home
PA Debate: The Morning After | 215 comments (215 topical)
I've been thinking about that... (5.00 / 4) (#32)
by Maria Garcia on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 06:32:50 AM EST
...it may just be that all this time had elapsed since the last debate and in the interim their had been so many "flaps" and most of them involved Obama. And also now he is definitely the front runner. It was his turn. Still, it is rather amazing that they did it because if you listen to the coverage of the debate this morning on NBC, you would not have gotten any kind of picture of what happened.

[ Parent ]
Ditto NPR (5.00 / 2) (#36)
by Fabian on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 06:45:44 AM EST
They highlighted Clinton's Tuzla apology and her "Obama can win." reply.

[ Parent ]
I can't help thinking that it is not (5.00 / 1) (#54)
by MaxUS on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 07:42:46 AM EST
good news for Obama that they're focussing on Clinton. Doesn't that send the message to the soft support that what Clinton says is what's worth reporting.

Positive or negative coverage at this point is pretty much just noise except to note that when both candidates speak only Clinton's remarks are well...remarkable.

[ Parent ]

Selective Media Outrage (5.00 / 2) (#63)
by STLDeb on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 07:57:14 AM EST
Wow some of the media (link in article, huffpo, dkos, etc.) is going just BALLISTIC over this debate.  

I look at this through an unbiased lens (as I'm  on the McCain bandwagon), however that being said, I thought the debate was fair.  Hillary scored some points, in my opinion.  I was upset that ABC didn't follow up when Hillary brought up the Hamas connection with regard to Obama's church.

I did mention to my husband last night though that Barack is a VERY charismatic speaker and therein lies the problem for Hillary.  BUT, Hillary was definitely on her game last night and did a fantastic job.

I mean, come on, do these people not realize that Barack has totally gotten a free ride up until now.  

[ Parent ]

Right. Obama could read the phone (5.00 / 4) (#64)
by MarkL on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 07:59:01 AM EST
book and people would be mesmerized.
He gets away with a lot of muddled-headed answers because people aren't really listening to what he says.

[ Parent ]
Cultural differences? (5.00 / 2) (#70)
by Fabian on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 08:06:02 AM EST
I hear that preacher-style oratory and I immediately become suspicious, not comforted.  Perhaps you have to be raised to associate that style of speaking with warm fuzzies and not someone who wants you to feel more and think less.

[ Parent ]
Plus, the religious cadence is another (5.00 / 5) (#146)
by derridog on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 09:18:53 AM EST
example of Obama's fraudulence. He wasn't raised in the south. He is a very good mimic. Here he's miming MLK. Most of the things he says on the campaign trail, not to mention his policies, are lifted from others. He doesn't have a core set of beliefs, as far as I can tell from watching his actions and how he ducks and weaves when cornered to try to spin whatever he says in such a way as to placate his listeners.   Although Hillary sometimes does this too, i believe that she does have a core set of beliefs that she has been acting on   for the last 30+/- years.   I believe that because I'm a little older than her and have been watching her for the last 30 years.  Obama is just in this for himself. That's really the only subject he's comfortable with.

[ Parent ]
Is it any surprise he identifies (none / 0) (#160)
by Fabian on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 09:32:49 AM EST
so strongly with black preachers?  If Obama wasn't a politician, it's easy enough to see him as a minister.

[ Parent ]
You only think that because he speaks like a (none / 0) (#204)
by derridog on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 10:15:39 AM EST
preacher and he only does that because he is trying to associate himself with religion and with the Civil Rights movement and MLK, so he can get votes.

This doesn't make him likely to take up a religious vocation. The man is into power, not self-effacement and hard work on behalf of God and the poor and downtrodden.

[ Parent ]

Donnie McClurkin? (none / 0) (#211)
by Fabian on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 10:28:44 AM EST
Being an entertainer is not an easy way to make a living.  Being a preacher with his own flock and his own church - that's stability and at least some power.

Look at the mega churches.  Look at the Right Wing Power of God machines.  There's power in it.  There's money in it.  No doubt.

The truth is that there is more potential in politics than religion.  You are right there.

[ Parent ]

Speaking Style (5.00 / 2) (#159)
by cal1942 on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 09:29:52 AM EST
Interesting you should bring that up.  I was talking to a neighbor a few days ago, a good lifelong Democrat.  He told me that he and his wife watched an Obama speech and felt uneasy and couldn't quite figure out the style.  When I said preacher he shouted "that's it, a preacher."

Now these people attend services (Roman Catholic) weekly without fail. It's not that they're offended by religion, quite the contrary, it's that a politician using that style is completely out of place and in large measure insulting. It sounds more like a scam than a civic declaration.

[ Parent ]

Here is the problem with that thruth, Jeralyn (none / 0) (#130)
by Salt on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 09:05:09 AM EST
called it Obama appeared weak to many of us.  To be mesmerized by the predators or Us speech, only I Obama can change your feelings of helpless to wondrous hopefulness, you would need to start with a shared belief system a cultural pathology of dependence that many women have long ago rejected instead choosing self-efficacy a belief that our own contributions influence the events that affect their lives.

[ Parent ]
The deal is the debate was fairER (5.00 / 4) (#84)
by Virginian on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 08:24:20 AM EST
most of the questions were actually in bounds and relevant...the problem is that since the last debate, the "issues" raised, predominately surround Obama.

Was ABC supposed to ask irrelevant questions of HRC to counter balances those such as Ayers, Wright, etc. asked of Obama? I know that the Obama supporters would say yes (although not in the words of my construction)...but the HRC supporters by and large are saying..."this is what should have happened months ago, no more pass" or "see how it feels? You don't like it either."

[ Parent ]

I don't see his charisma at all (5.00 / 1) (#200)
by Just another person on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 10:09:50 AM EST
not in 2004 at the DNC, not in this campaign /shrug.  Hillary isn't that great a speaker either, but at least she has substance. And her debating style is far better.

[ Parent ]
The slowed down roller coaster won't loop de loop (none / 0) (#133)
by Ellie on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 09:07:27 AM EST
You can't have upwards and forward momentum forever; something's gotta give. I thought that once the avalanching combination of "news", a few quick and heady successes, a whack of donations and bandwaggoning -- all topped up with the slobbering excitement of a chance to bash Clinton AKA "The Clintons" -- stopped feeding each other, Obama's weaknesses would become apparent.

Lately, the news has had more soundbytes of him hemming and hawing than the earlier, daily, enthralling ones showing him yelling to screaming crowds (the kind of clips that spike into the background drone of the 'snooze' and make people stop and pay attention.)

Except for the most shameless Obama cheerleader, trying to pump up this dud of a candidate when it's leaking air is like the futile exercise of Michigan J. Frog's handler when he tries to take the act on the road. (Free beer and a shot anyone?)

I missed the whole debate and only caught some clips.

[ Parent ]

PA Debate: The Morning After | 215 comments (215 topical)

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft