Again, I didn’t watch, but figured I would ask you all who you thought “won” the debate before reading all the write-ups tomorrow.
Clinton? Obama? Edwards? Dodd?
Reader Interactions
87Comments
Comments are closed.
Trackbacks
-
[…] I left my impressions in the comments over at Balloon Juice during and after the debate (old habits die hard). Surprisingly, newly anointed Democrat John Cole along with most of the far left commentariot over there didn’t bother to watch. They’ve already made up their minds. But who can blame them? The plate on their side is even emptier than the plate on ours. […]
sujal
America
:-)
CDB
In Soviet America, the candidates debate against the voters.
dougie smooth
I thought Obama really faltered tonight (and he’s my horse at the moment). You should really watch the first five minutes to get a flavor of it.
Dodd was good, Edwards was a push. Clinton was exposed on a couple issues, but she performed well considering all the CNN questions that were explicitly designed to push the “piling on” storyline and ask about her specific criticisms. Richardson was painful to watch as usual, Kucinich was sharp in rejoinder, and Biden was OK but has become overly irreverent to compensate for being ignored.
The clear loser of the night was CNN. Blitzer should be locked in a cage. He apparently thinks a moderator’s role is to ask as many gotcha questions as possible. In fact, he sounded a lot like Patterico with his hypotheticals (e.g. if absolutely nothing else is done about immigration, should they be allowed to get drivers licenses, and you can only answer yes or no). Their scripted questions were 5:1 gossip to issues. Their selected audience questions were reasonable, but they only picked people with stage fright. The audience was heckling and booing… They all lost just for taking it all seriously.
Jackmormon
I am THISCLOSE to jumping from the Obama to the Dodd camp.
Dug Jay
While not an overwhelming winner, Clinton probably came out ahead among the top tier. Obama was clearly a BIG loser, after a fair initial moment or two; he then faded out like some kind of medication had kicked in. Edwards was his usual annoying trial-lawyer self. Dodd had a few good moments as did Biden. Dennis K. is such a tool that they should probably just shoot him.
ConservativelyLiberal
I was the winner. I did not watch it. The only person who interests me is Dodd, and I can care less what the others have to say as I have heard enough from them already. Since Dodd does not stand a chance, why waste the time?
Where is Al Gore when you need him?
jcricket
the terrorists
\malkin
demimondian
Al Gore is doing something useful with his life, instead of running for president.
demimondian
Psycheout won the DemocRAT debase this evening. Of course.
norbizness
Lance Henrikson won!
Whoops, sorry, been watching the seasons sets of Millenium instead.
jcricket
(there’s supposed to be a slash in front of malkin. it was funny, i promise).
But yes, anyone who watched with the clear loser. Anyone who instead wrote comments on Balloon Juice with snark, clear winner.
When it appears clear the media has their script already written (“Clinton no longer riding high”, blah blah blah) it’s not even worth watching.
craigie
I think either Moe, Larry or Curly would make a fine president. They all did well tonight.
Keith
Tha Fans
Psycheout
Patterico was clearly the winner. If you’re talking about the debate, Biden made the most sense. And that’s clearly a loss for these United States of America.
The gnome was pretty funny when he got to interject a few words. I’m thankful that you guys have to deal with a Ron Paul clone. Painful, isn’t it?
John Cole
Kucinich can be embarrassing, but I do like how it illustrates the difference between the Republicans and the Democrats. The left, for the most part, politely shrugs and ignores Kucinich. The right is trying to destroy Paul for heresy.
Psycheout
If you want me to be serious for a minute, the press will declare Clinton the winner in unison. She wasn’t as tired this time (she took time off from her campaign to prepare) and the attacks from Silky Pony and Osama rolled off her like water off a duck’s back.
Clinton will be declared the winner. I’m actually a little sorry that Dodd, your favorite, didn’t do better. He’s certainly better than the top three. It’s a lot like the Republican party’s top three.
Excuse me, I’m going off to cry.
It’s going to be Clinton vs Giuliani. You can count on it.
AMERICA LOST.
Psycheout
One more thing. Watch the first twelve minutes. That’s all you need to see.
