Final debate thoughts

Posted: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 10:08 PM by Mark Murray

From NBC's Chuck Todd
This was not a good debate for Obama, period. But it wasn't a great debate for Clinton either. Of course, that may not matter to Team Clinton. In a twp-way debate, it's not about which candidate narrowly wins -- but which candidate gets pummeled in the post-debate reviews. And Obama will get pummeled because well he did get pummeled, a little bit by Clinton and a little bit by the moderators.

In the first 40 minutes of the debate, most of the questioning was on Obama's negatives (except for a lone Bosnia-sniper question to Clinton) and that's what helped create what was a near disastrous performance by Obama in those first 40 minutes. He was weak in a lot of his answers on his personal negatives. (Did he really compare Tom Coburn to a one-time '60s radical/terrorist?) Clinton, meanwhile, piled on, particularly (and surprisingly, actually) on Ayers. While I'm not sure if Clinton's piling on ever is good for her in the long run -- see her current poll standing -- it created some post-debate issues for Obama. Many news organizations will feel compelled to do Ayers stories in the next few days. While some may question the fairness and relevancy of the Ayers issue, it's not going to be good for Obama.

This debate is going to lead a lot of Obama supporters to ratchet up the calls on Clinton to either withdraw or tone down the attacks. Clinton supporters will point to this debate as proof that he's not yet ready for the general, that's why she should stay in, and that's why superdelegates should overturn the winner of pledged delegates.

Overall, with the spotlight on him very bright, Obama didn't step up. He got rattled early on and never picked his game back up. Clinton wasn't very warm (outside of he first few minutes), but she didn't have the spotlight on her very bright. And as we've noted in "First Thoughts" quite a few times, whenever the spotlight is on one candidate, the other seems to benefit. Tonight, the spotlight was on Obama, and for a short period of time, I expect Clinton to benefit. But the question is whether she can sustain any benefit since as the negativity goes on, she pays a bigger price than Obama. Let's see what the PA Dem voting public decides in six days. A big Clinton victory and this debate will be seen as an important turning point, a narrow victory (less than five points) and she could find herself facing more calls to get out.

Could tonight's true winner be John McCain? We're betting that's the unanimous pundit scoring tonight.

EMAIL THIS

Comments

waste of time

daniel, loganville, ga (Sent Wednesday, April 16, 2008 10:25 PM)

Not a good debate for Obama? Which debate--the one between him and the moderators that lasted for nearly the first hour of the debate, or the secondary debate between him and Clinton? I wonder why they bothered inviting Clinton? I also wonder if she may have had some inside information about a few of the questions in advance. Perhaps someone slipped her a copy of the questions while George and Charlie were cross-examining Obama.

Sherr, Maryland (Sent Wednesday, April 16, 2008 10:25 PM)

At least when Clinton takes a hit, her supporters don't whine.

Jared in Pa. (Sent Wednesday, April 16, 2008 10:25 PM)

Was this ABC??? I thought it was the National Enquirer. Terrible..terrible...terrible. Of course it was what I expected from George step-on-your-nopolis, however, most disappointing from Charles Gibson. Of course Obama was frustrated .... the debate is about being President of the United States not about what's been floating in the gutter.

garyd, amherst, nh (Sent Wednesday, April 16, 2008 10:26 PM)

Did they accept questions from Stephen Colbert's faux-conservative mask?

"Senator Obama, is there any way for you to lessen your hatred for America?"

Kinda ridiculous questioning tonight.

Chuck Todd was right about one thing, there was no winner tonight. Not even indirectly. This was a travesty highlighting how much the American media has fallen over the past 20 years.

Pander, Picayune MS (Sent Wednesday, April 16, 2008 10:26 PM)

First, I must point out Chuck Todd's bias opinion as I do everytime I respond to his blog. We finally do agree the 1st hour was spent on Tabloid issues pertaining to Sen. Obamam however he was NO DOUBT triple team by the bias, unprofessional, bone headed moderators and Sen. Hillary "I'll say or sell out my party" Clinton and for the record. Keith Olberman, once again gets it and was not fooled as you were by what transpired. The American people spent 2 hours watching a debate that should of been hosted by FOX News/Enquirer, unfiltered attacks by 3 people against a presidential canidate...This was a sad day in American politics and the media

Anthony E, Sandusky, OH (Sent Wednesday, April 16, 2008 10:26 PM)

The debate was a no go. The moderators shirked their responsibility to stick with issues. Actually, I thought Obama won, because he was kind of pointing this out the whole time.

