home

Rendell Off The Record: Hillary Scored Decisive Victory

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Media
Posted on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:25:48 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

By Big Tent Democrat

Chris Bowers reports:

I went to the spin room after the debate . . . I passed Governor Ed Rendell just as he was finishing an interview. Afterwards, appearing very happy, he said the following to someone standing next to him, revealing not only what he thought of the debate, but also of the early questions at the debate:

Even an Obama Kool-Aid drinking guy like yourself has to admit she scored a decisive victory tonight. A decisive victory. A knockout blow. A decisive victory. A decisive victory. Even more decisive when they started asking real questions.

. . . It was a candid, off-the record moment that I was able to catch because I was only standing five feet away.

Interesting. Good reporting by Bowers.

< On An Unrelated Note | Another Hung Jury in Alleged Plot to Bomb Sears Tower >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Rendell Off The Record: Hillary Scored Decisive Victory | 104 comments (104 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Rendell endorsed Clinton (5.00 / 3) (#15)
    by nell on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:45:49 PM EST
    So, obviously he would be happy if she does well. No surprise there and it doesn't make him a big meanie. He is happy for his candidate. What is interesting here is that this is coming from the perspective of a man who knows his state, so perhaps it says something about how undecided folks in PA who watched the debate may have felt about it...

    And while I agree that ABC was over the top last night and we should protest this for all Dems, I do not feel bad for Obama. Clinton has gotten this kind of horrid media treatment at EVERY debate and nobody said a word, nobody on his side said a single word to defend her. So, please, excuse this Clinton supporter for being human and not jumping up to defend him after the way Obama, his campaign, and his supporters have treated Clinton and cheered as the media unfairly trashed her. And had the media been doing it's job all along, some of these issues would have come out earlier so it would not have seemed like they were piling on with all of these questions. Wright, bittergate, and Ayers were issues about judgement, though the flag question, I thought, was ridiculous.

    Obama had, what, 25 bad minutes? (5.00 / 1) (#60)
    by Cream City on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:17:52 PM EST
    out of the first 40 minutes of the debate, for the first time in a debate -- the first time even in this campaign.  If he can't handle that, how can he handle many rough hours, days, months from the Republican attacks already being readied?

    And let it not be forgotten that, once again, he went after Clinton first last night. . . .

    Parent

    sounds like Rendell was experiencing (5.00 / 1) (#81)
    by Kathy on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:54:50 PM EST
    the same elation I was upon watching the debate--thank God someone in the media is finally treating Obama like a democratic candidate.  I am not speaking to the rightness or wrongness, but to the sheer personal (albeit petty) joy I experienced watching Obama get a small dip of his toe into the putrid water they always throw on Clinton.

    And he didn't handle it well at all.  (and, haha, kind of funny that "they" use the kool-aid thing, too)

    Parent

    I dont know (none / 0) (#85)
    by jondee on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 02:05:40 PM EST
    how anyone could be "elated" after all that disgusting, warmongering, neocon-lite implied in some of the questions.

    Parent
    umm because it was long overdue? (none / 0) (#102)
    by moll on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 08:21:07 PM EST
    It is an unfortunate reality, that if you want to be leader of the free world, you have to demonstrate you're tough enough to handle the job description.

    If Obama is going to cry when ABC is mean to him, I don't want him to be the guy who deals with North Korea on my behalf.

    Just because you're black or a woman does not excuse you. This isn't grade school, where you are just trying to please a teacher. This is leadership, where if you're not ready for the job, entire nations suffer. Either you're fit to be the President or you're not. If you screw up a deal with Putin when the chips are down you can't just make everything right by giving a pretty speech the next day to make sure everyone understands it's not your fault.

    Parent

    I am elated too Kathy (none / 0) (#91)
    by BarnBabe on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 02:52:42 PM EST
    I know, I should be annoyed at ABC, but after watching all the other debates, this one at least gave me something to smile about. BTW, forget just against McCain, what if he is President. Everynight would be fodder for the late shows. These are the kinds of questions asked in press conferences all the time.

    Parent
    George strikes back at criticism! (5.00 / 3) (#28)
    by Universal on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:55:10 PM EST
    ABC News' George Stephanopolus has stepped up to defend his and his colleague's Charles Gibson's debate moderation last night, and rightfully so:

    http://www.villarrealsports.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=461#461

    Anyone who hasn't called ABC yet, I urge you to do so to help counteract the Obama astroturfers who are trying to vastly overstate their influence:

    1-818-560-1000

    Thanks. Let's reinforce ABC's great coverage.

    thumbs up

    Ahh... (none / 0) (#37)
    by Same As It Ever Was on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:59:01 PM EST
    Universal.  It was only a matter of time.