The rest was a snooze. In the first 12 minutes you can see Obama and Edwards handing their balls to Harpy Clinton. It’s not a pretty sight.
crayz
The real story is Barry Bonds being charged with perjury and obstruction of justice. I pray George W Bush will commute the sentence of this American Hero – as he did for the patriot Scooter Libby – however not until the jury fails its duties and convicts Bonds of these phony crimes
Psycheout
I respectfully disagree. The country, other than Paultards, are trying to destroy Paul because he’s a lunatic and a RP presidency would be a total disaster, no matter what one’s political affiliation is. He’s a fine Congressperson where his influence is diluted. Take Paul straight into your vein and you’ll die.
Actually most of the country responds with “who?” when you ask them about RP. Good. He’s a total nutjob.
Cinderella Ferret
Lou Dobbs. Hey, I have proof right here. Maybe he can get Imus to run as his VP.
dougie smooth
I’m starting to agree with this. I wonder, though, if his personality is too bland to be electable. I’d like to see Dodd v. Awshucksabee. That’s be a tough call, that lazy eye and former fat guy thing are just endearing enough to make forget he’s a baptist. Oh, and republican.
wasabi gasp
Kucinich could show up co-piloting a bicycle with E.T. in the basket, yet Richardson would still manage to appear the kook.
Dodd and Biden: both white and not a vagina between ’em.
Edwards will kill us all.
Obama is extremely thoughtful. That shit won’t fly.
I can’t think of anything good to say about Hillary that she wouldn’t say better herself.
The Other Steve
I thought Dodd and Clinton came off well from what I saw(only first 30 minutes).
Obama really horked himself.
Psycheout
Huckabee, if you didn’t know, was responsible for letting a rapist out of jail on parole (like Dukakis) and his idiocy resulted in a woman being murdered. Look it up.
dougie smooth
I did know. Too bad he wasn’t a Mr. Show fan. (Yes, I’m gonna die a painful fiery death for thinking of that clip.)
Seriously though, I was just sayin’ Huckabee would be a good foil for Dodd in the general, not that he should get the nomination.
dougie smooth
and Dukakis was a rapist? That I didn’t know.
jnfr
norbizness is watching Millenium! That’s hardcore.
I’m sorry to say it, but I think Edwards did not have a good night. I wish to chocolate that Dodd had a chance of winning because he’d make an excellent President.
I’ve never cared for Obama’s preachiness, but Kucinich is such a cutie that I want to keep him in the debates forever, even though it’s really stupid to do so.
In other words, Hillary won. Alas.
Beej
Can someone please explain to me where this Hillary hatred comes from? She’s analytical, deliberate, and well prepared. General concensus-she’s a robot. She’s relaxed, amusing, amused, and friendly. General concensus-it’s all an act. Well pardon me all to hell, but isn’t she just following the script for “how you get elected in the good old USA” and doing a pretty damned good job of it too? We may all wish that the whole pack of candidates would be a little more genuine and a little less rehearsed, but that’s the way it is. The guys that follow the same script don’t get this crap. Why does she?
heywood jablomy
My preferred ticket:
Groucho Marx/George Orwell
Jesus was a Socialist
I’m a masochist and watched the whole thing plus the post debate wrap up. Of course the media wants Hilary to be the nominee cause that will ensure a gossipy pundit blab-a-thon to election day, so it’s all Kabuki in the end.
The end of the debate where the audience got to ask questions was the most telling for me.
Their questions really were good and were about real issues: the war, economy, spying, health care, etc. but the moderators would immediately rephrase the question into a neat right-wing frame like they were posting for Drudge before allowing the candidates to answer. It was disgusting. It was striking how none of the audience asked a “yes or no” question considering that’s all Wolf can seem to do.
Fortunately, they got called on it a couple of times. I thought Edwards was the strongest in this part of the debate. He did come across lawyer-ish when the moderators asked questions, but he is trying to dethrone the anointed Queen so I cut him some slack, but he comes alive when talking to the people. He really gives the sense that he’s for the working class. I also liked how he slyly pointed out that Hilary and the Beltway Dems are part of the problem. I think his real change message is valid, although I know the current state of media will never allow him to gain much traction. I think he’ll win Iowa, but the press and establishment Dems all seem to hate him, much like Dean the last time around.
I thought Dodd was very good and they gave him a lot of time. Obama was good sometimes, but for me he never really says anything. Biden had the best laugh lines and watching Wolf trying to avoid Kucinich was priceless, but God bless Kucinich he was still able to yell “Impeach them both” and get a resounding ovation from the hall. All in all, every one of the candidates are Einsteins when compared the the Republicans running.
I have real derision for Wolf Blitzer and CNN. Couldn’t they disclose that Campbell Brown is married to Dan Senor who is now working on McCain’s campaign? Couldn’t they disclose that James Carvill is on Hilary’s team before they started the post debate discussion? I worry that with this media we will end up with a nut worse than Bush.
Psycheout
That Campbell Brown lady asking questions in the CNN debate has ties to Mittens Romney. I hope she has nothing to do with any CNN Republican debate.
Robert Johnston
You won; you didn’t watch.
Psycheout
Wow. Could you set your sights any lower?
scarshapedstar
This debate was good for the Republicans. It always is.
Slide
Clinton won. why? Well, she once again shows that while she may stumble like ALL politicians will do in a long campaign, she learns. She will not be beat up twice the same way. She came out roaring and ripped Edwards and Obama new assholes. Thats what i want in my Dem candidate. If she can’t handle those two how could she possibly handle the likes of Rudy Kerick?
She is experienced. she is brilliant. She is hardened from being attached for years. She has the best political adviser alive and she takes no prisoners.
Oh, and didn’t you just love the way she handled that ridiculous question from Cambell Brown? “Oh,Cambell” Perfect response. Like there is no “boys club”?
VidaLoca
Oh, no question that she’s smart as hell — but one of the reasons she takes no prisoners is that she fights no battles. Hillary and the Big Dog are the heads of the DLC center-right coalition; for them it’s all about maintaining the compromises that keep them on the top. And that boils down to go-along/get-along.
I’m not very optimistic that any of the Democratic candidates will commit themselves to what should be one of the top priorities in their first term in office: all prosecutions, all the time. But I expect it of Hillary the least. From her I expect all-join-hands, sing-kumbayaa, “let’s put this national nightmare behind us and come together in a spirit of bipartisanship for the good of the country as we move forward together to solve the important problems that we as a nation face” blah-blah-blah.
sheila
I couldn’t disagree more. I don’t know if you’ve been asleep for a decade but both Clintons have been fighting to get where they are, appreciate their work or no.
I like Dodd a lot, as well as Obama, so I am far from deciding on voting for Hillary. But posts like these that talk about her like this make absolutely no sense to me.
VidaLoca
You could say it like that, or
you could change the emphasis a little; both would work.
But fighting? Fighting? Kicking ass and taking names and trying to do something that will really make a difference for people like (I’ll take the liberty of being presumptuous for a moment here) us? I don’t see it.
cmoreNC
Hillary sings “kumbayaa” with a smiling face while keeping a surgically sharp knife in the palm of her hand.
KCinDC
I can’t believe the media are saying the best line of the evening was Hillary’s saying “They’re not attacking me because I’m a woman, they’re attacking me because I’m ahead.” Yes, that got a lot of applause, from an auditorium packed with her supporters (just as any criticism of her got big boos), but that line was just a simple statement of obvious fact.
Not only that, but Hillary herself was the only one saying people were attacking her because she was a woman, so she’s reacting to her own whine. So now debating yourself is a brilliant strategy?
The Other Steve
Fuck you.
I’m old enough to know better, and none of that shit is true.
Zifnab
Cheers to that. I wouldn’t want to be in charge of this country after the last seven years, either.
Honestly, I’m not sure if she’s going to be the Gerald Ford or the Richard Nixon of the new Democratic Party. Is she going to run on the “let’s half-ass our way out of this tragedy” and lose all her popular support because she wants to keep eating at the cool kids table? Or is she going to take the Johnson-esque clusterfuck of today and turn it into the Nixon-esque Super Double Wide Extra Flying Clusterfuck?