Max (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:47 AM)

Todd has unfortunately let all the insipid compliments by his amen choir at MSNBC go to his head. He entirely misses the point that debates are not reducable to transcripts. It's not all about 'what they say' but rather about 'how they say it.' What seems patently obvious to the voters- that Hillary Clinton is simply spinning platitudes in cynical bad faith- is lost on boy genius Todd. Barack's earnest protestations concerning the trivial nature of the questions convinced us once again that he's the only serious candidate left standing. A quick look at the post debate polls on ABC, MSNBC and Drudge is a better measure of voter sentiment than a parsing of the transcript. Elections are about 'feel.' And, we the people feel that in Barack we have a true friend. Actually- that's the very same paradigm that served Hillary's husband so well- and got him elected twice.

General Striker (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:47 AM)

Flag pins? No, I'm not kidding. If you don't think minor crap issues like "flag pins" don't play a role in defining a candidate in the public's mind, you simply have not been paying attention over the last 28 years. Minor, insignificant issues like this take on a life of their own and define a candidate. Why is it so hard for Mr. Obama to wear a freaking flag pin?

I personally could not care less whether Obama wears a flag pin or not, but if he is going to take a "principled" stand against wearing a flag pin, he better be able to explain why in 10 words or less to "Joe Six Pack". Otherwise, he really does risk looking like an out-of-touch elitist. His answer to that woman's sincere question was a weak mish-mosh of gobbledy-gook.

Last night's debate demonstrated to me why Barack Obama will not be elected President. Which is unfortunate because I believe he will be the nominee, and I strongly beleive we need a Democrat to win in November. The reason? The unfortunate truth is you do need to pander to the masses a little bit to win. This is such a minor issue to pander on, but he won't budge out of "principle". Wear the pin already, for goodness sake!

Chris A., Washington, DC (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:47 AM)

HRC has proven again she is smart,tough and knows how to play this dirty game very well. After 21 debates...what substantive questions haven't been ask numerous times?
HRC as well as the moderators exposed Obama's achilles heel, that is he has an eloquent way of saying nothing with substance and tonite he wasn't even good even at that.
The Clinton stategy is clear and working. HRC is exploiting the fact that only four years ago, this "savior of hope" for the "limosine democrats" faction of the party was merely a state senator.
The HRC plan is simply to keep turning up the heat on Obama and his melt down continues. This was proven clearly tonite. HRC also knows with Obama having a melt down now....what happens when the Republicans come calling?... and they will. Politics is a dirty business and HRC is providing Obama the lesson.

You Get'em Girl!, Oklahoma (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:47 AM)

WOW! What a joke! People starving, can't afford medical treatment, the poor house is getting bigger and that's all those guys could think of to ask!!

Man can someone play the suberbowl commercials again

James Kelly, Virginia Beach, VA (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:47 AM)

Chuck, I respect your opinion most of the time, but this time, I think you are incorrect. While Obama was under the spotlight, yes, like a deer caught in the headlights at time, he did continuously attempt to bring the conversation back to the issues. This was the worst debate yet. I am surprised that the moderators did such an injustice, not only to the candidates, but rather to the voters. The questions were like broken records, played over and over again and lacked any real substance. Our country doesn't need to hear the bickering anymore, we need to move on. This was an opportunity missed thanks to Charlie and George.

Bee, Bethel, Maine (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:47 AM)

The "debate", if thats what you would call it was a real disappointment. ABC was a disappointment. Thats all we got for two hours, Obama having to defend himself against the one of the very things he was trying to stand against in politcs. The moderators should be embarassed of their part in the evening. Todd did you watch the debate? What are you talking about? 80% I'm with you, today I shocked at your comments.

