ABOUT FIRST READ

First Read is an analysis of the day's political news, from the NBC News political unit. First Read is updated throughout the day, so check back often.

Chuck Todd, NBC Political Director

Mark Murray, NBC Deputy Political Director

Domenico Montanaro, NBC News Political Reporter



The Philly phallout

Posted: Thursday, April 17, 2008 9:03 AM by Domenico Montanaro

The New York Times: “Clinton did not let an opportunity pass as she repeatedly challenged Mr. Obama on his record and views -- assisted, as it turned out, by vigorous questioning by the two moderators from ABC News, Charles Gibson and George Stephanopolous. The result was arguably one of Mr. Obama’s weakest debate performances. He at times appeared annoyed as he sought to answer questions about his former pastor, his reluctance to wear an American flag pin on his lapel and his association in Chicago with former members of the Weather Underground, a radical group that carried out bombings in the 1960s that were intended to incite the overthrow of the government.” 

The Washington Post adds, "The encounter, particularly in the early stages, seemed more like a grilling of Obama on a Sunday-morning talk show than a debate between the two candidates. Obama fielded most of the questions calmly, although at times he appeared to choose his words with extreme care as he faced perhaps the toughest series of questions he has encountered since taking the lead in delegates in the nomination battle."

The Los Angeles Times: "With the moderators and Clinton raising assorted questions about Obama's past for the first half of the debate, issues received relatively short shrift. Not until 50 minutes in was a policy issue -- Iraq -- asked about by the moderators. More than an hour went by before a question was asked about what Stephanopoulos called ‘the No. 1 issue on Americans' minds’ -- the economy."

The Boston Globe: “Clinton, seeking momentum in the dwindling weeks of the primary campaign, accused Obama of associating with controversial figures, including his own former preacher. Though she called Obama a ‘good man’ and said, after some prodding, that he could win the White House, Clinton said he would have many liabilities in the fall campaign.”

The Boston Globe's Canellos: "The first half of last night's debate in the august National Constitution Center in Philadelphia was a tawdry affair, as ABC news questioners called on Obama and Clinton to address a year's worth of dirty laundry, and each combatant eagerly grabbed at the chance to besmirch their rival a little more. But while some in the audience groaned, the litany of nasty questions -- about such matters as Obama's comments on the working class and Clinton's exaggerations about dangers she faced in Bosnia -- helped to flesh out a long-simmering subtext to the Clinton-Obama battle: The Clinton campaign's insinuation that Obama is more vulnerable to GOP-style attacks on his patriotism.”

The Washington Post’s Shales wasn’t too impressed with the debate. “Obama was right on the money when he complained about the campaign being bogged down in media-driven inanities and obsessiveness over any misstatement a candidate might make along the way, whether in a speech or while being eavesdropped upon by the opposition. The tactic has been to ‘take one statement and beat it to death,’ he said.” 

The New York Times writes about and fact-checks Ayres. “Mr. Obama was asked by a moderator, George Stephanopoulos of ABC News, about his relationship with Bill Ayers, a former Weather Underground leader who is now a professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago… Mr. Ayers is listed as a member of the nine-member board of the Woods Fund of Chicago, an offshoot of the Woods Charitable Fund, founded in 1941 by a prominent lawyer and telephone company executive. According to the fund’s Web site, it has focused in recent years on ‘issues that affected the area’s least advantaged, including welfare reform, affordable housing” and “tax policy as a tool in reducing poverty.’”

“Mr. Stephanopoulos and Mrs. Clinton also referred to statements by Mr. Ayers in an article in The New York Times on Sept. 11, 2001, that Mrs. Clinton said were ‘deeply hurtful to people in New York.’ ‘I don’t regret setting bombs,’ Mr. Ayers said then. ‘I feel we didn’t do enough.’ Mr. Ayers did not make the remarks after the attacks on the World Trade Center that day. The interview had been conducted earlier, in connection with a memoir that he had published, ‘Fugitive Days,’ and he was referring to his experience in the Weather Underground.” 

