What to expect: Tomorrow's debate (by Katzenkavalier)

This debate will be much more intense than what we are used two- basically we have a three way race in Iowa, with Edwards trying to hold on to his small lead, Clinton trying to get ahead and Obama looking for that solid second place he is so close to. This debate is all about impressing Iowa voters. Things to look for:

(Note: Barack Obama's people have brought the topic of less debates to the forefront today with a reason- expect that to surface tomorrow. I don't think he is "afraid" of debates, he's just playing the role of the "outsider"- he wants to spend more time "with the people" than in "media-controlled" debates. Expect the rest of the candidates to jump on Obama on this, which might be what he is looking for: "Look how the establishment politicians and the moderator jump on me because me wanting to spend more time with the folks!", trying to win the respect of Iowans. It'll be interesting to watch.)

-John Edwards will jump on both Obama and Clinton from the start, without hesitation. He'll call Hillary on health care and the "lobbyists" thing, and he will do the same to Obama but less intensely. If anything he will try to make Hillary look like an "empty dress" (all name and rhetoric, no real plans) and Obama like a mere follower (you just bring mediocre versions of my plans to the table). Expect the "angry populist" going for the KO from the start.

-Hillary Clinton will probably be more aggressive than usual. However, she has two options in my opinion. Either she goes after Obama in an attempt to make him look inexperienced and vulnerable, in order to take away some of the support he has in Iowa, or she decides to counterpunch against Edwards. In any case, she will still manage to look presidential and above the rest, but not as much as in the other debates.

-Barack Obama will try to convince Iowans he is the agent of change: that's the card he's been playing lately and he will continue to do so. Obama is our master counterpuncher- expect him to start slow and get jumped on early (Biden and Dodd will repeat their Chicago act, I guarantee it). Still, he knows what the main attacks will be (inexperience, out of touch, running from the debates), and I'm expecting him to be ready to shine once those things are brought up. If anything, it's starting to look like Obama is separating himself from the group in a sort of "me, the agent of change vs. them, the old school" kinda thing. I don't know how well will it work, but it will be interesting to watch. Expect him to counterpunch hard, especially against Edwards.

Kucinich will talk sense, as always, Biden and Dodd will repeat their attack dogs performance, Richardson might have a suprisingly good showing, given the fact that he seems to be well liked in Iowa and that might boost his confidence, and Gravel... well, he is who he is.

It should be an interesting debate. Is it on MSNBC?

view this as "make it or break it time" Edwards has a lot riding on this Obama less so but still has to be cautious. Hillary could lose big time if she isn't careful.And the one who may come out the best is Richardson because he is less under pressure.this is going to be interesting.Is this ABC? I have to check out the time tomorrow!

Best analysis yet!:

The Debates Are Killing Edwards & Obama

Conventional wisdom says that, in the presidential-nomination process, debates help everyone but the front-runner in the polls, because they give the pack exposure and face time next to the leader. But so far in Campaign 2008, the opposite has been true. The constant debates are slowly destroying the candidacies of John Edwards and Barack Obama -- much to the delight of Hillary Clinton supporters.
...

If anything, Obama fares worse in these debates. His advantage is that he's different and new, with all the excitement that comes with those attributes. But the more he appears on a stage with seven very conventional politicians, the more he appears as conventional as they are. In every debate, he loses a bit more charisma.

...

It may be that this entire furor over early debates will have little effect on a public that, by and large, isn't watching them right now. But they do affect the press a lot. Obama and Edwards would be well served to drop out of the debates now and take their case to the people. Otherwise, come January, they may find that the things that once made them distinctive no longer exist.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/08/the_debates_are_killing_edward.html

...I guess Obama is taking advise from ad hoc political analysts. Any minute, I expect we'll be hearing about mass firings happening at the Obama (not so happy) Camp!

and given that you celebrate the author's analysis as the best yet, I wonder if you also like his other screed...on Hillary.

Here it is -->

Hillary Clinton: Empty Pantsuit
By Steven Stark

<SNIP>

The main problem, however, is the subject itself. To continue the cliché metaphor, with Hillary, there is no forest. Or, as Gertrude Stein once said of Oakland, "there's no there there."

<SNIP>

Hillary's real claim to fame is that she married a political star. And, because of that, any biography that tells the truth about her essentially amounts to hundreds of pages relaying, well, not that much of anything. You can't write a good life story about a rather boring and unlikable personage who's never done enough to merit a lengthy biography in her own right, even if she is married to someone as interesting as Bill.

<SNIP>

The truth is that whenever Hillary has tried to do something important on her own -- and it hasn't been very often -- she's botched it rather spectacularly. The health-care "debacle" she managed during her husband's first term was rightly named. And, not only did she get it wrong initially on Iraq -- her most important vote in a fairly undistinguished Senate career to date -- she refuses, to this day, to apologize for it, thereby confirming the suspicion that she is unpleasantly imperious.

Barack Obama doesn't exactly have a lengthy résumé, either. But he differs from Hillary in two key ways. First, if you've read his book, you know he's genuinely interesting, with a set of thoughtful and original political ideas, forged in a rather unconventional background. It's fun to read his autobiography -- though it remains to be seen if this intriguing persona translates into presidential material.