    Parent
    Let's not (none / 0) (#61)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:18:16 PM EST
    ABC was atrocious.

    Parent
    not to me.. I think this was the debate with a (5.00 / 3) (#67)
    by TalkRight on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:24:09 PM EST
    change!!
    as per MarcAmbinder

    Obama's going to be the next president of the United States, maybe. The most powerful person in the world. And questions about his personal associations, his character, his personal beliefs, his statements at private fundraisers -- the answers to these questions tell us a lot. Sometimes the questions are unfair but this ain't Pop Warner; the artificial distinction between politics, personality and policy doesn't exist in this league, and if you're uncomfortable with it, then change the rules or don't run for office.

    But let's stipulate, for a moment and for the sake of argument only, that the ABC moderators were tone-deaf: that doesn't excuse Obama's performance. (If you think the MSM is ornery, wait until president Obama confronts Congress!) Obama's supporters like to see him fight back against the Man... witness his quick response to "bittergate".....; tonight, it seemed as if he was surprised by the pace of the questions and all the air was gone from his answers. There was no fight.

    Parent

    ABC was atrocius... (5.00 / 2) (#70)
    by Chimster on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:26:03 PM EST
    for not doing this earlier. I would consider this a leveling of the playing field and less of a debate. I think their tabloid approach to a debate was good practice for Obama (assuming he's the nominee) in the GE.

    Parent
    ends the untested talking point? (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by Chimster on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:59:23 PM EST
    No, my friend, it's just the beginning.

    Yep, If She Doesn't Watch Out She Might (5.00 / 2) (#45)
    by MO Blue on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:05:09 PM EST
    just descend to Obama's low level but she definitely has a way to go yet.

    These questions came from MSM (5.00 / 2) (#47)
    by Chimster on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:08:31 PM EST
    NOT Hillary's campaign. Thius has to do with HIM, not Hillary. If he can't handle the heat, he should not accept any more debates.

    the questions came from Republicans named Hillary! (none / 0) (#104)
    by moll on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 08:47:46 PM EST
    From the LA Times - Obama isn't going to, because Hillary (the Republican?) is so dirty:

    "That was the rollout of the Republican campaign in November," he said at a town hall meeting in Raleigh, N.C. "They will try to focus on these issues that don't have anything to do with how you're paying your bills at the end of the month." Saying that he has shown "some restraint" in running against a rival Democrat, the Illinois senator said, "If the Republicans come at me, I will come right back at them.... I won't have as much restraint with the Republicans."

    Obama expressed annoyance at the debate -- "It was 45 minutes until we started talking about a single issue that matters to the American people," he said -- and said he just had to "let it kind of ..." as he brushed off his suit shoulder.

    At the town hall meeting, Obama said that rival, New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton "looked in her element, taking every opportunity to get a dig in there." Calling her campaign "a textbook Washington game," Obama said, "That's her right, to kind of twist the knife in a little bit."

    To laughter from the audience, Obama quipped, "It does not get much more fun than these debates." But he won applause when he said personal attacks would not work. "Not this time," he said, predicting voters are "not going to be confused."

    Asked if he would participate in an upcoming debate in North Carolina, Obama demurred, saying that the two Democrats have had so many debates that "I could deliver Sen. Clinton's lines. She could I'm sure deliver mine."

    Parent

    While I agree that ABC hit Obama (5.00 / 5) (#49)
    by Anne on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:09:22 PM EST
    on a number of issues that, taken together and for about 30 minutes, may have given rise to calls that it was not a fair debate, is there any value in assessing how Obama responded to it?  

    Life is not fair - I'm sure we can all attest to that.  The eventual president will be subjected to all manner of situations, some of which will be under extremely difficult conditions - and there won't be much fairness in how that person is treated.

    I'm not interested in a president who cannot handle adversity that is beyond his or her control, so the more I can see how these candidates respond now - when things are pretty benign - the better.

    Clinton knows her stuff - inside-out, upside-down and backwards.  She goes well beyond having memorized a position paper - she actually understands the stuff she's talking about, and can relate one issue to another, put it in the big picture in a way that ordinary people can understand.  She doesn't lecture - she converses.