The New York Post leads with… “Obama used Bill Clinton against Hillary Rodham Clinton last night, blunting criticism over his own relationship with an unrepentant one-time1960s terrorist by pointing to pardons the former president gave to similar figures.”

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

If you can't take the heat get out of the kitchen!!!  It was clear that Senator Obama can not take the heat...there were tough questions to both debate participants, Obama's inexperience and judgement was on display for all to see.

He is no match for McCain!!  The "baggage" he has would sink the Titanic!!
I'm glad that the headlines are indeed showing that lopsided nature of this debate.  I'm an Obama supporter but would have to concede that Hillary won (with the moderators support).  Bill Richardson may not still feel loyal to the Clintons, but apparently George Stephanopoulus does.  As a PE voter, I feel cheated that our debate was mainly about dirty laundry rather than about the issues.
Obama served on a board with Mr. Ayers in the 1990’s, the Woods Foundation, which was a paid, underlined PAID directorship position.  They worked together, attended fundraisers together, Ayers held fundraisers and was a contributor to Obama’s Chicago’s campaign, plus they are neighbors and visited each other quite often.   Enough said.  This relationship deserves being vetted.  What’s your fear? If Obama has nothing to fear.   His associations with Farrahkan, Wright, Ayers and Refko should be fully vetted.
Great job by Barack! The ABC "moderators" seemed intent on HELPING Hillary throw the sink at him, and he handled it all beautifully. This will continue to backfire on Hillary. Barack wants to lift the country up. Hillary wants to tear Barack down. I support building the country up! GOD knows we need it. Enough of their old bully politics.
i think the unfair treatment of sen Obama by the mass media is horrible, i the views are really one sided and they need to consider making some changes of the hosts for different opinions "like some people of color".
What a disgusting display! You have a Clinton lapdog in Snufalupagus who uses Republican talking points from none other than Sean Hannity to  waste half the debate taking aim at Obama for inane BS. Thanks for your assault on our intelligence and complete avoidance of serious issues Americans care about in order to get your tabloid firing squad fix.

Every day we witness why change is necessary in BOTH parties. Clinton and her lackey disgust me.
If Obama is losing debates, why are superdelegates continuing to move toward him and away from Hillary?
Barack has picked up 5 SD's this week while HRC has picked up none.

I think this ambush/debate last night will bring even more superdelegates out of the wookwork for Barack Obama.
A media set -up Just as a revote in Fl. and Mi.Would be under the finances of A Hillary supporter.Dude get  a grip you dont Like Obama, Mr montanaro and anything to try and shine a negative light on him is the story that you run with.
Absolutely the worst debate EVER!! They should be ashamed, and the voters in Pennsylvania appalled they did not have the opportunity until HALFWAY through the debate to hear the candidates discussing the ISSUES that are important to them.  Disgraceful.
Could Clinton have "set-up" the questions, given George, Nutter, and Rendell have "connections" with her?.
I'm glad that Keith Olbermann, at least, reminded people that the first part of the "debate" last night was basically "let's attack Obama" by a guy who used to work for the Clintons in the White House (I guess he's not a Judas, eh Carville?) and who got one of the questions from Sean Hannity. I can understand them wanting Clinton to be the nominee, but when the GOP, in essence, is helping you to get there? C'mon. It's bad enough one "Democrat" will likely speak at the GOP convention.

I know Stephanopolous left the Clinton White House before the end of Bill's term, and that he's been the host of "This Week" for awhile, but does anyone else see there's even a perception of bias there? Made worse by the fact that the first half of the debate had zero to do with policy - something Obama tried to tell them - and was mostly about people he knows. Meantime Hillary gets one question on her Bosnia lie, apologizes and says she needs more sleep (no 3am wake up call?), and Obama let it go - I'd like to think because he knew that'd been hashed enough.