Honestly, I’m still holding out hope for Edwards. He’s the only candidate I see – besides Dodd or Kucinich who aren’t going to get elected – who would be willing to do the right thing over the smart thing. I would absolutely fucking love an Edwards/Obama or Obama/Edwards ticket, but I suspect that is far, far too much to hope for.
The Other Steve
Spot on. I am flat out amazed at how incredible Hillary is at campaigning, and in every single debate she clearly looks like she belongs there, and is in charge of everybody else on the stage.
You don’t win Presidential elections by writing position papers. Nobody gives a fuck. You win by demonstrating leadership. By taking charge. By withering attack after attack after attack and not breaking a sweat. Because if you can’t fight back against the US media, how the hell are you going to deal with Whackamdinajob from greater Wakistan?
Johnny Pez
If I really thought this was true it would make me more likely to support her.
And I didn’t watch either. As my good friend Jesus notes, it’s all just Kabuki.
The Other Steve
That would most certainly be the result of a John Edwards Presidency.
God that guy is a moron.
cleek
makes her sound like a cylon.
The Other Steve
By your command.
Elvis Elvisberg
When? How?
I haven’t seen what she said that was “playing the gender card”; I’ve just heard a bunch of Chris Matthewses insist that she had. What did she say?
Zifnab
Yeah, she’s got a great stage presence and if she were auditioning for the role of Hamlet, I’d nominate her in a second. But I, for one, give a huge fuck about her position papers and her voting record and the corporate crony company she keeps. We tried electing President-I’d-Like-To-Have-A-Beer-With, now I’d like to elect an actual liberal President, in the mold of Roosevelt and Kennedy, who will roll back 12 years of Republican bullshit.
The Republicans hate Clinton because she’s playing the same game they are, and she’s better at it. So they throw whatever mud they think will stick at her.
The Progressive Wing of the Democratic Party doesn’t like Clinton because she’s playing the same game the Republicans are, and she’s better at it. So they get on her policy choices – Iraq War authorization, Corporate Welfare and Cronyism, backbonelessness on Telecomm amnesty and Torture and Subpeonas and SCOTUS nominations. Hillary’s been a Senator since 2002, and I haven’t seen her take a principled stand ONCE, since she was sworn in, that a different Senator didn’t take a full week ahead of her. She’s a Lieber-Dem, and she’s bad news for America if you didn’t like the last seven years under Bush.
ThymeZone
She said that she was really excited to be the first woman candidate for president, and that there have some ceiling issues in the past. That’s about the gist of it.
I have wondered for a long time why the newfangled primary process of picking national candidates is so broken, and has produced such lousy presidents. Now I know, and I don’t know why I didn’t figure it out sooner: It’s the media. They really aren’t up to this process. Here we are at the crossroads of huge, profound problems and issues in this country, and these morons are talking about “gender cards.” These media people are really just awful, despicable whores who have no respect for this country, or for their own professions, and should all be fired on the spot and replaced. Matthews and Russert are actually worse than the whores on Fox News because they operate under the accepted pretense of journalistic standards and objectivity, and therefore their failures are the more dramatic.
This process is seriously broken.
Here’s the relvant transcript:
jcricket
So Whackamdinajob and Malkin are neighbors? Or are great Wakistan and outer BlogisWakistan mortal enemies? (Or is it like a North and South Dakota thing)
Gary Denton
This was the one debate to watch, actually funny and a pitched battle at the beginning. I gave up before the real folks came on with their questions but heard I didn’t miss anything.
Clinton – easily won and looked like she had spent a fortune on her face and hair. Looked tough and presidential and slugged and stabbed the boys repeatedly while smiling and looking charming.
Obama – big loser. I wonder if he is really the candidate trying for VP or practicing for his next run. Totally flubbed the illegal immigrants with driver’s license question which he should have been well-prepared for. After getting on to Clinton for waffling a minute earlier showed a bigger longer example and was called on it.
Wolf was another big loser – made clear that FOX NEWS isn’t the only conservative network.
Biden was good, loose and biting.
