y C L I N T O N W I N S A G A I N ! ! !

Hillary Clinton has won ALL 20 of the debates. She's clearly the most intelligent, most qualified, most experienced, most electable candidate in the race.

She nails Obama every time on the details. He's such a wimp, always looking to her to answer the tough questions and then agreeing with her when he has nothing to say. What an empty suit. He's completely unqualified and unelectable. His stuttering, stammering, yaallknow, tired looking debate performance was pathetic.He needs to stick those skinny fingers up his nose. He's had a total free pass from the corporate owned media and their republican pals. When that's over, he's toast. Even on Fox (it pains me to say this) they are more fair and balanced in this campaign, at least they tell the truth about the orchestrated effort by the Republicans across this nation to ask Republicans to "do their duty" and vote for Obama to bring down Hillary only to vote for McCain in November. WAKE UP DEMS!! Read the New York Times article by Geraldine Ferraro about how the national Dem vote for far for Obama has actually only been 15-20% of the actual Dem voters!!! WISE UP!! DON'T LET THE REPUBLICANS WIN BEFORE WE EVEN HAVE OUR CONVENTION IN AUGUST!!!! VOTE SMART! VOTE HILLARY! COME ON OHIO, TEXAS, RHODE ISLAND AND VERMONT!! WISE UP!!! OBAMA IS A BIG TIME LOSER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The media doesn't even pretend to be fair. It's blatant 24/7 attacks on Hillary would have crushed any other candidate months ago. Hillary is amazing. The Dems are lucky to have her and stupid if they throw away their best chance for victory in November by nominating Obama. He's unelectable.

I could NEVER vote for Obama because he's unqualified to be President (and I have NEVER voted Republican), but I put my COUNTRY FIRST, PARTY SECOND!! A vote for Obama now is a vote for McCain in November. That's a FACT !!!!!!!!!!

The brilliant Tina Fey said it best on SNL, "BITCH IS THE NEW BLACK" AND "BITCHES GET THINGS DONE"

ROCK ON TINA!! ROCK ON HILLARY!!!

REAL DEMS HAVE YOUR BACK!!!! GO ALL THE WAY TO THE CONVENTION!!!! THIS RACE IS FAR FROM OVER!!!!!!!!!!!!

James & Jenny (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:30 AM)

Get over it HMT,Hillary's campaign has been on Life support for sometime now.The Only reason it's still Alive is out of Respect for Bill from the MSM.Hillary should be DNR( do Not resucitate).

If Barack had Lost 10 or 11 contest in a row, the MSM would have Crucified him for Not Dropping out & saving the Democratic Party from Battle he could'nt Win!!!!!!!!!

Get over your Woe is me, i'm a woman act, as Hillary should also.

Rick,ky (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:31 AM)

Barack was much better than Hillary.

*In the beginning of the debate, Hillary was agitated and kept raising her voice...not very presidential. Barack, on the other hand, was cool and collected.

*Hillary needs to understand the country wants to move on past the 90's. We don't want the divisiveness her nomination would engender. I know I don't want to relive those hyper-partisan days. Barack represents a better way.

*Despite what she says, Hillary is not "vetted." Why won't she disclose her tax returns? What surprises are lurking there?

*Hillary says she is for working families, but who owns her campaign? She is funded by PACs and lobbyists. Barack, on the other hand, is funded by a million little donors like me. If elected, he wouldn't be owned by anybody except the American people.

*Although Hillary says she is ready on "Day One", on the single most important past issue, Hillary showed that she was spineless and voted to allow Bush to start a premptive war. I can't trust her with important decisions. Barack can be trusted to make the right decisions.