To be fair, I did applaud when Stephanopolous pressed Hillary on the question of "could Obama beat McCain" and forced her to commit to an answer. So now her campaign can stop saying "Obama can't beat McCain".

Obama may have gotten surprised by the Ayers question, but he had a nice riposte when noting that Bill Clinton pardoned some of that group's members. And of course, Hillary is so hot to claim that time as experience for her, except when it doesn't benefit her.

If NBC gets to run another debate, could you guys have Olbermann moderate it? At least I feel I'd get to hear about ISSUES.
I didn't know Chuck Todd was THAT opposed to Obama. The most interesting thing I find is how time tells the political tale. The subtext of this race seems to be bringing all that normally lies dormant to the light.

The "debate" illustrated this to the fullest. I would ask my fellow voters how does a flag pin make someone a better president? Why not an American ring or star spangled glasses?
This was just a travesity created by ABC with no help for the voters.  Obama is great and will overcome.  HRC is just trying to bring him down-we need her out of there.
When did Obama start stuttering? As the questions get more pointed toward him, he's now himing and hawing through his answers. He doesn't look decisive or as if he'd be much of a leader.
No doubt that Clinton won last night, and all previous debates, there is no subtance to Obama's ideology or campaign, e.g. change needs to come from the people? ok. And just for those(including reportes and newscasters) that are saying that Clinton went on the attack in last night's debate, please watch it again, the questions regarding Obama's past comments and associations came from the moderators, not Clinton. It definitely makes me question his "judgement" of association to various individuals and groups.
I tossed and turned last night after watching the debate. In my mind I conjured an imaginary candidate who turned the tables on Charlie, Hillary and George and berated them for their lack of patriotism. I wish Obama had put them in their place. This country is in the decline, let down by our leaders and the media. Somehow its not enough just to boycott ABC News and This Week. This morning I am seriously pondering a move to Canada. I have my passport and I am near the border. I don't love America today. I'm sorry, I don't. We don't deserve super power status. We have degenerated beyond redemption.
More than 12,000 comments on ABC website; 90% or more negative against ABC; calls for ABC News, Stephanapolous and Gibson to apologize to the American public.

What a sham debate!
Good Job Hillary,  now because Obama look so down and angry been confronted, some people are saying that it was because ABC,  ja ja ja ja ja, good excuse.  

Obama is not capable to handle criticism, he is not good when he is confronted and he needs to explain, he look like unable to handle rush situation, I DONT THINK HE CAN HANDLE MCCAIN IN NOVEMBER.

Hillary shows that she is the one.  SUPERDELAGATES, don’t be making decision because your children like Obama, it’s  the future of this country, don’t be stupid making decision based on childhood’s impression
Couldn't find the moderators. All I saw was two hold-up men trying to kill a man behind a lectern, with a female onlooker. Seems a shame that ABC presented the hold-up in some kind of historical context, for it only served to sully the place, the time and the context. Shame on ABC for indulging in false advertising--wasn't a debate as billed, just a miserable reality almost-murder show, which, fortunately, didn't succeed. Wonder what the job market is for aging failed hold-up men.
I live in Philly and like so many others, the debate last night was viewed as a pathetic farce.  When this race began, I and so many others had high hopes for a different kind of Democratic Change.  One that would lift the country up out of it's current bottom brought upon by the stranglehold of failures from the current administration.

I have lost any respect I might have had for Sen. Clinton.  I expected some change from Sen. Clinton's campaign.   My opinion of the media to spin news and negative feeds of the Democratic race into a pile of .... has been validated.  Sen. Obama captured my interest from his first speech at the National Convention.  Despite the gaffs and misspoken statements he or his campaign may have made, I still see him as the candidtate to bring about the most "Change" in the country.  I'm tired of "Politics as Usual". That's why we are where we are today with the failing economy, health care & foreign sentiment.

