Thoughts on the FOX Dem. Debate.

What are everyones thoughts on the debate?

I thought it went pretty badly, myself. Dean and Edwards did the best but I've seen them do better before (Edwards did better last debate). Suprisingly I was not that thrilled with what Sharpton, Braun, and Kerry had to say. Sharpton made some questionable attacks at Dems, Braun didn't seem energized, and Kerry was struggling too hard over his war vote.

Kucinich is just crazy, I like him less and less as he attacks and spits but has little presence. Graham dissed gay marriage pretty harshly. Liberman was more conservative than ever and a baby at that. Gephart did ok but definetly not as good as last time around.

Not to mention the horrible commentators and the LaRouche nuts.

were Fox plants. Fox did host the debate, after all.

ok, lets hear it

Then again, I pretty much believe that the entire Larouche organization is a plant by the Bush's. Larouche started when Bush Sr. became involved in the CIA, and Larouche was Bush's main "critic" during the entire Reagan/Bush years, and he starts to reappear when Bush Jr. runs for President.

Either Larouche is a paid disruptor for the Bushes, or he gives them his services for free. The CBCI really screwed up letting Newscorp/FOX run this debate.

calling them immature...pointing out how the entire audience was against them and the candidates handled it well...

finally a tad of common sense.

fox will do anything to make blacks and dems look bad. Will c-span air this in the correct way?

..and they were very professional. They did not stand up all at once as amateurs would do. They were organized, as good Republicans are organized, to have a continuous disruption. This was a Republican dirty trick, I would bet a dollar to a donut...

From the Donald Segretti bag of dirty tricks.

Kucinich seems more and more unhinged--although, he does sometimes say things that need to be said, that others are afraid to say. He just seems very unstable to me.

unstable is a good word for him. He just seems to be so pissed at everyone on stage that it's scary and sad. He needs to stress his own innovative ideas and stop b*tching about everyone else being so mean.

Before the last debate, I had never seen Kucinich on TV. I actually believed what all the anti-progressives on this board had been saying about him - he looks really ugly, he yells too much, he's too left wing.

It was all lies. Kucinich looks just fine on TV, he is well spoken and doesn't yell - that would be Gephardt and Sharpton :) - and his positions are as mainstream America as you can get. That's why he was cheered when he said he wanted to cancel NAFTA and the WTO, for his bilateral fair trade stance, and his strong support for civil rights and a progressive economic platform.

I can understand why the richest, wealthiest Americans don't want Kucinich, but for the 90% of people who are working middle class, Kucinich's ideas and personality are very appealing. I don't know if Kucinich will be able to get his message out when the corporate media, the GOP, and the DLC corporate Democrats are fighting so hard to maginalize him, but so far he's doing a great job.

Kucinich has some good policies on paper, but, boy howdy, he does NOT play well live in person. Too bad.

You can call Gore "wooden" - that would be accurate - but remember when Rush Limbaugh and the others tried to portray him as "crazy" and "unhinged"? Now Kucinich is getting attacked in the same way, supposedly by different people.

Unbelievable - I saw both debates and Kucinich did very well, much better than I had thought, because for a while I actually believed the anti-progressives were being truthful about Dennis. Fool me once...

As a presidential candidate he's lost me even though I agree with his positions the most.

The Senate needs you Dennis, but I'm glad you're debating and bringing important points foward.

minor, but thought I'd correct it anyway.

I didn't see the debate on TV, but I read the transcript carefully (in today's Washington Post). And I liked what he said. He said things that needed to be said, period. None of it seemed "unhinged."

Kucinich NAILED Geppie, and he sounds better every time I hear him.

were planted by FOX....either that or the security guards were on their coffee break.

:)

Kucinich is just crazy, I like him less and less as he attacks and spits but has little presence

There is nothing here of substance except your dislike.

Kucinich flat ROCKED. the highlight of the whole show was when he unequivocally said "NO" about supporting the Bush/PNAC $87B Halliburton appropriation request.