Oona, Raleigh, NC (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:48 AM)

I didn't watch the debate because I expected the exact result stated by the majority of the commentors. Personal attacks and general foolishness. It is unbelievable how the media feels the need to "dummy down" the issues. I am personally offended as I am sure many are that the media assumes we as American are just that shallow and well stupid. We aren't children lets make this election about big people issue shall we.

Scott T. Detroit, MI (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:48 AM)

I was so turned off by the attack job last night on Obama that I had to turn the T.V. for about 15 minutes. When I turned back to the debate, they were still asking "Tabloid" questions to Obama while letting Hillary skate on everything she has lied to the American public about. Not one question about the Penn / Colombia story. No real questions about true issues facing the american people. Hell, they only gave each candidate 30 seconds (at the very end) to discuss the rising gas prices and what they plan to do about it. Pretty soon. most people won't be able to afford to drive to work every day. I will not watch ABC news again. Can we have one debate now with these two candidates where only issues are discussed. Can MSNBC put this together for the American people. If not, maybe CNN? Anyone out there willing to do this?

Chris, Texas (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:48 AM)

If anything is apparent, MAKING news is more important than any meaningful discussion of the issues we face today. Wearing a lapel pin is an issue? How about discussing how we should continue getting to work and eating, given gas and food prices? The media outlets didn't do themselves any favors on this one. It was politics as usual and media as usual. Both have lost touch with the people they are suppose to serve and inform.

John T, Boise, Idaho (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:48 AM)

Forty-five years as a political junkie, this was by far the most horrific moderation of a debate I have ever witnessed. Both candidates would have been better off appearing on FOX NEWS (the false news network) than before the two nitwits last nite. ABC should be ashamed of themselves.

byrdlegs, alexandria, va (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:48 AM)

Gosh, Obama finally gets some long overdue tough questions and his supporters cry foul. Based on his poor performance, I think it's safe to say the republicans will turn him into a pin cushion this fall.

ray hamilton, gillespie, illinois (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:49 AM)

That debate last nite was sooooo onesided, you Guys showed your true assinine colors. You were all about Hillary Clinton and trying to male Obama look like a villian. How can you blame a man for something someone else has said. (Pastor Wright) The Rev said what he felt not what Obama felt. Hillary has done all that dirt while she was in Congress and is trying to turn the spotlight off her and onto Obama. You know if Hillary is elected, she will not be President. Bill Clinton will be the next President and the next time another Monica comes in the picture, Hillary will forget what being a Presidewnt is about.

Ms Bee (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:49 AM)

Not that I am surprised..but Obama does not perform as well when people aren't so enamored of his every move...His ego needs constant stroking..Is that the kind of president we want? At least Clinton performs under intense scrutiny and pressure...That is the kind of president we need!

RGV (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:49 AM)

People are saying Obama message is important. Well the medium is the message. If reflects devisiveness, underlying racial tones and lacks any substance. Unfortunately your "Rock Star" got caught with his pants down because of his own ego. And I quess us peons willhope that Clinton moves ahead or else we are looking at Voting republican!!

Tom, Largo, Fl (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:49 AM)

The debate was televised and I agree, Obama was extremely weak and stuttered a lot. You could tell he did not know what to say and the wheels were turning to put something intelligent out there. Good debate.

contesa, Vining, MN (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:50 AM)

If you want to blam someone for the joke of the so called debate last night I think we should start with ourself,Its time to call,or write or senators and congressman and demand a change to the way debates are handled,I would suggest the top 20 to 30 questions submitted by the people of the us and only allow those questions to be asked.If our senators and congressman dont want to help us change this,we should fire them come election time and elect someone that will

jeff labrosse madison wi (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:50 AM)

After all was said and done I realized that Senator Barack is effective only when he has "speech number 6" to which to refer. Senator Clinton was so better prepared to answer policy questions in an organized and well thought out manner. Her experience showed through. Unfortunately for Senator Obama, his lack of experience and knowledge of the subject matter was obvious last night

Laurie Brown (Morristown, NJ) (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:50 AM)

Obama really showed he can't handle things when the going gets tough. The press will make the best of it and make all the excuses it can to make him look good. They have decided he should be the Dem's candidate and have been pushing him now for several months. Can't wait to hear what Olbermann will say about him losing the debate. MSNBC is so pro Obama I quit watching Olbermann.