I now want a swift end to this Democratic race.  My opportunity to contribute to this will be in the form of casting my vote in the coming days.  I urge the voters of PA and the Superdelegates, to now join me in bringing an end to this "Political Rendition of Survivor" (more like "LOST") and capture the remaining months to plan and prepare for the final campaign between the two parties.  We have lost ground Democrats!  Supers...stop being spectators in what looks like a schoolyard brawl. Step in, break this up, and let's get back to the business at hand.
I don't understand the gripe about Obama being asked tough questions about his past relationships, teh flag etc.

I am a Clinton supporter but I've always thought these comments about Obama and the flag and the comments about his being a Moslem were absurd and I saw teh questions asked of him as giving him an opportunity to point out how absurd they are.

If Obama didn't want to here questions about the flag he could simply start wearing a flag pin...but he hasn't and he was given an explaination as to why he hasn't.  Same thing applies to his past associations.  I respect Obama's right to associate with anyone he might choose but he should be mature enough to understand that everything he does is going to be pick over again and again.

Let's not forget Eliot Spitzer in New York.....

Spitzer was thought of as a real Mr. Clean sort of Pol.  Now, with the passage of time (and after the election) we find there was a person within that nobody knew was there.  

This is not a situation we want to emerge after we elect our President..... So sorry Hill...sorry B Man...sorry everybody that thinks comparitive politcs is negative.  This is the way it works.
Why do so few people get it?  ENOUGH IS ENOUGH! We have two honorable and qualified candidates for the White House on the Democratic side, why don't we celebrate that and focus on the differences on their stands on the issues at stake here, versus harping and sniping and criticizing and dredging up every minor point from their past and mis-statements?  These are two very human and flawed people, as are we all, who happen to love this country and believe that we have had enough of an administration that cares nothing about law and rights and dignity!  They both support change and I believe would do a fine job as president.  We need to let the media and these candidates know that we demand a campaign that focuses on ISSUES, not who can't bowl or why someone drank a shot of Canadian whiskey instead of Jack Daniels!  We have to come together and demand action on the real issues facing us; the economy, health care, social security (or insecurity), THE WAR, poverty, jobs, education, crime, and the list goes on and on and on!!!  

We all must unite and stand together and DEMAND a discussion on the issues and then VOTE together to make sure that in November the party that still remembers how to care for ALL people wins the Presidency, the Senate and the House.  It's not "win at any cost" it's win because of the cost of the alternative!
The moderators were pathetic. They did a disservice to BOTH candidates. They pushed both of them to make the campaign-killing pledge of "No New Taxes". They pushed and pushed on questions until they got the answers that THEY wanted.

And who gives a sh** about a flag pin!? That is 10 minutes of my life I will never get back, and will hold that grudge against Gibson and Snufalufagus forever.

Goodbye ABC, hello National Enquirer.
there were so many jokes about NBC's debates being biased toward Obama...

I wanna know, when did ABC News endorse Hillary???

The first 40 minutes was not a debate, it was a basic onslaught by both opponent AND moderators. I've never seen a debate so incredibly lopsided!!!! ABC News should be ashamed. The Post got it right when they said both MSNBC AND CNN did a better job moderating...

Through it all, not Obama's best night, but after that kind of BARRAGE, I think he handled himself about as well as can be expected. Hillary would've been whining, "oh, you're picking on me because I'm a woman!".
I was an undecided Democrat PA voter prior to the Debate. I was listening to each candidate with an open mind as to who would be best positioned to actually make the changes this country needs - economically, environmentally, health care and international policy (including Iraq and Iran).  My feeling after the debate was that Hillary clearly had the broader oversight and knowledge of the political hurdles which must be crossed to institute change.  I strongly feel she is the best candidate to make the changes.  Barak Obama, while his ideas were sound seemed to me to be somewhat naive and inexperienced as to the process of change.
Senator Obama is not inexperienced.  He may not have as much as Hillary but she gets most of hers from being Bill's wife.  Personally, all her suppose experience is that she has learned how to be a actress and a far better liar!!!
<< If Obama is losing debates, why are superdelegates continuing to move toward him and away from Hillary?
>>