Dennis is a true Democrat.

wanted to make. Looked better to me.... Graham also looked better to me, and I had written him off. However, my first choices after this particular debate would be Moseley-Braun.......with Sharpton next. I became a Dean supporter this past weekend, but he disappointed me tonight with two comments about Iran and Syria should have been looked at by Bush before he invaded Iraq.

that comment just about turned me off him entirely. (I protested against this Invasion....so I'm very hard core anti war) Gephart who had started to look better to me this last week......went off my list..(I don't find him trustworthy) and the rest I could care less about.

This is a short answer.

On my list as well...

Someone posted about him making a snotty comment about gay marraige...

I missed that and will have to read transcript...

He out and out said what we have known all along -- that Bush deliberately mislead the American people on Iraq and the War on Terra -- he KNOWS because he is on the Senate Intelligence Committee. You BET he knows.

Unfortunately -- his powerful revelation was interrupted by a heckler! Goddamn idiot!

Regarding gay marriage -- he said he supports legal equality in gay relationships, but does define marriage as a union between a man and a woman for the purpose of procreating children.

Several of them showed some real guts tonight

And some real grace too.

Makes me proud to be a Democrat.

I can say "Hell yeah!" to what these guys are saying, instead of "well, okay, I guess if that's really the best we can do."

Graham was chosen to give the "official" Democratic party platform on gay marriage it seems - his response is the position that will appeal to the vast majority of Democrats.

Any Democrat who comes out strongly in favor of gay marriage will be killed in the general election. Sad but true.

I also was very impressed with Graham tonight. I look at his record and he's way to the right of where I usually find myself, but he was very good tonight.

Moseley-Braun has been a favorite of mine for a long time. I really appreciate her contribution both as an articulate candidate with great ideas, and as a woman. I hope this doesn't sound sexist, but she brings a nurturing, gentle, but forceful tone to the debates, without backing down from her commitment to social justice, that I really admire.

calm but firm would aslo apply to her presentation.

excellent qualities is a person elected to the most powerful position in the world.

:thumbsup:

like the stereotypical "politician" - he knows his positions and sticks to them, particularly on health care and the war.

the guy is nothing if not definitive. However some of his ideas have as much much chance of becoming law as I have of swimming to Hawaii.

The guy is a good debator, LOTS of practice in the House.

and I thought he did better than last time. I like his ideas, but I don't think he can win.

We're not unique people with unique needs and desires shared by nobody else on the planet. If we think DK has good policies, other people will too. All we have to do is make them visible.

no confirmation of any...any...points made...those assholes

Interesting.

Glad I agree with Hume on something.

Another talking head said they thought Lieberman was the only one calling out another candidate, which they someone presented as positive. Ick.

Kucinich is my favorite
Sharpton has impressed me very much
Graham impressed me tonight

I also like Moseley Braun
and Dean and Kerry and Edwards

I don't think Gephardt ever says much of substance, it always strikes me as politician rhetorical fluff. Lieberman is my least favorite.

But I'll vote for whomever the Democratic PArty nominates.

And after tonight, I'll feel better about it, no matter who it is, than I would have yesterday.

Attacking each other is just what Fox nazis wanted. Be proud of all our candidates, they attacked little man bush and his evil empire.

Fred Barns and others were almost in tears because...the attack was against nazi little man bushie and not against each other. The main reason why there are 9 candidates is to attack the enemy, the main terrorist against America. That will be little man bushie.

All spoke well and presented great ideas. The questions were well presented. Thank God, they were not questioned by that nasty Hume.

But I still think Dean is the best choice.
But the debate was good and I think the differences in them all was shown. They all have different talents and if they were a team they could probably do well.

Although there were substantial differences in their ideas, in general, they presented a unified front. It was marred briefly by Joe calling out Howard Dean -- who showed yet again how well he thinks on his feet by reminded Joe that they were all Democrats and should concentrate their anger on smirky.