Therese Squeri (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:31 AM)

I don't know why I should expect a different set of standards for this election that I would in the regular work place. It's much easier for a black man to get promoted than it is for a white (or any other color) woman. We are set to a highers standard (ALWAYS). It makes me so mad that because Hillary has showns that she is not a droan by showing more than on emotion they tag her as moody, schizophrenic, crazy..............because I don't know ANY men who are every cranky, moody, or uneven in their behavior. I'm sick of the Obama bias. It is real and it is percieved. The networks should not be able to give 24 advertising to their favorite candidate and I just hope the people in Texas and Ohio are smart enough to vote for more experience. On the darkest evening of the year would you drive without headlights if you had a perfectly good set of headlights (even if you didn't like what the headlights looked like). That is what the people voting for Obama are doing. They are driving this country without headlights when we know what a Clinton presidence would be. Also, has anyone thought about what the black community will feel Obama owes them for their unwaivering support of him?

a of illinois (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:31 AM)

In debate as in advertising........people are simple. People want the last word because the last word is remembered more than the previous words. That is why getting the question first ALL THE TIME has a bias. It's the same reason why in the Wal-mart commercials you hear.........blah, blah, blah......Low prices.......Always low prices at the end because regardless of whatever else was said they know you will remember that last line. Her criticism of the media was neccessary. When it takes SNL to preview their lovefest to bring some clarity to how they've been acting then you know it's been pretty blatant. Whatever it takes to get them to treat the candidates more equally so each American can make their own choice is what all of us should want. If you prefer to be brow beaten into supporting Obama that is your choice but for many hard core democrats this bias is a huge turn off to this race.

a of illinois (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:36 AM)

Chris Matthews has a bizarre, quasi-feminine approach to judging political candidates. Case in point: his characterizing ole' Fred Thompson as a handsome man. Geesh. Speaking from a genuinely feminine perspective, I found Obama's debate performance more "thrilling" than his speeches. In particular I love his eyes and the way he doesn't lie.

Amy B Portland, ME (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:40 AM)

Billy, Normal:

I have no idea why anyone thinks either candidate was exceptionally good or bad or would have done either good or bad depending their turn in answering the questions about Russia and Putin. Hell, any moron who listens to or reads the news knows about the things that Putin has been pulling lately as well as his recent criticisms of the US. Their answers that Putin needs to be watched and wee need to depend on friends to help keep pressure on Putin and Russia to behave is a generalized no-brainer statement. Where was the additional exceptional knowledge of these issues discussed by either candidate last night. I didn't hear any. Some people hear Hillary say well we can't really trust Putin because he has hand picked his successor and they think that makes her an expert on foreign policy? Give me a break. I'm sure that you Billy could have given the same if not a better repsonse to that question. Let's nominate you for President.

C A, Tuscaloosa, AL (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:44 AM)

Lynn form NY:

I agree with you. I'm a lifelong Democrat who'll vote for McCain if Obama's the nominee. He was unprepared in last night's debate. He fed off of Clinton's answers. I'll never forget the Russia Question, and that schoolboy look that Obama gave Clinton when he turned to her to allow her to answer it first.

I'm upset that MSNBC has endorsed Obama.

I'm disappointed that Dems are gonna nominate someone so ill-prepared for the Presidency.

Obama is an empty-suited windbag.

Dirk, Brunswick, Georgia (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:45 AM)

Obama's willingness to sit down with Clinton and work on the how is similar to how he answers his questions.........I agree with Hillary. It allows him to be the man in charge while getting the answers and solutions from a subordinate woman. I've had similar workplace experiences..........huh........I guess there still is a glass cieling. Black men did get to vote before women got to vote so I guess it's the natural order. It doesn't have to be if Texas and Ohio make the right choice.

a of illinois (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:46 AM)

"Obama's HUGE gaffe on once again resorting to "I agree w/Hillary" -- elle

What color is the sun over your planet where being agreeable and honest is a huge gaffe?

nuanced (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:46 AM)

Hillary cleaned his clock last night if you do a real analysis of the answers on policy. Looking presidential doesn't buy you much if you can't articulate the policies and issues at hand. Hillary has policy down cold. Barack seemed clearly out of his element - especially on questions of foreign policy. I thought it was a breathtaking moment on the Russia question when he automatically looked at her to answer. He wanted no part of it and just repeated what she said. Brings to mind the Xerox quote which, while not all that clever, may be more applicable to Obama than his supporters would like to admit. I think some very large holes appeared in the Obama personna last night. I also think that the MSNBC pundits saw that as well.

The Farrakhan question was a big moment. The fact that 1) Barack had to be schooled on why it was a big deal and 2) the fact that he conceded without fully understanding that constitutes a huge red flag for anyone looking at this race objectively.