Second, he's self-made and paid his dues as a community organizer and state legislator -- which provided an education in itself. He didn't get his Senate seat by being the husband of Michelle Obama (and then pretending that somehow his spouse had nothing to do with his rise to prominence).

<SNIP>

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/06/hillary_clinton_empty_pantsuit.html

Bill is very astute and politically brilliant yet if you look close he is essestially weak.
Hillary is the strutting pretender. She is the type, who I have seen before, that is good at pretending. She is very good at smokescreens. She struts around pretending to be the super competent brain.
And she has alot of people convinced she has tons of experience and policy. yet she has neither.
it is because it is Bill doing it all. he is the one coordinating the whole thing. When he left the country she attacked obama.
Bill saw the threat of Obama early and not Hillary. He was the one obsessed by him. He is the one trying to throw off his campaign. You see where she stumbles when he is busy with something else.
the only thing I have not figured out is if this run is for Hillary's ego or for Bills ego.

He knows the guy has what he had in 1992.

But the Audacity of Arrogance, thought he could wing it!

Just remember, Obama has committed all unforced errors.

Hillary a pretender? Are you sure you're a Dem? Or just not a good memory. I'd love to have those days back.

as we have seen and then, foot in mouth disease is evident. (Only) doing well with prepared speeches and material is very telling.

In the June 21st article you posted he got it ass backwards..

He underestimated Hillary's GRAVITAS and overestimated the impact of Obama's INEXPERIENCE!

:rofl:

Dumb question: Which network is carrying the debate?

and what time??

thx
DR

...it varies around the country. In Orlando it's on at 11 AM - 12:30 PM. It's tape delayed.

See, the ABC Network sends ABC News with George Stuffitupyurass to its affiliates at 9:00 AM - 10:30 AM EST. On the Pacific Coast it's sent from 8:00 AM - 9:30 AM.

But affiliates may delay the show to any time they desire. You may want to get up and watch your ABC station's morning news - they may announce when it's on. And try reading that "TV Weekly" listing you have in your morning paper.

The most certain way you can get the time the show runs is to call your local ABC affiliate; ask for the news department, which is generally the only department open early on Sunday morning. You might get an answering service or something. Keep trying. If they have a "send your news tips to us" line try that.

In fact, if you DO call your ABC station, they'll notice that you're watching news programming, and programs involving Democrats. So by calling you might actually be putting them on notice that people care about such programming.

but I'll check my local listing.
:)DR

It has nothing to do with the merits of Obama or Edwards.

thus far not made that big of an impression. HRC stands there resolute in her answers and in her style and mannerisms. She comes across as the one that has the know with all to be president.... Obama will miss this debate or forum as he says he is limiting his appearances and the Clinton camp responded, "So he'll meet with dictators but not the black caucus or seniors in Iowa?"
I do thank you
Ben David

Obama has already agreed to quite a few debates, and is just not agreeing to do any more. That stupid quip from the Clinton campaign is also wrong, since he will be at the black caucus debate.

right before the debates. If not he would do so on Monday.
Hillary is obsessed with Obama so look for her to attack him and she may even try for Edwards to help her. If Edwards is smart he won't and stand his own. Earlier this week he wanted obama to join him in making a big denouncement of Lobbyists. The Obama camp declined but, I cannot shake the feeling there is more to it.

there, their, they're
your, you're
to, two, too

Spell check is not always on our side.
:-)

I agree on your assessment, but think there will be some Hail Mary throws from Kucinich, Biden and Dodd aimed at Clinton mostly to try to gain some kind of favor.

I'm not sure on the venue though. If it's a large stadium where Clinton has to yell, she will come across as...well...what she is.

Are we that cynical and clairvoyant that we already know the outcome?

I for one, am a cynic, but I can't tell fortunes unless one has a lot of money based on corporate and media interests. In that case, go for "your girl." Clinton will be declared the winner and applauded by the MSM. They know who butters their toast.

I'm for sure not for Hilary or Richardson. Edwards still trumps Obama for me, but we will probably do worse.

Clinton will offer more platitudes and offer little substance, then make up some bullshit issue to bash Obama with, like she always does.
Obama will do okay, unless he gets fired up by being badgered over Clinton's bullshit.
Edwards will be attacking both of them, probably over lobbyist issues.
Richardson will be a forgetful bore.
Dodd will be somewhat less of a forgetful bore.
Biden will walk the line between entertaining and being an asshole.
Kucinich will rip off his shirt and turn into the Hulk.

Now that I would love to see! :)

I like him just as he is :loveya:

he's all green, angry and shit.

He'll probably look pretty sheepish after having accidentally smashed Bill Richardson.

Having watched the Republican one, the format for this is that of a true debate. Stephanopolous will be a very good moderator if he repeats his previous performance.

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v4.0
==================



This week is our third quarter 2007 fund drive. Democratic
Underground is a completely independent website. We depend on donations
from our members to cover our costs. Thank you so much for your support.

Chris Matthews will say Hillary won.

:rofl:

There's no telling where its been.