I really liked the panel -- good, thoughtful questions -- and they were perceptive listeners at well. Even Brit Hume behaved himself for the duration and moderated in a professional manner.

The "Dean Factor" has rubbed off on the others -- I think they all understand now that there is, and has been all along -- very strong feelings against His Chimperial Highness -- and now they are lending their voices to our outrage.

about his ability to relate to the needs of African Americans (I'm paraphrasing here) because Vermont has so few minorities.

Dean said (paraphrasing again):
"If the number of African Americans in a state were any indication of how a person would act towards minorities then Trent Lott would be Martin Luther King!"

Now, that was fast thinking on his feet!

need more calling the Repukes out by name - nail'em

disrupting without any confirmation? This even after the debate. Rove's plan for sure. Since Fox made no attempt to investigate how the disruptors came to be in the auditorium, they bear part of the blame.

usually do. They could have been GOP plants. If they were Karl Rove operatives I wouldn't expect them to yell out "Four more years."

Larouche runs on the Dem Ticket every election but is never allowed in on the debates. His supporters get really pissed. This isn't the first time they've voiced their disapproval of him not being allowed in.

I'm sure if you google "Larouche 2004", you'll find something...

Around the 5th time things were interrupted by hecklers (plants?), did you notice that Brit Hume all of the sudden asked Dean what his lapel badge was about? Prior to the heckler interrupting, Hume was directing a question to Kerry...so, why the sudden shift to Dean?

I think this was a off-hand way of trying to subliminally tie Dean's support of a student union movement to the debate hecklers (plants?).

If Fox held a Repuke debate, DO ANY OF US BELIEVE THAT THERE WOULD BE HECKLERS? HELL, NO!

If the Democratic nominee field had any sense, they would band together and refuse to appear at another Fox-sponsored debate. Fox needs to be spanked for their lax (and maybe welcomed) attitude towards turning this debate into a farce.

FUCK FAUX.

JB

viewers away from what was happening. Like how they won't show it when people run onto the field during a sporting event, so as not to encourage it. I don't think FOX is out to screw Dems. If they wanted to screw us, they wouldn't have show the debate period.

:hi:

They've all done better in the past. Dean was better tonight then last week, but other then that, eh. I think it was the disruptors and nobody was really able to 'hit their stride'. Oh well, that's the way it goes sometimes.

Dean did OK, good comeback to Joe L., great line about Trent Lott! Closing a bit weak IMO.

Lieberman is trying so hard to get fired up, but his positions still suck. What's this about sending more American troops? I thought there were no more?? Also, stop reminding us how you were Al Gore's running mate. Who cares?

Sharpton is moving up my list of favorites fast. This man is the conscience of the party, I used to wonder what he was doing here but no more.

Others: eh....Mosely-Braun seemed thoughtful and articulate, but she doesn't have any fire and no one's taking her seriously as a candidate anyway. Edwards still seems like a light-weight, Gep still seems like a hack, Kerry still can't explain his IWR vote and the man looks like a cadaver, Kucinich still sounds permanently pissed. Graham did pretty well, was forceful and direct, so he probably did himself some good--but not enough. I didn't catch his gay-marriage line, though...have to watch the replay.

Hecklers were a disgrace...after the first one, the others should have been hustled out in half the time it took to get them to shut up. These people just love to marginalize themselves, I guess...that way they get to keep on being victims. Good for Al for telling them to put up or shut up.

As mentioned people look at Edwards as a "light-weight."

If they actually listen to what he says and his delivery he is a great candidate.

Ideally, I feel Kerry would make the best President, but this election is not about who is the best candidate to lead America, it is about who can beat Bush!

I think Edwards is the only one that can beat Bush. His looks help, he speaks clearly, doesn't say stupid things and the fact that he is from the South helps bring in the "rural" vote. I had my doubts about him, but the debates have shown me that he has what it takes to battle it out with Bush.

Of the candidates, I want to hear more of Edwards --- and less debating between Dean and Lieberman.