Dodd, who I had previously liked, was very dull and moved to the right.
Edwards tried to take it to Hillary and then realized he was only making himself look bad. As a lawyer he may have also been responding to the audience, majority for Clinton.
Richardson was typical in demonstrating how he is an expert on everything and continued auditioning for VP.
Kucinich must have been seething with the contempt and deliberate ignoring the journalists showed. He will not resign, his motive is to move the party to the left by getting his supporters to state conventions from caucuses.
Prediction: by early February Biden, Dodd, Richardson and Gravel will be out of the race.
If Obama and Edwards don’t stop Hillary in Iowa and New Hampshire it will be a very short race.
(Bias, my preferred candidates in order are Edwards, Biden, Obama, Richardson.)
The Other Steve
Then that would be Hillary Clinton.
Here’s the Democratic Platform that Roosevelt campaigned on in 1932
KCinDC
In increasing order of annoyance:
1. Clinton and supporters’ (minor) attempts to play the gender card.
2. Pundits’ complaints about her playing the gender card.
3. Clinton and supporters’ complaints about the complaints about her playing the gender card.
Cinderella Ferret
After the February 5th primaries (mini-Super Tuesday?) Richardson will withdraw and still have time to meet the February 7th filing deadline to run for the Senate seat Pete Domenici is vacating. But I think, like many others, that he is auditioning for VP, i.e., a Clinton/Richardson ticket. Recall that Richardson held a couple of Cabinet posts during Clinton I & II, and now he wants to be part of the in-crowd for Clinton III.
KCinDC
I hate Obama’s decision to talk about Social Security, possibly strengthening a Republican myth about a crisis. But he definitely handled it well in this debate when Clinton brought out that even-more-Republican line about “a $1 trillion tax increase on the middle class”.
jcricket
The media sees themselves as guiding the story, and in many cases have it “pre-ordained” in their mind, and I think that’s a big part of the problem.
Coupled with their he-said, she-said style of reporting (“He said that thimerosal has never been proven to cause autism despite multiple studies; She said ‘YES IT DOES YES IT DOES’; So there’s some debate on this issue clearly. Back to you Wolf”)
I’m not saying I believe that reporters need to someone come from the platonic ideal on high to pass “objective” judgment. But I think the media in the US needs to go one of two directions:
1) Openly partisan allegiances like every other country (you’ve got the conservative paper, the liberal paper, etc)
2) Stop buying PR and spin as fact. Report it for what it is.
Pb
Roosevelt is a Ron Paul supporter? Who knew! (On the other hand, I’d be pretty surprised if Ron Paul ever supported anything like the Emergency Banking Act…)
The Pirate
I think the most damage done to the country in the last few years has been the unbridled accumulation of executive power. Which one of the candidates is most likely to reverse that process? I very much doubt it’s gonna be Hillary.
jcricket
I agree. The correct response is, “Social Security is not in crisis, that’s right-wing spin from people who want to get rid of your Social Security. We have far more pressing matters to attend to, like fixing the AMT, healthcare & the Iraq war”
Seriously, a program that doesn’t even begin to have deficits (since the trust fund is real) until 2041 is not in crisis. And it’s possible, with upward economic activity, that the trustees will revise out further into the future the date when SS actually needs “shoring up” (the date has moved further and further out each year over the past 10-15 years).
ken
The more I see of Senator Clinton the more I like her. She is really a classy lady.
The more I see of Edwards the more disappointed I get that with his obviosly enormous talents that he cannot connect with me as I wish he could. I just do not think he has the chops to do what he wants to do.
The more I see of Obama the more I hope he sticks around and runs again in eight years. I really like him but he needs to engage the right wing mean machine for a few years to earn his place as a serious candidate.
capelza
Is jealous…
Clinton did look like a million bucks I have to say. Didn’t watch the debate, but caught the “highlights” this morning and I noticed that right away.
Is it just me or have we had more debates in this year than in all the history of the United States?
Elvis Elvisberg
KCinDC wrote: Hillary herself was the only one saying people were attacking her because she was a woman.
I wrote: When? How?