As for health care, Hillary was dead on again. Everyone should be covered and, yes, it should be mandatory. As she explained, subsidies will be available to assist those who need help affording it. Barack's point about Medicare Plan B not being mandatory is not even the point. At Medicare's inception, there was only what is now knows as Part A and was mandatory from the beginning and remains so. It's great that Barack wants to mandate coverage for children, but if the parents are sick and can't get care, things can get pretty hairy. Universal healthcare is going to be somewhat painful for all in the beginning, but so is anything that's really worth doing.

I think you will see a little surge for Hillary in the polling in the coming days leading up to Tuesday. Then, perhaps, some of the Dems who are reluctant to endorse can finally come into play - Richardson, Edwards, etc.

So don't count any chickens just yet Obama disciples. This is why they vote.

JT, Nasvhille, TN (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:51 AM)

So Barack Hussein Obama named himself? What kind of sick joke is going on here on First Read today. I want America to focus on issues and answers, not names. Get a grip ya'll. You sound bad.

Blaine (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:51 AM)

Obama didn't handle the Russian question any better than Hillary did. Baracks airy assurances to negotiate with Russia vis-a-vis Serbia do not take into account what sort of person Medeyev turns out to become. If,acting as Putin apparatchik[which it appears that he is],he makes common cause with the Serbian nationalists[which they are doing,right at this moment],then Serbia turns into a Russian protectorate much like North Korea with China in the 1950s-1990s with all that this will entail. Serbs,backed by Russian military might,will increase their meddling in Kosovo,drawing in an increasingly worried EU and a NATO that is fracturing and falling apart as we speak.
Not enough time was spent on this rather important issue.

Lee Holmes (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:51 AM)

As far as who won the debate poll...........Many voters over the age of 40 are not texting and posting online. Obama's supporters do have a greater advantage and I will give them credit that they realize that it doesnt' really matter who won because for millions of people who didn't watch the debate, they will hear that Obama won and will assume he must be pretty good to be getting all this support........the bandwagon effect...........and perception is reality. Hillary was clearly more informed than Obama. But younger people are more worried about doing what makes them feel good then what is good for the country. They haven't ever had to sacrifice or work through a recession or depression and they know even if their choice is wrong and economic times are hard that many of them call fall back on their parents to help them out. I'm not in that boat. My husband is in IRaq. This election matters because if a democrat doesn't win (and I believe HIllary is better prepared to beat John McCain) my husband will probably being looking ahead to more deployments........missing out on more of his daughters lives as they grow and falling behind in his career. But if Obama makes you FEEL good then...........that's really more important???!!!

a of illinois (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:53 AM)

Obama's statement about NAFTA and lead-poisoning product, sorry China isn't in NAFTA. Also, Obama's pastor gave Farrakhan a lifetime award. So both are bigots along with Obama since he gets his advice from his minister for +20 years. He asked his minister if he should run for president and thinks the world of him. Obama doesn't give any articulate answers, just a bunch of fluff.

joe, Idaho (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:56 AM)

I thought the most troubling moment of the debate was Hillary's response on releasing her tax return. Russert should have asked her why she hasn't already done it. People have every right to suspect she's hiding something, so why not clear the air now. Doing it when she's the nominee, well that makes it appear that she's more concerned about being the nominee than being the president. I'm sure the Republicans would be more than happy to do to Hillary what they did to Bill--tie her up in legal knots for the next four years.

Michael, Elkhart, Ind (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:56 AM)

I am a hard core Obama supporter and I think that this Hussein middle name thing just needs to get out over and done with. The reality is that it is his middle name. It should be a non issue. He didn't pick his name, his parents named him.

The more people say it the less power it has. It will lose it's mystique. That's why Jon Stewart said it at the Oscars, so the joke would be told on the biggest stage possible. We've all heard it now.

In 40 years when the kids today grow up to be president, with their unique names plus all the crazy spelling their parents have given them, how are we going to take them seriously. They sound like a combination of a law firm and a film festival.