He made some excellent arguments, and I found myself applauding for him in my living room. I was reminded why he's my second choice! His stance on education was what I wish I'd hear from Dean.

All the candidates did awesome, except Lieberman who looked like a snivelling child when he was (rudely) interrupted by the protesters. I thought Joe was going to stomp his feet and start flailing him arms, but fortunately he stopped at crying "Oh, come on!" Sharpton handled the protesters (and Faux!) perfectly.

Dean had the best line of the night with the Trent Lott line.

He isn't getting the lion's share of attention because he isn't showing any anger or raising his voice.

Wait for the general election there...

the guy is plain and brutal on things he dislikes. Like the lawyer he is, he can rip new rectums with the best of them. Debates call for a different style than speeches.

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

just because he is a southerner. They are much more politically involved then you think. I think he can carry a portion of the southern vote because of his ideas and his positions. But if this was the case fact that he is from the South helps bring in the "rural" vote. then how come the only state Gore could carry was Florida and that was not by a huge margin? If we try to elect someone with the most electability, we may elect the most unelectable candidate. Unless you have a crystal ball how can you be so sure Edwards is the one with the best chance to win?

have won ! If Gore were more personable OR more dynamic he might have a job now as well.

Northern liberals ? Only Kennedy and that was largely due to makeup.

Do the math...

Gore's problem was that he put all his eggs in the Florida basket.

I've said this a thousand times. In the last three weeks of the election, the only think I heard about from Gore was 'prescription drug plan for senior citizens", and he flew back and forth between Fl and, was it, NH?

What did you hear from Clinton in the last three weeks? Variations on the theme, "It's the economy, stupid", specifically targeted at middle class people wondering why the US economy was hurting them so badly. And Clinton was ALL OVER the country in the last few weeks.


Gore did amazingly for someone with such a narrow strategy. Had he not focused so much on FL, and if he had broadened his campaign themes, he would have won (and he would have picked up a few more southern states).

I've also said this before: being from the south in America today says more about class than about regionalism. I think a guy in Boston or Brooklyn or Watts or Tucson sees a guy with a NC and they don't think, he only has NC interests in mind. What they do is they hear that accent and think, this guy knows what my experience of working class America is like.

This election is about who would be the best president. Perhaps more so than any time in our countries history. If some candy ass is elected how the hell is he going to straighten out the mess Bush made? Even if we do elect the best man for the job he will be blamed for all of Bush's fuckups...just like Carter was. So he better be willing to take some heat and stay the course....and an acquiescent individual concerned with "political expedience" is by their nature not willing or not capable of doing so.

I don't think Edwards has a snowballs chance in hell of getting elected. Dean or Kerry will be the next president of the United States. I'll put money on it. Unfortunately I don't think either of them are the best candidate. I used to like Dean...but the more I hear come out of his mouth the more he convinces me my initial feelings were ill-founded. Nope he doesn't like the war in Iraq...he wants to have one in Iran and or Syria.

Listening to six candidates standing up their shouting "I support the troops", "I support the troops" I'll give the Junta whatever he asks for...the same six candidates who supported them by giving a spoiled AWOL chickenshit boob Carte Blanche to use them as mercenaries and quite possibly send them to their deaths...well that is disingenuous to say the very least.

You want to support the troops, get them the hell home. You wanna get them home tell AWOL he ain't getting any more money. If Bechtel, Halliburton and Carlyle want to wage a mercenary war let them hire their own goddamn army and fly their own damn flag. Maybe AlQueda will blow them up instead of my family. Frankly I am tired of the steaming wet sack of shit we presently call "the liberation of Iraq" being wrapped in my flag and being payed for with my tax dollar and my kids life.