Nobody has ever accused the Democrats of being smart.
What a joke.  51 minutes of lets attack Obama for his associations.  No mention of the huge conflict of interest in Colombia with Mrs. Clinton.  A far more important discussion than whether Mr. Obama sat on a board and was friendly with an ex-convict, ex-radical. (Do you really believe he's going to become president and then start planting bombs?)  What I'd like to know is, if Mrs. Clinton is going to go back on her word about her opposition to NAFTA and CAFTA considering the fact that her husband (and herself by proxy) earns money suppporting those two AND her top adviser (who still works for her) was actively supporting the deal, while she was shilling against it.  Let's talk about that association.

Also, why are the pundits, today (Mr. Todd?) discussing Mrs. Clinton's "umbrella of security" in the Middle East.  Are we seriously going to become so involved in Saudia Arabia, Dubai, UAE that we'd launch a massive counter-attack, if Iran attacked one of them?  

This is substance, let's discuss that.
I find it "laughable" that anyone questions the moderators. They have the right to ask any questions, just like the pro-obama moderators from cnn and msnbc.

That being said, Obama looked:tired,angry, annoyed and unpresidential in the face of tough questioning.
I can truly say that the only fair question HRC got asked by George S. was: "Is Sen. Obama electable?" HRC's response was, "Yes, yes, yes!!" Despite the fact Goerge S and the Clintons fell out with each other long ago, I still felt it was a conflict of interest for him to be moderating this debate, as he was strictly biased, barring the one question I mentioned above, and his slip was definitely showing. There was no pretense of this debacle even being fair and balanced. Fair and balanced does not even denote Fox News, much less. ABC News. If crap were a flower, they would be a bouquet. I guess it shows if the media itself focuses on a flag pins versus people losing their jobs and homes, it clearly demonstrates that the press is elitist, out of touch, and they cling to non-issues, as they generate ratings over substantive issues. With HRC clearly and resoundingly admitting that Obama is electable, she effectively gutted her own central argument to the superdelegates. Obama held his own despite being gang-raped……

Obama '08 "We are what we have been waiting for."
again, MOST of us got it!  as some of the nations news has reported, this was a poor display of moderating a debate ..that didn't come until the last 30 minutes of the show.  the first 50 minutes was nothing more than 'he said, she said'..and Obama held his own against the constant badgering, mostly by George, which I found interesting in the text of his relationship with the Clintons.
In an election tailor made for ANY Democrat to win the election, it's still mind boggling that the Clinton campaign with the assistance of some Republican moderators continue to anything in their power to undermine the leading candidate.

Barack Obama will be the Dem candidate and it's time to start backing him 100% so that we don't end up with another 8 years of war mongering and economy crashing.  WAKE UP PEOPLE!  If you love this country you will help get it back on track, strengthen the middle class (the backbone of a capatilist nation) and reject this campaign negativity.

SEND A MESSAGE PENNSYLVANIA, VOTE OBAMA AND END THIS PRIMARY BEFORE IT DESTROYS THE ONE CHANCE WE HAVE TO REMOVE THE REPUBLICANS BEFORE THEY HAVE THEIR WAY AND REMOVE THE MIDDLE CLASS!

Do you love your children?  Then, protect their futures.  As an independent voter, I can see the "lesser of two evils", not only from a party standpoint, but even within the Dem Party.

OBAMA IN 08!
Finally the media starts to vet Obama.  Too late for Clinton.  Too bad.  I guess McCain will be the next President after Obama's dirty laundry gets aired.
I always knew that if the press started getting touph on the rock star the real person would come out. He can't take the heat. Neither can his supporters.
As an undecided voter, I would have liked to hear the candidates' positions on the housing crisis, Bear Stearns bailout, Fed rate cuts, the decline of public education, the role of the executive branch in Government, the feasibility of a diplomatic solution in Iraq, etc., -- you know, things that matter -- rather than flag pins, "sniper fire" and "bitter" gaffes, loose associations with controversial people, etc. -- you know, things that don't.