Rodney, Fresno, CA (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:57 AM)

1) don't CARE whether McCain's apology was "good cop, bad cop." That will do him no harm among Republicans and he's already been dismissed by his party's right-wingnuts. I'd expect to see more of this as the race goes on.
2) Media IS harder on Hillary; she has "experience" and should be more nimble, and it reflects how the "smartest girl in the room" is generally treated by all the "cool boys". Barack Obama has a compelling personal story and is not only a traslational candidate but a role model for men of all colors. He's also beaten Hillary silly with his very well-planned campaign.
And in the end, if the candidates will begin to discuss the REAL costs of all the promises and requirements of maintaining the preeminent position of the USA in world affairs UNDISTRACTED by campaign stunts we will ALL be better off.

rodeo, ellensburg, wa (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 12:00 PM)

I like the way you have interjected the videos into the text of this essay. Please continue with other articles when appropriate to do so.
Wish you folks could set up your articles in the same format of Maureen Dowd's pieces: you can click on any word, phrase, or name and a definition or explanation will immediately pop up. Very convenient.
My on-line video of last night's debate was out of sync. This is very distracting, but, I know what the candidates look like, so I just listened. Hope your staff aren't too distressed over this technical problem. You folks do great work. Thank you.

Corinne Carter, Richland, Wash. (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 12:01 PM)

Hillary, the “Fighter”, consistently demands the last word. She is willing to bludgeon to the end with rambling rhetoric and an undeniable wealth of knowledge. She presents as a chameleon dancing in circles on a mood-of-the-day plaid. She can inspire confusion, piercing personal putdowns, defensiveness and anger. Her knowledge and caring are lost as her opponent stiffens against the assault or limps away. This is the political tact of yesterday that has lowered America’s stature in its own eyes and those of the rest of the world.

If the Clinton’s quest is indeed more than fulfilling their perceived entitlement to power, let them stand aside and actively support Obama’s gift for uniting opponents with the consistent demeanor of respect for the dignity of all. Peace cannot be achieved with an arsenal of superiority and defeat. Peace can only be reached when all who grasp for it do so from the level footing of mutual respect and dignity.

Sue Davis, Las Vegas, NV (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 12:02 PM)

I think the press is dropping the ball again like they did in the run up to the Iraq war. They are not asking the tough question of Obama just because they love the drama of it all. I guess they are leaving that for the books they would be writing after the fact. Unfortunately no body holds the press accountable. I am an independent who strongly believes that Obama is good, but he needs a little seasoning to handle the toughest job in the world. All his rhetoric about bringing people together would be thrown out of the window when he walks in the oval office and realize that for him to get any thing done, he has to listen to 100 senators and 230+ members of the house, all with different individual agendas. He would realize that for him to get any thing done, he would have to fend of some of the powerful members of congress who has children of his age from ramming down their personal agenda down his throat. The only person that I know who was able to do that was Bill Clinton and that is why he has so much animosity form both the republican and some members of his party and that is why he was a successful president.

Kristoff, Phoeneix AZ (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 12:03 PM)

Civil War - REDUX. The tone of the debate may have been civil (except for Tim Russet's race-baiting Farakan obsession; but the tone of the blog/chat that occompanied the debate online was anything but. I was disturbed as I chatted along with the others not only by the mean spirited personal attacks on Senator Clinton; but even more so by the "Tar Baby" and other racial epitaphs that were used by that were at least educated enough to be typing in a blog online. I was horrified to realize that the KKK was alive and well in cyberspace - and I told the other chatters this at the time - most didn't seem to get what I was talking about; which also made me sad.

David Higgins, Walla Walla, Wash (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 12:12 PM)

Anyone with even part of a brain knows why the questions are always asked of Hillary first. It gives Obama time to memorize her answers. Doesn't this man have one unique idea of his own? NO.

Also Obama wouldn't answer the question about the Pastor of his church, who praises and lifts up Farrakhan, who by the way is the leader of Nation Islam; ( remember 9-11?) OBama being a member of this church for 20 years is very troubling. People should listen to Obama's Pastor on you tube. He is scary.
Obama's church and pastor are for black people only and Africa is their main concern.

Obama's name is.......Barak Hussein Obama, why is he ashamed of it?