There is a reason we got this thing called Nato and a reason we have the 'irrelevant UN". It is precisely to prevent the crap that is going on in Iraq right now. It is precisely to prevent my flag, my money and my soldiers from being used as they are being used at present. Why in the hell do we need to maintain control of ANY of the shit going on over there, if not to pluck the cherry from the top? Everyone says it ain't about the oil...so then what it hell is it about? Why is it so important that we maintain military control or any other sort of control if not to get something other than liberated Iraqi's out of the deal? I think it is time the American public and its politicians quit shitting themselves. I think it is time to face up to the facts....the least of which is our fear of loosing face the most of which is that we want something aside from a peaceful free Iraq. The resolution Bush claimed to be enforcing was a UN resolution...NOT a US resolution. As such it is the UN who should be handling it NOT the US. Either the UN is irrelevant or it is not. The more money we spend in Iraq, the more time we spend in Iraq the more control we seek to exert the more irrelevant we make the UN. Any candidate who says otherwise is stupid or part of the con that has been going on since 9/11, plain and simple.

You know....at first this evening I was pretty pleased with everyone in the debate (except Lieberman)....but the more I think about it the more pissed off I get. All of these people knew before the war what we know now...and still at least 5 of them are still blowing smoke up our asses. I need to go to bed...I am getting pissy now....sorry. Good night.

RC
USN Vet

Most of the Dems shined.

They are just so unprofessional. Fox reminds me of my hometown local redneck station. A bunch of cheese dicks who try and cover up the one dimensional, crappy job they do with nifty graphics. You can gild a turd...but it's still a turd. I'd think after a while they'd get a little embarrassed by the absolutely pathetic job they do. I don't even get pissed watching Faux anymore because they never do anything or say anything different...it just the same predictable shit...over and over...they're borrrrrring. You can watch the a-holes for a week and never hear anything new. Any question, any situation has one of nine answers or one of nine impressions. The only thing the least bit interesting or original they present is the weather. I mean I wouldn't even mind listening to the attempts of the rightwing propaganda machine if they would perhaps dream up something new....evidently they lack the intellect. Then again maybe they have come to recognize that the vast majority of their audience has no intellect and figure what's the point. Working for Faux has got to be one of the easiest jobs a "news-person" can get.

I thought the commentators did an excellent job and asked excellent questions. Personally I don't have a problem with Sharpton attacking Dems...some need attacking. Some frankly need to get their asses kicked. I'd agree with you on Braun and Kerry, however.

I don't understand your dislike for Kucinich. He is a small man with a small voice who tries to make up for it with an attitude. Unfortunately that is rather obvious and at times gets a little irritating. He demonstrated the biggest set of stones on that stage, however. He is not a follower and he doesn't kiss peoples asses. That ain't crazy....that is what being a leader is about. I wonder how you would feel about DK if he was 6-3 250 pounds and had a baritone voice.

Lieberman isn't worth my time to type about. Gephart was Gephart.....

Edwards was ok but the guy gives me the same feeling as a used car salesman...maybe that isn't fair...probably it isn't. I get the impression that he is one who, like Gephart, plays the political expedience game....and who needs that? He's a real Democrat but he ain't got the nutz to do anything about it.

Dean seemed to me to be sort of flat. I like him and have considered voting for him....but he left me a little miffed with his remarks about Iran and Syria.....sounded a bit to much like AWOL. I may have to rethink my support of Mr. man after that remark

I thought the Larouche nuts were great....Nothing like a little comic relief. The reaction of the candidates exhibited a sort of class and style that I think all Democrats should be very proud of. I got a charge outa ole Reverend Al threatenin to sic his homeboys on em....hehehehehe. Right on Al...you go wit yo bad self, brother!!

RC

for 3.5 minutes of viewing.

Not the debate itself.

RC

Kucinich kicked ass, I think he shined the most other then Sharpton, but he gave a peformance everyone expected. But Gephardt did better then most, he actually showed passion in what he was saying and the stuff he was saying was believable. I think Dean and Edwards did ok, but like always Lieberman got booed. TO me, it seemed like the LaRouche nuts were targeting Lieberman, everytime he spoke they interrupted with their nonsense. Braun sounds like the smartest person there whenever she speaks whereever she speaks so she is very high up on my list. Graham just moved up on my top 3 list due to his peformance, but which candidate will allow gay marriage? I remember Edwards said he was against Gay marriage and I also heard Dean said it should be up the churchs but I disagree. I thought it was a bright and shining moment for all the candidates except Lieberman, but in some instances he did ok.

edit: I liked how Kucinich was forth right and honest, while all the Candidates were giving some kind of answer to the question, Kucinich out right said no. Here is how my list looks after yesturday.

Dean 10
Kucinich 9.9
Graham 9.5
Braun 9.4
John Kerry 8 (great candidate, the war vote bugs me though)
Al Sharpton 7.7
John Edwards 7.5
Gephardt 6.0
Joe Lieberman 0.1

is some people need to drop out fast. I started to forget who was in the debate because there are just soo many people in it. Some of the candidates with no traction now need to drop out and hope for a VP nomination or wait for 2k8.

I am sure some here want soo badly to blame Fox for the disruptors, but I will blame LaRouche. Brit mentioned that it was a 3 tier auditorium, and the security had a tough time getting to the loud mouths quickly because of it.

I thought Gephardt and Kuci did the best. Liebermann was awful, and would have been even worse, if I didn't have some sympathy for him being interrupted by the protesters more often then others.

The others were OK. Dean did fine, but didn't really shine. Kerry was boring as was Graham.

Over all, I was happy with the debate because I heard them discuss some topics I haven't heard them discuss in other debates: guns , gay marriage, the upcoming 87 bill dollar vote.

carried on Faux?? They were fools to even show up and pander to the neaderthal crowd.

Morgan State is an historically black school. Excepting the disruptors, you're suggesting that attendees to the Congressional Black Caucus debate are neaderthals ? AND that their appearance to debate with a black minority flavor was mere pandering ?

Ouch and ouch again !

But will vote for whoever is nominated (ABB). I do remember thinking all together they would make a great team. I hope after the nomination is decided they get together and work together. I think Sharpton would make a great speach writer/press secretary for the nominee. I just love it when he talks. Kucinich would be a great vice president. I think he would do well keeping whoever was elected honest. Ultimately I would like to see a Dean/Clark or Dean/Kucinich whitehouse with a heavy dose of Sharpton on the side in 2004.

I really enjoyed her comment about gun control. Something like, "responsible gun owners have nothing to fear from reasonable gun control laws." I agree completely.

I'd be tempted to give her my vote if I thought it would do any good.

My impressions where almost completely opposite of yours.

Edwards was decent but no stand out and Dean seemed to me to be firmly holding his ground but taking no chances.

Mosely Braun on the other hand gets better with each debate. Kucinich has improved his tone ten fold, now his message is the focus instead of his anger. Sharpton was telling it like it is as always.

Graham bumped it up a notch from the last debate, but barely.

Underperformers, in my view, were Gephardt and Kerry.

The biggest loser with the continuation of his tactic of alienating democratic activists was Lieberman.

everytime I see him speaking to a black audience he talks about marching with Martin Luther King, keeping the dream alive, etc. When Lieberman was speaking at a hispanic forum he was talking about how unauthorized citizens weren't terrorists or something like that. Dean talks about affirmative action wherever he goes, when he officially announced his candidacy he quoted Martin Luther King.

The candidates exposed, on national right-wing TV, the lies of the Bush administration without any O'Reilly or John Gibson shushing them!!! How could you not have loved that? Two or three candidates mentioned Halliburton! I was amazed! I thought free speech was going to be forever reserved for the other side of the Atlantic.

Graham attacked Bush like no other candidate, and his well-established position gives his comments a certain legitimacy. I respect his reference to gays as "homosexuals." He spoke like a true Southerner and was not afraid to oppose what the audience thought with insincere words. I didn't agree with him, but he had integrity. He was the true star of the night.

Kucinich is not crazy. When all manufacturing jobs get shipped overseas, you'll understand.

Lieberman got the biggest dose of humiliation that he has probably ever received in his political life.

It was an amazing debate.