<< Last Entry - Main Page - Next Entry >>

[05.03.03] Debate Notes Even I was surprised at the frequency of the savory red meat moments in tonight's South Carolina debate. More surprising still, Howard Dean did a lot less than his fair share of the instigating. Some thoughts:

• The debate's most interesting moment came when the rest of the field virtually declared war on the Gephardt health care plan, and did so by effectively endorsing the Bush tax cut. Dean, Lieberman, and Edwards criticized Gephardt's corporate tax credits (which as I've noted, don't buy you very much, if anything, in terms of covering the uninsured) and paying for it by repealing the Bush tax cut. Edwards made the most direct statement to this effect, saying that a tax cut repeal would take $1 trillion out of the hands of "working Americans" and put it into the hands of corporate actors. So, 1) Edwards is admitting that the Bush tax cuts help working Americans, and 2) the exchange sets a precedent whereby anyone wanting to attack Gephardt needs to at least implictly defend the 2001 tax cuts.
• Kerry looked ill. I barely heard a word from him all night.
• Lieberman came out swinging on the war issue, taking a direct swipe at both Dean and Kerry. Gephardt and Graham issued similarly tough utterances, suggesting that the me-too on Iraq side of the field may be getting overcrowded. First, let's see if they sing the same tune in Iowa and New Hampshire. Second, if they keep it up and don't get the nomination, it'll look like an even bigger victory for the anti-war side.
• Remember in the 2000 candidate-to-candidate questioning when Orrin Hatch would bait Alan Keyes to attack Bush, rather than doing the deed himself? That's basically what happened with the questioning tonight — that and the softballs designed to make the questioner look good. Thus, few questions for Kerry and a slew for Bob Graham. In a 9-candidate field, using that format for direct attacks only raises the stature of the person being attacked.
• What was up with Howard Dean and the reading off the notecards? Is he that weak in debates? I was really expecting an electrifying follow-up to "I don't want to listen to fundamentalist preachers anymore!"

There is a tendency for Republicans to gloat about dissension in the ranks among Democrats--and vice versa, of course.

The thing to bear in mind is that such things have not stopped the nominee from winning in the past. And Democrats have always been a more fractious party, at least in my lifetime. Infighting and contradictions betwixt them is therefore not much of a sign of anything except "it's primary season."

Posted by: Dean Esmay at May 4, 2003 02:45:05 AM

It's interesting to read the comments about the debate on the Liberal web sites. They Dean people seem more than a little dissappointed. Also, a lot of people seeing Edwards for the first time are impressed by his articulate delivery. No note cards for Edwards.

Posted by: Helen at May 4, 2003 12:36:39 PM

Loyal Tolkien fan that I am, I couldn't help but notice the symbolism of having nine Demo candidates. If the '88 election had the seven dwarfs, the '04 election has the nine Nazgul!

Posted by: Patrick Ca at May 4, 2003 01:45:23 PM

One lefty website i went to said that Sharpton was the voice of reason. That doesn't say much for the other candidates.

All i can say is PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE let Sharpton stay in this as long as possible.

As a Bush supporter, i'm even thinking about sending a donation to Sharpton's campaign to help him stay in.

Posted by: Greg at May 5, 2003 09:22:43 AM

Only watched a bit of it. I still think Kerry gets the nod, if only by default. The left flank just has too many candidates --- Dean, Moseley-Braun, Sharpton, et al. Lieberman and Graham, the only two candidates that I, as a Republican, found somewhat impressive, could never win a Democratic primary, or at least not THIS Democratic primary. Edwards reminded me too much of Clinton --- he talked a lot but never really said anything. Once again, I don't think he can win THIS primary. Gephardt is the Bob Dole of the pack, and Dems don't usually pick their nominees that way. That leaves Kerry, who's just liberal enough, just moderate enough, just wonkish enough, and just "real" enough, for the Dems of today. Moreover, a guy named Kerry from New England is almost certain to pick a guy named Graham from Florida as his running mate. Graham will run to the right of Bush on the war on terror while Kerry runs to the left on domestic policy. It's a ticket that will surge and then plummet, just how low only time will tell.

Posted by: Dave at May 5, 2003 11:19:10 AM

I think Kerry effectively ended his campaign (it won't show for a while) by going after Dean before the debate. Dean moved away from his strong anti-war stuff due to it, but I think it makes it tough for Kerry to straddle that one now.

Sharpton is the real ringer in this crowd. People want to write him off as a fringer. But his politics are not distinguishable from Dean's, and he is an electrifying speaker (he doesn't just yell the "red meat" lines, he says some fairly thought provoking things from the Left), and he has a sense of humor, which near as I can tell, is unique among that crowd (could Lieberman's "wring your neck" line been more contrived? Did Stephanopolous let it leak he would ask the damning "too nice" question?)

Posted by: blaster at May 5, 2003 08:01:35 PM

Post a comment

Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Remember personal info? YesNo

Comments:

Y'all! MT hears you — just click once to see your comment posted.

Syndicate this Site: XML or RDF