Obama has many questions to answer about his involvment with this church and his Pastor.

John Doe (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 12:13 PM)

The debate confirmed what I thought all along - Obama is weak. I don't hate the guy. In fact I like him a lot. But he is dangerously unprepared for the top post.

Let's not be naive - there will be opposition in Washington not to mention other parts of the world.
Reaching out and diplomacy is good but there will be battles that require experience to make a good judgement - and guts to put forward/fight for what is right. Obama's in experience in foreign policy is way too little to be ignored.

One of America's biggest problem is foreign policy. The world hates us for the decisions a neophyte President made. We need to restore our image among other things in the world arena.

Dems please unite behind a candidate. I am for Hilary simply because I know she has what it takes to resolve the mess we are in. She's focused on those. She talks about them in detail because she knows them by heart. Barack would make an excellent VP. Will take over in 8 years and continue the path to recovery.

Whoever it maybe, let's make sure not another Republican gets sent to the White House.

Joyce, NY, NY (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 12:14 PM)

Civil War - REDUX. The tone of the debate may have been civil, except for Tim Russet's race-baiting Farakan obsession; but the tone of the blog/chat that occompanied the debate online was anything but. I was disturbed as I chatted along with the others not only by the mean spirited personal attacks on Senator Clinton; but even more so by the "Tar Baby" and other racial epitaphs that were used by those that were at least educated enough to be typing in a blog online. I was horrified to realize that the KKK was alive and well in cyberspace - and I told the other chatters this at the time - most didn't seem to get what I was talking about; which also made me sad.

David Higgins, Walla Walla, Wash (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 12:16 PM)

She called for these added debates, then whines about them. She says the media is showing favoritism. If Obama had lost 11 contests in a row the media would have allowed him to go gently into that dark night. However, Hillary, the actual loser of 11 contests, is still being highlighted and spotlighted in the media. It is, in fact, the media that has kept her in the race. Her constant changing demeanor concerns me. To paraphrase Forest Grump, she is like a box of chocolates, you never know what (or who you are going to get). I am afraid she will run the White House like she has run her campaign, which does not reflect the experience she claims. Mr. Obama on the other land had run a much better, even an excellent campaign and this was done absent the long-term Washington experience the Clintons seem to think he needs. His corporate like ability to lead and motivate will bring the right people with the experience and expertise to change this country to his administration. A Clinton administration, however, would be more of the same ole, same ole, same Washington "experience" that got us where we are today.

Denise, Maryland (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 12:20 PM)

1. Obama won the debate by staying calm, cool, and collected, behaving "presidential." Trying to compare his debate style to his speech/rally style is obsurd. Of course they are different; they should be. If he spoke at a debate the way he speaks at a rally, he would be criticized for monopolizing all the time. Debate formats are entirely different!

2. Shame on Hillary for playing the gender card. Shows how desperate she is. I agree with the commentary after the debate that if Obama had played the race card, he would have been soundly criticized. Everyone has agreed that we need to keep matters of race and gender out of the campaigns, at least by the candidates!!

3. I see nothing wrong with Obama saying he agrees with Hillary on an issue. Thank goodness someone does not feel the need to rehash the details of subjects we have heard over and over, ad nauseum! It leaves time for discussing other issues. We all know already that most of their positions are very similar and that the real choice comes down to who can help lead our country out of the mess it is in. In my mind that is Sen Obama.

4. I would have liked to see new issues addressed, and if there is another debate (heaven forbid!!) I hope we get away from the standard fair we have heard for 20 debates and address issues more pertinent to our economy: foreclosures and debt issues, inner city redevelopment, education reform, the plight of middle class Americans who are losing ground every day.

All in all though, I think Hillary needs to see the light and get out before Democrats lose the enthusiasm that Obama has helped to inspire in Americans. Voters might decide soon to stay home or defect to McCain if we don't solidify behind a candidate soon.

Oh, and someone please give Chris Matthews his own show where he can listen to himself all day long, but we can change the channel.