    Ed Rendell was happy about seeing what so many of us see every time she gets an opportunity to talk about the issues.  ABC may not have covered itself in glory last night, and maybe it will prove to have been an overcorrection, but it's the first time Obama has been subjected to scrutiny at that level, and people needed to see it at least once.

    Exactly... (none / 0) (#58)
    by Salo on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:17:11 PM EST
    ...what will they say when Mccain removes Obama's entails live on TV?

    oh Unfair, and illegal.

    Parent

    Hillary seems to really know how to talk (none / 0) (#62)
    by stefystef on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:18:22 PM EST
    to people directly.  I noticed that she would look at the camera when she talked to the issues.  Obama looked away and down a lot.  Obama seems more like a professor, lecturing people and aloof.  

    Both seemed really annoyed with the baiting questions from George S. and Charlie.  That was the worst debate in all the debates this primary.  

    Obama needs more scrutiny like this because the Republicans will be merciless if he's the nominee (which is still up in the air).

    Parent

    Nice try (5.00 / 2) (#63)
    by Chimster on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:20:12 PM EST
    Everytime the MSM attacked Obama, he returned fire by attacking Clinton (baking cookies, Bill's pardons). This is who he really is and how he really works. If you like this type of "new politics", then by all means, keep supporting his nomination.

    In my opinion (5.00 / 4) (#66)
    by kmblue on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:23:16 PM EST
    Obama did not handle being The Target on live TV well.
    Clinton can and does handle it well, she's had a lot of practice.
    Obama's supporters can't handle their man being attacked at all.
    The hysteria on the blogs and the calls for the heads of Gibson and Steph (no matter if they were unfair last night) is proof of that.
    How many times have we been told that Hillary is a whiner by Obama supporters in the past?
    Where is the objectivity, I wonder?

    Indeed (none / 0) (#1)
    by andgarden on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:28:47 PM EST
    and while I think Rendell puffs up Hillary's success a bit much, I agree with the contours of what he says.

    I missed it. (none / 0) (#2)
    by halstoon on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:31:49 PM EST
    Perhaps my kool-aid is extra spiked at this point, but I saw an Obama victory and a bitter Clinton having to resort to GOP politics to stay in this thing.

    When Obama noted that President Clinton pardoned two of Ayers' cronies (after Clinton insisted the story continue to be looked into), she clammed up and chose to move on, knowing he had exposed her as being just as vulnerable to GOP attacks.

    When she had to say "yes, yes, yes" he can beat McCain, the SDs watching knew that they had the greenlight to come out for Obama.

    His use of Coburn to deflect the Ayers/Wright controversies was brilliant. I think he may do very well Tuesday, meaning he'll keep her to a single digit win.

    Extra spiked is the call (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:33:25 PM EST
    from where I sit. It was impossible for Obama to win that debater given the extreme bias against him.

    I think he lost the second half too, as Rendell says, even when the "real" questions came.

    Parent

    Intenational Herald Trib. says (none / 0) (#113)
    by oculus on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 02:39:48 PM EST
    Obama lost and Clinton won in a calm, collected manner.  Nagourney and Zeleny wrote the article.

    Parent
    You must have tuned out (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by abfabdem on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:51:47 PM EST
    before they got to the substantive questions where she knocked it out the park with specific answers on what she would do in response to each one.  Obama's answers were more vague and more like speeches.  This was also where the undecided monitor on the screen spiked upward for her repeatedly.

    Parent
    Extra spiked (5.00 / 2) (#21)
    by angie on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:51:49 PM EST
    First, Bill isn't running for President, Hillary is. Second, Obama claims this is dirty "guilt by association" tactics that aren't relevant, and then turns around and does the same thing to Hillary. Third, it isn't Presidential to throw blame onto others to deflect from your own actions.  Finally, as to the pardons themselves -- those two were convicted, served jail time, and repented.  That is vastly different from being "friendly" with a guy whose rich daddy got him off & who shows no remorse.

    Parent
    Yeah, I know. (none / 0) (#107)
    by halstoon on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 10:02:19 AM EST
    It'd be like if your brother got paid 200 grand to get his buddies some of those pardons. Just imagine when it's the sister whose prez and not the brother-in-law. Maybe pardons go down to $150k.

    Parent
    Shame The Undecided Voters Polled At The Debate (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by MO Blue on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:54:13 PM EST
    didn't agree with you. They though that Clinton won 50% to 23%.

