Time Magazine's Candidate Grades for the Debate: B's across the board

Clinton:

Grade: B

Seemed drained but determined, proud and intense, and eager to strike the right post-truce tone. Clearly relieved to have the racial tension behind her (at least for the night), and patently enthusiastic to discuss national security. But pandered a time or two too often, and spoke in Senate-speak (a la Chris Dodd) far more than appropriate. Went in with stubborn confidence, but her timing was a bit off.

Edwards:

Grade: B

While Obama and Clinton eyed each other, he kept his focus on the White House. Showed his raring-to-be-president spirit with responses organically derived from his platform, his political value system, and his groundwork. Nevertheless, the debate’s energy remained fixed, laserlike, on the other two. Bottom line: strong night, but not strong enough to turn the “two-person race” narrative into a “three-person race” drama (unless he wins Nevada).

Obama:

Grade: B

Inspiring and thoughtful, but sometimes ponderous. Ready to go, but obviously fatigued. Overall, stood toe-to-toe with Clinton on style and substance. Relied on stump speech excerpts more than usual, but neglected to hammer his core message of change. Was a somewhat quiet presence at the table, particularly in contrast to the exhilarating orator he’s been on the stump in recent weeks.


http://thepage.time.com/halperins-report-card-on-the-mnsbc-democratic-debate/

I don't understand why she kept repeating that it was a black-brown debate. I'm not even being snarky. I don't get why she kept saying that.

Hillary gets points for her deftness at attacks, while knowing full well that the "men" couldn't respond quite in kind...and if that is how a debate was to be judged, then yes, she scored points.

But the first thing that turned me off she said in her first answer of the debate. She said something to the effect that this "election is about our personality" (talking about the candidates). I was thinking, I don't think so Hillary. This election is to be about us.

Her incessant talk about her 35 years is also starting to wear thin. She doesn't ever enumerate what she actually did during those 35 years other than a couple of things like working on the Children's Fund....otherwise, she seems to assume that we are already supposed to know, or that we need to simply assume. That's bad news for the GE...because she will be questioned then.

Was it that she married Bill Clinton 35 years ago or something, cause I'm not sure what that milestone marking the 35 years represents?

In addition, she seems to want one to think that she had NS clearance or sat in on NS meetings during her years in the White House, but she did not. Why does she thinks that we will be safer with a person that didn't bother to read the NIE and voted for this stupid war? :shrug:

Edwards gets the lowest grade because I knew much of what he was going to say, before he said it. I finished his sentence about the 200,000 Veterans for him as I watched. His fever pitch passion in all that he discusses gets tiring, because he never modulates his tone, at some point folks start thinking that he's putting on, this exercised agitation....especially considering that so much of his past actions don't reflect this burning urgency that he likes to convey. That's where one can pick up on the disconnect that Edwards seems to have issues with.

I found Barack to appear somewhat disgusted at times, and he smiled less than he has in the past...although that's not such a bad thing because it makes him appear serious and determined, which is a good thing. he was calm and cool when he needed to be, and carried himself with a true air of authenticity while still able to add a dash of humor. He conveyed oftentimes that he sees and understands the big picture very clearly, and knows what qualities that are his own that he can offer to the presidency. He was eloquent, thought provoking, pensive, and original. His statement on conservation was the only mention of what we, as citizens, could do right away. The mention of No Child behind, and his concern about Black fathers not always meeting their responsibilities was very effective as it was on point.

And if one thinks that Baracks ponderous pausing as he speaks is distracting (which I don't have a problem with myself), John Edwards batting eyes and weak moved wrist are really, really hard to take. At least with Barack, you know he is processing his thoughts, and you actually don't mind waiting for what he's gonna say.

I give the win to Barack.

Your scoring appears to be a bit different than most.

Actually, I think they each did quite well given the open hostility of Russert, avoided most of the traps set, and represented Dems really well. Each also had a couple of problem questions.

We really won't know until the caucus. FWLIW the Fox focus group thought Edwards the winner by a lot.

But not sure the rest of the M$M will agree with that. I'd bet ten to one they'll scramble to explain why Nevada was an aberration, meaningless in the overall picture.

Make that 30 to 1