KCinDC wrote: In increasing order of annoyance: 1. Clinton and supporters’ (minor) attempts to play the gender card. …
When? How?
ThymeZone
Yes, but alas, the “fair and balanced” mythology has made that impossible. Pols and their spinmeisters have long ago learned that spin IS fact, just because they say the words.
“Scientists meeting in Chicago say the earth is round, but critics maintain that the earth is in fact flat.”
To the pseduo-journalist, the fact is not the that the earth is round, the fact is that somebody says it might be flat. And look, here they are saying it! Anybody can see it’s a fact.
The meaning of facts becomes lost in a blizzard of babble and context-switching.
This is why we, the consumers of information, have to do our jobs, and learn to discern and listen carefully and critically.
The media at this point are an impediment to information, not a path to information. They have learned that churn is what sells. So, they sell churn.
KCinDC
Elvis, as I said, it’s minor. The most blatant example came from Geraldine Ferraro. I don’t think she has any direct connection to the campaign, but the media get exercised about controversial statements by supporters all the time. The stuff from the campaign itself has been more subtle, combining “the politics of pile-on” with statements about “one strong woman” and the “boys’ club” and the like but not directly stating that there’s a connection between the two points, just talking about them together.
jcricket
Listen, TZ, I agree with you. I think the fact that the media gullibly (or intentionally) publishes faux controversies is really hurting America. There are a million issues on which things are clear as day, and only muddy because of bad reporting (in print, on TV, etc.)
But I don’t hold out much hope of things getting fixed either. The ability to determine which information should be trusted will clearly be the key skill in the 21st century.
That and knowing who to kick in the junk.
jcricket
Despite BS claims from the right (and haters like Sully), poll after poll shows this to be true of the public at large. You’ll rarely hear the media follow up one of those polls with this finding, but Hillary is not as divisive as they claim.
If she is the nominee, and fights hard to counter right-wing attacks (she did well last night), she will run away with this election.
Sure, right-wing evangelicals and fraidy-cats (the burkas are coming) won’t vote for her, but they wouldn’t vote for anyone with a D next to their name.
The bases will vote for the nominess, but Hillary will appeal to “centrists” (shudder), independents, Republicans just plain fed up with their own party, etc. They might claim otherwise now, but just wait until the Republican nominee goes off the deep-end to the right trying to prove their bonafides to the 24% crowd.
ThymeZone
In about two years, I’ve gone from saying that I hoped to Dog she didn’t become our candidate, to saying that she is clearly the best candidate and I look forward to the ass whipping she will deliver upon the GOP beast next year.
I don’t really like her all that much on a personal level, and her voice makes me cringe, but I think she can deliver us from the Beast and then maybe save the country, at least a little. For that, I’ll put up with her voice for a while longer.
The Other Steve
The funny thing is. When we’re going to start having problems is when Social Security starts calling in the debt from the general treasury. That’s in the near future, like next 5 years.
The Other Steve
You have to remember though, that Bill Clinton is a deeply unpopular President.
His approval rating was only like 70%.
compared to the Most wonderful President of all time with his approval rating of 24%.
ThymeZone
Meh. The ebb and flow of revenues versus outflows is a permanent fixture of the SS scheme. If we aren’t prepared to deal with those things, then we can’t have a SS scheme.
That, of course, is the position of the CATO Institute, which doesn’t want us to have the scheme. Progressives pretty much universally endorse the scheme.
The remedy to the “problems” you refer to is to suck it up and manage the finances appropriately. Smart taxation, and restraint with things like trillion-dollar useless wars will go a long way to helping us solve the “problems.”
Slide
When I think of the upcoming battle with the Republican candidate for president I have to ask myself who would do the best? Edwards? hair fluffing, trial lawyering, limited experience Edwards? not a chance. Rudy will chew him up and spit him out. Obama? Please. Don’t be me wrong, I LOVE Obama and what he has been saying. Some of his speeches are truly awe inspiring, uplifting and dead on. But that don’t make him a good candidate to go up againt the GOP smear machine.