I certainly hope people are voting on criteria more profound than who-knows-who and who-said-what-about-whom.  Am I back in high school?
What a nasty mess. No real concern over the suffering of the non-rich except from Senator Obama. He was the only human being present last night. The rest acted like rabid dogs. His was the only voice there with an intention to speak to the problems plaguing the American people, and not to further some twisted agenda.

This, as all other trials he has had to face, will turn in his favor. Already undecideds, and even some Clintons supporters are turned off, and considering Obama as the candidate they will endorse.

It is human nature to turn against falsehood. Watch Barack's numbers go up, as Hillary's plummet even more.
Bill Ayer's relationship whould be more fully vetted. It is true that it was after Obama met Ayers that he he had a very quick political rise. Ayers and his wife Bernadine Dohrn have continued to.  spread their anti-American message through college students for many years. Obama has been friends with Ayers for 12-15 years. And you're telling me that Obama being associated with Rev. Wright(anti-American) and Ayers(antiAmerican) for 20 years, that He (Obama) is not anti-American himself. This association is scary.You noticed Obama never answered the question about his relationship with Bill Ayers. This is not about something that happened 40 years ago, this is about the scary anti-American people who are trying to get one of their own elected President of the United States. Many of you Obama lovers need to do your research.
In my opinion, Barack has been given a pass by the media until lately.  Clinotn has had to endure all kinds of questions about her personality (rember the likeability question in NH?)   She answers them, genreally stays cool and gracious towards Obama- she is clearly used to it.  

This debate showed Obama to be peeved and frustrated about having to answer questions about his own negatives.  His message of rasing the level of political discourse for the first time sounded like a dodge of questions directed against him that others have had to deal with for years.

Obama supporters do not like it when the media dishes out the same treatment to him as they have to Clinton and other politicians.  The bloom is off his rose - finally.  Now maybe people will get get around to evaluating whether he can really handle the job he seeks at this point in his career.
One of the many reasons to avoid Disney channels like ABC is they act like FoxNews. Didn't get to the #1 issue for over an hour...and why was George moderating, didn't he work for Clinton's when he was president?
I think this was bash Obama night and Obama dealt with it head on. This will hurt the Clinton campaign even more as they focus on things other than issues as they did last evening.
I thought it was kind of funny when Obama brought up the folks that Bill Clinton pardoned...Hillary sure didn't want to make her time then and passed the opportunity to rebut. She is running scared!
I don't think Obama was "rattled" when asked the Ayers question. I felt he was just frustrated by the fact he had to answer questions on everything but the issues that matter to America. I have acquaintences in both my professional and personal life that may have done things I might not condone. Their life choices, however, have no bearing on how I do my job. This should be the same for our presidential candidates as well. All three candidates may know people that may done things that were inappropriate (HRC is till married to one!!). But what really matters is what they can do for the country when they are elected.
The question for me is should George Stephanopolus been allowed to even moderate the debate since he was part of the Clinton Whitehouse?  I am sure that ABC had others who qualify to moderate.  It was obvious that both moderators had an agenda but I think that the American people are much smarter than the media gives them credit for being.  If the People begin to participate in politics as Senator Obama advocates then it is not advantageous to the Corporate Media so it is important that they take him down.  If Bill Clinton pardoning the weather underground is not more important than sitting on a Charity Board with someone then I ask the Media, by suggestion of Chuck Todd, what's the real purpose of delving into the story?  Yes politicians and the media do want to distract people to talk about guns, religion, patriotism and immigration so that they can keep control of the real agenda.
This was one of the most poorly moderated debates in history. I couldn't even tell from the Washington Post article what was said on policy issues.