Jerry Hudson Camden NJ (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:50 AM)

Obama is the one who behaved like a uniter, like an intelligent person who wants to improve and lead this country. He is the one who wants to discuss the issues and by doing that come up with solutions to the problems that plague this country. His interrogators care about ratings and Clinton cares only about fostering her ambitions, not the country.

Ineke van der Meijden, Huntsville, AL (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:51 AM)

Maybe true that they caught Obama like a deer in headlights but if he can not handle himself in a simple debate, then how is he going to handle running an entire country. People please, the truth of the matter is that we have all decided who "OUR" candidate is so these debates almost seem mute, right?

Helen, ST.Nazianz, Wisconsin (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:51 AM)

This farce of a 'debate' was nothing more than Charlie, Clinton and George ganging up on Senator Obama. It was an unfair lopsided attack demonstrating the bias of abc, someone in management and/or the moderators at abc with the obvious goal of 'getting' Obama while favoring the Clintons. From the first spotlight on Chelsea, to the second view of Chelsea, to the third view of Chelsea smiling, followed by the abc cameras on Wes Clark. This was a low class political ambush and did nothing for my respect of abc as a fair and balanced network.
It only reinforces my support for the truth telling Obama vs. the divisive Clintons. From a 65 year old independent, white western male.

G. Kats, Pocatello, ID (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:51 AM)

I believe when it's all said and done Sen. Obama will prevail. His refreshing insight and refusal to play dirty politics attitude,is what the american people are looking for. He has real solutions to our current problems, if MSM would let him be heard. They have him spending so much time on defense, he can't get his message across as effectively as he should be able to.
Watching ABC last night, I felt I was reading the National Enquirer. The issues the moderators presented in the first 40 min. were not the issues I care about or the american public for that matter in general. It is dissapointing to see that we are still taken for granted and perceived as not intelligent enough to see past this biased smoke screen that was called a debate. ISSUES,ISSUES,ISSUES
that affect me and how I live, is what I want a debate to be about. ABC and the Clinton campaign get an F-.

Kenneth Simpson,Chicago, Illinois (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:51 AM)

Why does MSN homepage read in a small side section"Bad debate for one candidate"??? Further illustrating that even when he bombs the Senator from Illinois just can't get bad press. ----listen do you hear it------>BIAS! I think he could get drunk and hit a dog, a baby in a stroller and a granny and still come out smelling like roses in this media.

Kay, waiting for my turn to vote (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:51 AM)

Now I understand the reason why the common person in this country will constantly be stagnated. This was a pivitol moment for the American people to appreciate and understand the issues that affect us. What do we get?....INEPT moderators. Thanks!...I think.

Russell, Newark DE (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:51 AM)

Hillary-And admitted lier.She said Bush lied about war.See what lies can lead to
Obama- Guilt by assocation also un-american.
He without sin cast the first sin.
Why is it that white people judge weather you are a true American or not. Do you feel all Blacks hate America. Why?
Angie

Angie (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:51 AM)

I cannot beleive that my senitor from IL. whom has voted over 124 times present, did not represent me in Il. yet we would consider him to represent all the states,,,, what is he going to do vote present everytime he doesnt know what to do.....

kit clark, elgin IL. 60124 (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:52 AM)

This was ABC's attempt to change the mighty course of destiny. I thought they would have been a little more subtle with it. That was what you call blatant bias. I was offended by the way ABC denied many the opportunity to make intelligent decisions. Our country is in too much trouble because of these types of tactics already. I think the American electorate is truly fed up this time around. Thank God for that!

Leon Gatewood, Wadesboro, NC (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:52 AM)

Hillary Clinton calling the bitter comment by Obama demeaning? Whao, that is audacious. There is a story on Huffington Post about her telling her husband to "SCREW THEM" in 1995 about southern white democrats. And then the stuff she said only last October about voters in Mississip while she was still trying to win Iowa. Oh what about what she said about Obama winning in small states that doesn't matter. Isn't that demeaning to the democrats who live in those states and who took the trouble to exercise their constitutional right? In her view then, the Primaries should only be done in a handful of states (the big ones) because those are more important than the say Montanaor Wyoming,right?

jane smith (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:52 AM)

I am actually a Republican so I am not as emotional as others about the performance of either candidate. However, Obama did have the courage to say HOW he would solve problems. Clinton gave the safe, traditional political answer, "We'll form a commission and look in to it". No one wants to hear it but the only real way to fund is to cut spending or raise taxes. At least some one finally said it...yes there might be an increase in taxes of some sort in order to pay for social security.