Hillary is the only one that I would look forward to seeing debate Rudy. She will evicerate him like she did to Edwards yesterday. And… all the bad shit about her has been out for years. She has been vetted like no candidate I can think of and I think if they get really heavy on her there is a very good chance of big backlash. She was, after all, the victim, in the Monica thing.
Again, I’ll repeat what I said before. She is brilliant, an extremely hard worker, knows the issues inside and out, learns from her mistakes, is advised by the best living politican in the world and has had everything possibly bad said about her already. The sullys and mathews of the world won’t vote for her but a lot of “independents” will once they see her through a long long campaign. She is getting better (other than the admitted bad performance in the last debate) as a campaigner every week. Like I said, she learns.
We have to win the white hosue from the Republicans. Have to. The minor differences between the Dem candidates is irrelevant as far as I am cocnerned. I am looking for the one that has the best chance of winning and in my book that is HRC.
jcricket
Why is it a problem when SS starts asking for the US to pay back its IOUs (treasury-backed bonds), which with current estimates is no sooner than 2017 (10 years, not 5, and regularly pushed back a year or two)? Seriously.
If the government doesn’t pay back on its treasury backed obligations, the whole world’s in a heap of trouble, not SS in particular. Put simply, you cannot argue SS is in trouble until 2041 without arguing we’re headed for imminent, worldwide, catastrophic economic collapse.
Basically, in 10 years the SS program says (we’d like back the extra we’ve been paying in to shore up the system). Some budget/accounting magic happens to shift money, and they say “OK”. In 30 years, someone says “OK, we only have enough money to pay exactly what we need… And if you do nothing, we’ll have 75% of what we need over the next 35 years” (75 years from now). Hardly the makings of a crisis like the deficit spending on the war, projections for eliminating the AMT without repealing Bush and other tax cuts, and Medicare spending.
The fact that the general budget is bleeding red left and right is no reason to raise SS taxes to shore up those areas of the budget (atrios pointed this out yesterday). SS is fine, the rest of the budget is not. Let’s fix that.
ThymeZone
Agreed, based on what we see and know now.
Politics is a funny business, and we still don’t know what the Roves of the world have up their sleeves for her in the general election. I can imagine, it won’t be pretty.
I’m really hoping for a Rudy-Hillary contest. That man is such a piece of shit.
jcricket
She doesn’t really make me cringe, but a lot of her votes do. However, I don’t care. The positives of having a Democrat in the WH are enormous.
Let the liberal house and (potentially) more Democratic Senate:
* Propose S-CHIP expansions.
* Actually end this war
* Make clear torture and warrantless wiretapping are illegal
* Roll back the Bush tax cuts/eliminate the carried interest loophole
* Propose better mileage standards/support alternative energy
Ask yourself: Is Hillary going to veto any of those?
Ask yourself what kinds of judicial appointments Hillary will make (esp. compared to Rudy, Mitt or Huckabee).
Sure, she might not take the lead as much as I would like on any (or all) of those issues, but there are so many things a Democratic president (of any sort) in the WH will do that it hardly matters (this time around) who gets the nomination.
Personally, I like Edwards policies (income inequality is a big one for me) a lot more, and think he’s very personable. I’m fine with Obama on many things too. Hell, if Kucinich could win I’d vote for him.
But the president is not an all-powerful dictator (with the exception of Bush trying to be), so it’s not only their policies that matter.
If we win the WH with Hillary, let’s spend the next 4-8 years pushing stuff that matters through Congress. Move the national debate on the issues that matter to the left. 8 years from now, Hillary’s successor (likely her Veep) will run as a more progressive candidate. This is how Republicans ended up so far to the right (to their detriment, something we hopefully won’t repeat).
The only way to reverse this trend is get a Democrat elected to the WH
jcricket
The thing is, it doesn’t matter who our nominee is, they’ll get shit slung at them left and right from the wingers. The crowd that wears purple heart bandaids and supports the Swift Boaters knows no depths.
So whomever can best put up a fight with these bullies is who will win. Anyone who accepts the right-wing framing on anything is doomed.