    Parent
    Awesome (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by Democratic Cat on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    Maybe in November he'll only lose by single digits to McCain, and all us Dems will get to attend an inaugural ball.

    Hey, wait a minute...

    Parent

    Yeah, your Kool-Aid (1.00 / 0) (#24)
    by stefystef on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:52:45 PM EST
    is extra spiked with Obama-Love-Juice.  

    While most people say that the moderators sucked (especially George S. who HATES the Clintons after they basically gave him a career), most say that Hillary won that debate.  She handled herself better and when it came to policies, Obama said the same old same old, while Hillary was more direct and fresh.

    Hillary looked good (loved the haircut), Obama looked ashen and uppity.  

    I think the Obama-bots are using the Rovian technique of repetitive statements to convince themselves that their candidate, Obama, isn't cracking from the strain.

    His mask is slipping.

    Parent

    Wow, as an HRC (none / 0) (#31)
    by tamens on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:56:01 PM EST
    supporter, I think your use of the word "uppity" is absolutely uncalled for.  Because really, don't we all know what that means.

    Parent
    Uppity (5.00 / 3) (#53)
    by stefystef on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:13:57 PM EST
    Well, as an African-American woman, I know what the word "uppity" means to some people.  I use it for anyone who acts like they are too important to deal with others.  It has no racial, ethnic or sexual connotation to me.

    So you can be a White Gay Man from a trailer park and still be "uppity" in my book if you act like your stuff don't stink and you are too important to deal with me.

    Not everything is racial.  Sometimes people don't like you because you are unlikable.  

    Parent

    true (none / 0) (#86)
    by tamens on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 02:10:08 PM EST
    Context is everyting, and on the tubez color is non-existant.  

    If I, a white woman, referred to a black person as uppity, I'd get my ass handed to me, and rightly so.  If I told my son, wow, aren't you feeling uppity today, thats telling him to back off.  Context.

    Parent

    It's the Clintonistas who are employing (none / 0) (#108)
    by halstoon on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 10:05:35 AM EST
    Rovian tactics. As if her past associations will not be brought up just b/c they were gone over before.

    She defended the Black Panthers. Bill pardoned lots of scumbags. Her brother got paid. She stole docs from Rose. If Obama really was playing dirty like her, you'd be hearing this stuff from his camp. You're not. But she does think we should beat the Ayers connection to death. What a shocker...

    Parent

    OK (none / 0) (#9)
    by Marvin42 on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:43:08 PM EST
    He got caught contradicting himself on taxes in 2 minutes, he stumbled on most of the tough answers, and this was the "light" version of the McCain debate in preview.

    So SDs are lining up to come out for him why?

    P.S. I am sure on the pardon she decided NOT to take the bait of bringing Bill back into the discussion. Notice his complete absence?

    Parent

    Robert Reich was apparently convinced. (none / 0) (#109)
    by halstoon on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 10:06:54 AM EST
    How many SD endorsements will that make this week? 8? Who's come out for her lately??

    Parent
    ah yes, a single digit win for Hill is a loss (none / 0) (#10)
    by angie on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:43:10 PM EST
    in Obamaland -- what a happy place that must be. /snark

    Parent
    It most certainly is. (none / 0) (#22)
    by Faust on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:51:58 PM EST
    That's just a a reality. If he loses by 5 or less it's a win for him. 6-9 will be viewed as status quo. Status quo is bad bad bad for her. She needs double digit. That's not Obama land that's just a fact.

    Parent
    Fact? You use that word a lot, but (none / 0) (#33)
    by angie on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:56:27 PM EST
    I don't think it means what you think it means.

    Parent
    Spin ... spin ... spin ... (none / 0) (#74)
    by Robot Porter on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:32:50 PM EST
    Faust,

    If Obama gets the nomination and only loses the GE by 5% will he be sworn in as President?

    A win is a win.  A loss is a loss.  Everything else is spin.

     

    Parent

    If she can't blow him out in PA (none / 0) (#110)
    by halstoon on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 10:08:09 AM EST
    there is something wrong in Clintonland. I know your rose-colored glasses won't see that, but it's true.

    Parent
    That is plain weird (none / 0) (#3)
    by digdugboy on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:32:44 PM EST
    How could Rendell or anybody else characterize this as a knockout blow? It will have negligible effect on the race in Pennsylvania and elsewhere. The overarching sentiment is that the debate was pure crap. Who was he speaking to at the time? Pure spin.