Blake, Atlanta, GA (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:52 AM)

speaking of flag pins, Obama actually lied about what he previously said about wearing them...

he is digging a deeper and deeper hole that he is now unable to climb out of... his lies are too complex, and changed, and variable, that he cannot even remember which lie he said a day ago, to try to cover for the one he said today.

good grief, it's about time the media gave balanced coverage of Obama, although it's a year too late

Obama in quicksand (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:52 AM)

We absolutely need a new beginning in Washington. I believe Obama first and foremost can bring that.
Hilliary 2nd and McCain not a chance.

We have watched every debate, every one and this one was obsurd. Obama is a fine, intelligent and intuitive Leader. Hilliary, albeit, using whatever she can to win, will absolutley set out to do what she says.

Obama did not faulter last night, he just knew they were wasting his time and the time spent by US, the voters, who were watching.

Stand strong Obama and Hilliary a little less "pettiness". It only hurts your image.

I will eagerly with all efforts, support Obama or Hillary as with respect to McCain, until he had is "economic advisor' talk for him on TV the other day, he never did nor could address himself the economic issues and serious problems we are facing.

Shame, shame on your George. Charlie did at least try and ask Hillary some "pointed" questions.

Chris (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:52 AM)

I feal sorrow for you people that think that Obama got trashed he got what he had comming for a long time. Obama is not for the people he is for Obama.
And he sure is not a leader if he was he would have done more in the debate he just dident no what to say and if Mccane get hold of heam he will just brake down and gry like a baby.Wes

Wesley Walton Roy Wa (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:52 AM)

It is fascinatig that when someone speaks in terms of truth we get rattled as a people. The economic outlook for the country is dismal, the war is an embarrassment, people are being evicted from the homes they purchased, gas prices, food prices, water prices, rediculous. I don't care about his pastor or a statement taken out of context. I would like to see a person of integrity placed in the position of commander and chief. I want to see it done honestly and fairly. I understand it is a battle, but the PEOPLE of this country are suffering. Spinning these words is irresponsible and down right ignorant, but we do live in the US and that's another thing we get to CLING to when we don't have control of anything else.

Dean Smith (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:53 AM)

Hello Todd,
First of all, ABC erred by allowing stephanopoulos to be one of the moderators(him being a former clinton errand boy).Secondly,HRC was so negative and divisive in the debate which made her an instant turnoff.Finally, with the way this campaign is unfolding so far,there is no way Barack will make her his VP.

Brad Delpy (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:53 AM)

Can someone please ask obama about the whole flag -and pledge of alligence issue? how can a future president of america not embrace our flag? does this bother anyone!

angie new castle d.e. (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:53 AM)

Obama kind of liiks like the New England Pats Mr. Perfect to a complete failure in the past few weeks culminating with a loss to a New Yorker.

He is over! If he still ghets the nod he is unelectable. Too bad

njz (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:53 AM)

Chuck, I love ya man - but come on, this was clearly sensationalized tabloid questioning. The American people learned nothing that can help them make a decision other than to stop watching ABC news. In 2008 "the youtube age" we are all used to the constant scandle, gossip, accusations - we're numb to it! We want to know how this country is going to start competeing in the world again. How are we going to lift up our citizens, not tear down our candidates. Shame on ABC and our once trusted mainstream media. If mainstream media is doing this, where should I get my news TMZ, youtube, Drudge?? Very Sad.

Done! in Dayton, Ohio (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:53 AM)

Hmm... The news biased towards one candidate over another? Now you know how Republicans feel. We've been seeing this happen to our candidates for years.

Nunyabidnes (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:53 AM)

Keep up the good work - it clearly shows two weak candidates not poor reporting. No amount of "spit and polish" will make either Clinton or Obama shine.

Pam, Friendswood, Texas (Sent Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:53 AM)

<< Previous

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=905215