Svensker
The thing that was the most disheartening about the whole thing was the wrap-up afterwards, when the “experts” were asked about who “won”. NO ONE mentioned any issues, and how interesting someone’s ideas about how to deal with an issue had been. The ONLY thing they talked about was how well each candidate did with his/her spin on the issues. Not, was he/she right? But, did he/she look good saying it?
That really depresses me.
Slide
after all thats gone on these last 7 years THAT is what depresses you? We (Dems) better stop bemoning how the system works (or doesn’t) and learn how to play the game. Like someone once said, it seems the Dems go to gun fights with a knife. Its always been style over substance. Remember Nixon sweating? Remember Muskie crying? Remember Romney’s being brainwashed? Remember Dukakis in a tank? Image, soundbites, and bumper stick slogans is what wins in the good ole’ USA whether we like it or not.
ThymeZone
The amazing thing is that anyone considers these people “experts” at anything, other than being on tv.
The Other Steve
Because as much trouble as we have balancing the main budget, it’s going to make it worse. I’m saying it’s going to be a problem politically. Because we’ll either cut spending, or raise taxes, or both.
Perhaps not problem… But it will be a Challenge.
The Other Steve
Well according to everybody I talk to, she’s going to invade Metropolitan Wackistan.
ThymeZone
But probably not The Challenge … which will be, rising healthcare costs and no way for the government to control them other than by either walking away from the entitlement altogether, which is not possible, or finally taking on the healthcare issue in a straightforward manner.
Healthcare is going to cost a lot more than Social Security. The question is how we will deal with that. Honestly, and head on, or by smoke and mirrors and lies (aka the GOP Plan)?
Svensker
Yes, exactly. We’re talking about illegal pre-emptive war, torture, tearing up the Constitution, etc., and the frigging “experts” are asking about Hillary playing the “gender card” and whether Edwards was too mean. That “game” is one of the reasons we’re in the clueless mess we’re in.
And I’m not bemoning anything. Moaning a little, perhaps… :)
jcricket
OK – fair enough/different point.
My whole point (as TZ put it) is that shoring up SS in 30 years will be child’s play. There are a couple of really simple things you can do that make SS basically “safe” forever (or a combination of a few).
And that’s if SS even needs it. The date when benefits outstrip what SS collects has moved farther and farther into the future since the trustees started calculating it in the mid 80s). In the “optimistic” scenario (the SS trustees use optimistic/pessimistic/realistic as the three scenarios) the date moves from 2042 to like 2060.
I dunno about you, but 2060 is a long frickin time from now. I’ve got some more pressing things to worry about with regards to the federal budget.
Raising taxes is a challenge because people want a free lunch and Republicans have told them only the mean-ol Demoncrats are keeping the people from their free lunch and ponies (not a free lunch of ponies, though). And Democrats, unfortunately, have done a piss poor job of countering the rhetoric and articulating the positive, pragmatic reasons why we need taxes and why they need to be raised on the people that can afford it.
So I fault Republicans for making perfectly reasonable tax policy changes poisonous debates, and I fault the Democrats for the lack of courage in responded.
D-Chance.
The three who looked presidential last night were Clinton, Dodd, and Biden… although Biden let that short temper of his show through, again. Loved the takedown of Suzanne Malveaux, however. Biden would probably be the first president to publicly tell a reporter to “go fuck himself” during a live nationally-broadcast press conference.
Edwards talks a good game, but he looks even “slicker” than Bill did when he was first running. I just have a hard time believing a damn word he says, or his sincerity when he says it. His trial lawyer skills are just too good for his own good.
Love the superstar and the idealism in Obama. If the Bush admin was only guilty of extreme corruption, I’d say Obama might well be the right man at the right time. But with the war and what we will need in its aftermath… I think someone more seasoned, a bit more “insiderish” who has a few more years in the loop would be better. Obama in 2016? If he can ride the wave and learn from his experiences of the next eight years, sure!
I have a hard time taking the other two seriously.
jcricket
The problem is that only works if Hillary doesn’t win twice and have a Veep that becomes the nominee.
I doubt she’ll pick Obama. From a practical standpoint seems like she’d pick a Richardson or Blagovech (sp? minus recent scandals.
That’s an interesting question – who for Veep.