    I think he he meant (none / 0) (#5)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:33:55 PM EST
    within the confines of the debate.

    Parent
    Probably right (none / 0) (#6)
    by digdugboy on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:38:01 PM EST
    but the weird thing, at least the way Bowers reports it, is the elation Rendell seemed to be experiencing while giving his opinion. Private elation about a debate that will have zero bearing on the outcome of the race is what is weird.

    Parent
    Rendell really loves this stuff (5.00 / 2) (#8)
    by andgarden on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:39:09 PM EST
    in another life he'd be a blogger.

    Parent
    laugh out loud. n/t (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by Faust on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:54:16 PM EST


    Parent
    You think it will have zero impact. (none / 0) (#11)
    by MarkL on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:44:19 PM EST
    we will see.

    Parent
    No effect? Don't kid yourself (none / 0) (#12)
    by goldberry on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:44:23 PM EST
    My sources in PA say they are paying attention to every word.  Maybe he can lose by 10.  By 20?  I don't think so.  

    Parent
    I just heard on the radio (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by abfabdem on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:52:29 PM EST
    that 10 million people watched it, more than any other debate they have had so far.

    Parent
    First debate not on cable, I think? (nt) (none / 0) (#68)
    by Cream City on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:24:10 PM EST


    Parent
    What do you mean? (none / 0) (#18)
    by nell on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:48:50 PM EST
    Did the Clinton campaign think this would make a difference with may voters? I hope, I hope!

    From my calls with undecideds early this week, it did seem that people were open to watching the debate to help them make a decision, but who knows whether people really bother to tune in. Also, it is possible that the debate will have the kind of backlash that they had when Clinton was hammered.

    Parent

    Yes, what do you mean? (none / 0) (#25)
    by angie on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:53:30 PM EST
    Does your source think the debate helped or hurt Hillary? I'm thinking helped based on the result of the ABC focus group.

    Parent
    "private elation" (none / 0) (#114)
    by diogenes on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 04:34:20 PM EST
    You really think that Rendell didn't mean to be "overheard"?

    Parent
    Of course it's spin (none / 0) (#40)
    by stefystef on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:00:20 PM EST
    What do you think this is?  Crickets?
    This is politics, the ultimate contact sport.
    Rendell is a Clinton supporter.  He's spinning as fast as Axelrod and Ted Kennedy can spin a pity party for Obama (oh, ABC beat up on Barry- They must be racists).  

    The debate was crap because of the moderator.  Hillary (and Obama to some extent) rose above it.  Hillary was stronger in the debate.  It's something Obama-bots can't handle.

    Parent

    Cricket is actually a pretty rough game (5.00 / 1) (#75)
    by Jim J on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:33:06 PM EST
    For example, it's not illegal for the bowler to aim for the batter with intent to injure. It's the whole stopping-for-teatime thing that's deceiving.

    Parent
    Politics is about more than spin (none / 0) (#52)
    by digdugboy on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:13:45 PM EST
    This debate should have been much more than it was. Your reference to "obamabots" is stupid.

    Declaring a victor in a debate like that should be completely meaningless. It's almost like declaring who was the victor of a nuclear war after the entire planet has been destroyed.

    Parent

    Okay, I deplore 40 minutes last night (5.00 / 1) (#71)
    by Cream City on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:26:21 PM EST
    just as I deplore many hours of previous debates that were not about we-the-people's issues and all about most so-called "progressive" blogs' issues with Clinton, which they have hammered on her about for thousands of hours.

    We're agreed, then.

    Parent

    I don't trust anything Bowers says (none / 0) (#7)
    by Edgar08 on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:38:02 PM EST
    This is just fodder for the movement to portray Clinton and her surrogates as big bad meanies.
    Meanies> MEANIES?!! (none / 0) (#16)
    by goldberry on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:46:56 PM EST
    What's to mean about telling it like it is?  I think Ed Rendell was having fun getting inside Bowers' head and screwing with his navigation system.  Jeez, we've become such wimps.  This is what politicians do.  There's nothing in what Rendell said that was mean.  He's just having fun.  

    Parent
    People say they hate that political crap- (none / 0) (#87)
    by Kathy on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 02:16:42 PM EST
    mudslinging and the stuff.  They have been saying they hate it since the first presidential election the US ever had.  And still, it continues, because it is effective and everyone who says they don't listen to it and hate it actually lets it penetrate.  

