How bad was tonight for Gephardt?

By him not showing up for the debate, what are the chances that this will dramatically alter his poll numbers and hurt him in the long run?

Rp

In other words nothing...I agree with Mrs. Heinz-Kerry...these things are SILLY,aren't helping ANY of us...and NObody's watching except ALL political animals and Paid or Hope to be PAID operatives.
BTW..Hizzoner? JOHN STREET?:yourock: !!

He may have gained in Iowa, his must win state.

They are dog & pony shows.. They are a platform for the "questioners" to show off, and try to trip ALL the candidates up..

If they had been savvy, they would have all agreed beforehand to have the regular OLD fashioned debates with the LWV, like they used to have..

They got tricked into doing these in exchange for "free air time"..

Do we really know any more about any of them now, than we did before?? This whole "debate season" has been about supplying embarrassing soundbytes for Karl & the Goons in the WH basement.. No doubt, they have several commercials "in the can" already... all ready to unleash on whoever the eventual candidate is..

These "debates" are little more than a gussied up "Crossfire" or "Hardball"..

It's just an opportunity for them to trash each other and try to get the "soundbyte of the night"...:puke:

I think that most of the volunteers for a campaign are young people in college.

I do not think he has really made inroads.

It also makes me wonder, "Is his obligation only to blue collar workers????? I mean, that what it seems to me. Does he even want to raise CAFE standards? To me, he only has one block of the Democratic Party and that is of the blue collared workers.

But the main question is...why did he not attend this debate? Was he trying to stop the SEIU endorsement or something?

The debates themselves are of marginal value, but I think the Rock The Vote ones are in particularly minor, because young people don't vote like older people do. It's a chance for the candidates to show a different side of themselves, and this debate was pretty good as far as debates go, but really, with so many people there, nobody can help themselves a lot. Gep would have been another face on the stage.

Gephardt demonstrated where his priorities lie --
Iowa -- at a time when other candidates were at the debate. If he wins Iowa, the publicity will be worth a lot more than what he gave up at the debate tonight.

If I have to choose between 1) Bush and Gephart, 2) Bush and Lieberman, or 3) Bush and Sharpton in 2004, I'm going to vote Democrat, then run for the nearest restroom and vomit.

As entertaining as I find these debates, they really aren't that helpful because not enough people watch them. The answers are too short for anyone to really knock it out of the park. (Sharpton, obviously excluded)

Actually, I think that the only impact they could have on voting would be if someone screwed up horribly. If that happens, it will be played over and over and over...

It is a thing for us nuts right now.You know the c-span people.