Kasha, NJ (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 12:20 PM)

Obama is only where he is because of the media and MSNBC. All of the white media wanted to make sure that everyone knew they weren't biggots. Well we know know they are just sexist. Us democrats now do not have the best most qualified and tested candidate to put in the white house. I am a loyal democrat but I will not vote for Obama. He will never win the big states and the red states. I urge all republicans in Texas to vote for Hillary. (the polls show Mcain losing to Obama and beating Hillary) DO WHATS GOOD FOR THE REPUBLICAN PARTY AND VOTE FOR HILLARY TO KEEP HER IN THE RACE. I can't wait to see msnbc after Mcain trounces Obama in the general election

Kevin, Florida (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 12:26 PM)

I think everyone is overlooking a number of facts. There are many democrats who will not admit to any pollster that they will not vote for Obama for fear of being labeled racist in their attitudes. Yet in speaking with a number of friends, they clearly state their intention on staying home if the choice is Obama McCain - something they would not admit to a stranger. It seems to be simmering just below the surface that if you do not support Obama - that must make you a racist! I am not a racist and I support Hillary - we've seen what inexperience can do and it's not pretty. We live in far too precarious a time to trust the direction of the country to some one who has not, even as a chairman of a committee on European ally relations even made 1 trip to meet with them!

Dorothy Weintraub (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 12:28 PM)

When Clinton was the front runner, her attitude in speeches and debates took on the appearance of smirking, superior, b---h. Now that she is losing, she shows sarcasm, pettiness, anger, hostility and the usual Clinton smarm. As president, you really don't want that kind of persona in the White House because every president constantly faces crises and problematic issues. We need a cool headed and smart acting president. Obama may or may not be that type of person but do you think it makes sense to have someone so inexperienced in both life and the workings of government to be running the show? You wouldn't hire a person to wash your car who was so inexperienced, but you would trust your family's security and well being to such a president?

"How do you want to handle the planned attack on the U.S. President Obama?"
"Well, I'm HOPING it will CHANGE."

I don't care for McCain but I'll take him over that.

Ron V (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 12:28 PM)

I guess some things never change. I am so tired of reading/hearing about how unlikable Hillary Clinton is and just how presidential and special obama is (he isn't). It doesn't seem to matter what Hillary talks about, how much knowledge she has, what her policies are (explained many times), there are just too many obamamanics that have become so brainwashed by obama, that it's boring to read. The comments never change.
As far as the media goes, its very apparent, if not established, that the media favors obama. This favoritism can be challenged over and over, but the media does not have the guts to admit this, they just deny, and continue to favor obama.
I don't favor obama. He actually scares me because of the worship from the obamamanics. This is not normal. And because it is not normal, there is something beneath this that will eventually come out.
This country still has a president that has come very close to destroying the USA, had many worshipers (same as obama), and look where its gotten us today. It certainly is time for a change, but I want a change from a leader that I can trust to turn this country around - not a Hollywood created celebrity, with his own logo and marketing experts marketing him as a brand. We are at a very crucial time in the USA, and we absolutely need a leader that we can trust, who can do the job, who is tough enough to stand up to the enemies of the USA. I don't find that charisma and Hollywood speech writers can do this job. Because obama hides and slides around so much of "his" policy, I don't know what they are. No, anyone can have a website and post anything on that website. I've been there - don't break your arm patting yourself on the back obama - you are weak and the only reason that you are where you are is because of your endorsements. But in politics, you have to pay for the favors you receive and payback will be big time.

notanobamafan (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 12:31 PM)

all these "hypothetical" questions from Russet are absurd. Hillary always gets the tough questions first it is so obvious that the media is enamoured with this Obama. He is untested and unproven and the Republicans will eat him up. In an election where we should win in a landslide we will lose again. 4 more years of misery is better than 4 years of Obama.

Kevin, FL (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 12:31 PM)

I have been undecided in the race between Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama. Having read the comments from the supporters(?) of each side, I have decided if Obama is the nominee I will vote for him. The hatefullness of Mrs. Clinton's supporters and their willingness to do and say anything has disgusted me. Shame on you!!! If Mrs. Clinton is the nominee, I will vote for Mr. McCain.

Nancy, St. Augustine, FL (Sent Wednesday, February 27, 2008 12:32 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=708414