    It's the same reason I know about Britney Spears though I never read those magazines and never watch those programs--it just penetrates, and it stays in your head.

    I'm curious to see what the average folk think about Obama saying we still need affirmative action to help poor white kids get into good schools.

    Parent

    I loved the debate last night (none / 0) (#13)
    by Chimster on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:44:42 PM EST
    Was it unfair to Obama? Perhaps. But it was so enjoyable to see him sweat a little.

    The Real Obama (none / 0) (#44)
    by stefystef on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:04:21 PM EST
    was starting to come out and Barry wasn't happy about it.
    I guess there will not be a North Carolina debate... bummer.  I wanted Hillary to put the finishing touches on Obama.

    She should go ahead to North Carolina and have her own debate/town meeting.  Let the people of NC talk to her directly.  She will shine.  Hillary is much better on the one-on-one than Obama.

    Hillary seemed energized by the debate, but pissed that the issues were ignored for discussion on non-issues (American Flag and patriotism question??  What foolishness).

    Now there will be more cries from the Obama-bots to make Hillary quit.  She's ain't quitting people.  Get use to it.

    Parent

    Obamabots and Hillarybots (none / 0) (#54)
    by digdugboy on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:15:16 PM EST
    That's so useful and cute!

    </snark>

    Parent

    real questions.. (none / 0) (#14)
    by TalkRight on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:44:43 PM EST
    Its is interesting the press is slamming ABC for taking 40 min before they asked the real questions but on their conference call question they pressed the Clinton camp the very same (unreal questions) like her Scre*'it remarks or Clinton's pardon!!

    Obama's Drive By (5.00 / 3) (#17)
    by Chimster on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:48:04 PM EST
    Yes, he's a politician. His drive-by swipe at Bill and Hillary about Bill's pardoning was a kitchen sink. Glad to see he's above all that type of attacks.

    Parent
    And don't forget the cookies (5.00 / 2) (#32)
    by abfabdem on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:56:16 PM EST
    He decries the focus on trivial matters then brings up her comment about baking cookies!!

    Parent
    and he never goes negative... (only the adds are ) (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by TalkRight on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:15:51 PM EST
    Obama Going Negative? DISCREDITED Mailer Hits Clinton On Trade AGAIN?

    Sen. Barack Obama's camp is sending out mailers in Pennsylvania directly taking on Sen. Hillary Clinton for her position on trade.

    The piece tiptoes the line between position contrast and general attack, as the Obama campaign cites several news items and quotes that are subject to different interpretations.

    For example, the mailer cites a Newsday article from September 2006 concerning Clinton's perceived support for NAFTA. Aspects of that article, however, were retracted because it included the since-discredited line that the Senator said the trade agreement was a "boon." ... even Newsday offered that the use of their piece in a political context could be misleading.


    Parent

    I was not able to retrieve that one from the trash (none / 0) (#90)
    by BarnBabe on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 02:40:38 PM EST
    But I got two more that I did get and brought them to work. There are all the Clinton Said parts that everyone knows. But he has the While Hillary was praising NAFTA, Obama opposed it in the Chicago Tribune, 04.He also has the Gas line one saying he never took money from oil company pacs or DC lobbyist and shows the gas lines of the 70's (Carter).(Bet he does not know that it is the Wall Street Traders (Goldman Sach)who are driving the prices. Someone needs to tell him) He has nice pictures of Hillary on them and he is shaking hands with the typical you know what.

    Then there is one from Hillary about Obama and Nafta saying it is all on the Record. Quotes from BHO in Sept 04,A/P. Herald Review, and Feb 08, CTV.It is more positive looking and gives 6 points on her plan. There is a lovely picture of her looking relaxed and smiling. She includes a thumbnail one of him.I am keeping them until after next Tuesday.

    I love Rendell. I hope she doesn't steal him away for her cabinet. I like the sound of that. Her cabinet. My Sweet Day Dreams for sure. But then believing is the magic that makes dreams come true.

    Parent

    Obama ought to be asked about how (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by Cream City on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:29:28 PM EST
    how would use the presidential pardon, after people have served their sentences and publicly expressed remorse -- unlike Dohrn and Ayers.  (Interesting to me that the talk keeps being about Ayers and not about spouse Dohrn, also a WU accomplice and also unrepentant, as in my part of the country, from which she comes, her name still brings quite a reaction from past prowar types -- as well as antiwar types who saw what the extremists did to the movement.)