The "moderators" just attacked Obama for 50 minutes. This looks like another case of Gibson and Stephanopoulos, both members of elitist white corporate media, going after the "uppity" black man.
This was Barack Versus, Hillary, George, Charlie, ABC News Sean Hannity and the other New Yort Right Wing Radio Host. It is an absolute shame, than an actual political question is not asked until an hour into the debate...and that Barack was relentlessly hounded with backup question after backup question while Hillary was allowed to tip toe through the tulips and was not pressed at all on her Lies about Bosnia or Macedonia. I was happy to see Barack not stoop to their levels even though he had ample opportunity to do so. Hillary is more intent to show why you shouldn't vote for Barack instead of why you should vote for her...I guess it's because her entire candidacy is built on a lie. SHAME ON HILLARY and those who support her if they believe the fraud of a debate was legit.  She couldn't even look into the camera when she was running the man down. This just further let's me know my support of Barack is correct.
Barack was horrible..he looked annoyed and uncomfortable trying to defend his mentor Rev Wright....this is not a person who can beat McCain and is not trustworthy. He looked as if "how dare they question me!". a POOR PERFORMANCE!
It floors me that we dems aren't bright enough to see that electing Barak Obama would be like electing another George Bush.  The only difference is, that he talks better--an improvement, no doubt. But it has become obvious that he is arrogant, just like Bush. Doesn't handle critisism well, just like Bush.  Talks of "uniting", but is truly very devisive.  Is inexperienced in foreign affairs, just like Bush.  
HAVEN'T WE LEARNED ANYTHING, PEOPLE?!
I have to the conclusion that the media and some politicians have no idea what real middle class Americans want.I am a bitter American,and so are many others.America needs to replace its ageing politicians with young minds and new ideas.Clinton and McCain are a part of the problem recycling old ideas.
That "debate" last night WAS NOT a debate.  It was let's ATTACK Obama with tabloid news issues and then label him as being on the DEFENSIVE.  I'M TIRED OF DIRTY POLITICS.  I'M TIRED OF THE MEDIA PROMOTING THEIR OWN AGENDA.  I'M TIRED OF JOURNALISTS BEING ON A WITCH HUNT TO PROMOTE THEIR CANDIDATE!  That's what that "debate" consisted of last night.  What happened to issues that mind to the masses?  All these questions to Obama were designed to whet the fears of the blue collar Americans that the republicans have so effectively manipulated for decades to win elections.  I pray that this tactic will backfire.  It's time out for these type of campaigns and these type of politicians.  I will vote for Obama.  The sad thing is that I started out as a Hillary supporter.  I am disgusted with the turn of events in her effort to win this nomination.  The behind the scene maneuvering, the misinterpretation and blatant attempt to distort the truth, the divisive tactic of using an opponents "true" misstatement against him for political purposes has totally turned me off.  And, to see a former president reduce himself to the same type of divisive politics that they so effectively used to blame the "right wingers" for when he was in office, has totally made me an anti-Clinton voter.  Had someone told me this 10 years ago, I wouldn't have believed it.  I look forward to voting for Obama in Pennsylvania on April 22.
This was as much as a ABC endostment for Clinton as I have ever seen! If the debate was suppose to be about this countries problems, then why was it a whole hour of lets attack Obama. I would not recomend that anyone watch the reruns of the debate if it was even lucky enough to be shown again.
The debate never got to the so called "policy issues", because there are no differences between Obama or Clinton. Both are social liberals, economic liberals, protectionists, and as green as Al Gore. What's left to debate?
A pathetic performance by Obama....poor Obama did not like be asked anything about his negatives. His disdain was showing. Looks like it is too late for Clinton...President McCain...sounds that way as Obama cannot and should not win. Since when do we vote for a cult of personality and no actual subtance?


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):

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=907911

First Read e-mail alerts


Sign up for First Read alerts
The first place for key political news and analysis

Syndicate This Site

Add First Read to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google