    Parent
    Exactly (none / 0) (#29)
    by abfabdem on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:55:21 PM EST
    Ed Schulz just did this on his radio program today.  First he complains about the non-issue questions and then goes into a big spiel on the Weathermen and Clinton pardons (forgetting of course to mention Ayers' post 9/11 remarks in this supposedly definitive explanation of the story).  (He also said he did not watch it.)

    Parent
    Ed Schulz (none / 0) (#46)
    by stefystef on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:05:09 PM EST
    sucks.  Period.

    Parent
    Is that all there is (none / 0) (#19)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:49:15 PM EST
    to the Chris Bowers 'report'? Slender.

    The only winner last night... (none / 0) (#30)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:55:35 PM EST
    ...was the GOP, their media enablers and J. Sidney McSame III.

    And yet you all seem to be cheering on this sort of thing.

    From his radio show (via ThinkProgress)

    HANNITY: There are two questions that I don't think anybody has asked Barack Obama, and I don't know if this is going to be on your list tomorrow. One is - the only time he's ever been asked about his association with Bill Ayers, the unrepentant terrorist from the Weather Underground who on 9/11 of all days in the New York Times was saying "I don't regret setting bombs. I don't think we did enough." When asked about it by the Politico, David Axelrod said that they have a friendly relationship, and that they had done a number of speeches together and that they sat on a board together. Is that a question you might ask?

    STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, I'm taking notes right now.

    Let's see, a Clinton insider asking questions suggested by Hannity.  Sad, but not at all surprising.

    You lose all credibility (5.00 / 3) (#48)
    by angie on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:08:47 PM EST
    when you describe George S. as a "Clinton insider" -- they had a huge fallout years ago -- anyone who has paid the least bit attention to politics knows that he is the opposite of an "insider" vis-a-vis the Clintons.

    Parent
    Apparently... (none / 0) (#50)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:13:01 PM EST
    You are SUCH a knowledgable insider that you're the ultimate authority on their relationship?  

    Somehow I doubt that very much.

    Parent

    Heh (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:17:46 PM EST
    Um, it was pretty well reported but you are right, no one knows FOR SURE if he is a Clinton insider. But you DID make the allegation.

    Since you are NOT an insider, we can assume you have no idea.

    Parent

    You can assume... (none / 0) (#78)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:43:51 PM EST
    ...until you're blue in the face, Mr. East Coast elitist.

    You don't work closely with someone for many years--to the extent of getting glowing praise in their book and not keep some sort of attachment to them, even with this supposed "falling out".  

    People have differences with each other all of time but in most cases it doesn't change the underlying relationship.

    Parent

    Guess Bill Richardson is a Clinton insider too... (none / 0) (#95)
    by Maria Garcia on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 03:37:14 PM EST
    ...he's a stealth bomb in the Obama compaign just waiting to go off.

    Parent
    And... (none / 0) (#98)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 06:59:38 PM EST
    ...which networkdoes Bill work for again?

    Parent
    ...okay then Dick Morris. (none / 0) (#100)
    by Maria Garcia on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 07:08:05 PM EST


    Parent
    Does Dick Morris (none / 0) (#101)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 07:35:15 PM EST
    ...get to moderate debates and get his questions spoon fed to him by Sean Hannity?

    Parent
    I knew you wouldn't disappoint me...LOL. (5.00 / 0) (#103)
    by Maria Garcia on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 08:27:05 PM EST


    Parent
    I've enjoyed it too much to do that! (5.00 / 1) (#105)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 09:17:57 PM EST


    Parent
    You mean like you assume (none / 0) (#96)
    by angie on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 04:17:11 PM EST
    that I was presenting myself as a knowledgeable insider when I informed you of a very public and extremely nasty falling out between George S & the Clintons that was reported ad nauseum?  Or when you assume BTD is a an East Coast elitist.
    It seems to me that you are the only one making assumptions which are based on nothing but what you want to be true.  And you know what they say when you assume. . .

    Parent
    Now... (none / 0) (#84)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 02:03:32 PM EST
    ...instead of picking nits, perhaps you'd like to address my point as to who the real winner was last night and the fact that the moderator(s) were taking suggestions from frickin' Sean Hannity.

    Parent
    Is there any question (none / 0) (#79)
    by jondee on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:50:15 PM EST
    now whether he's an insider in the Iran-scare mongering campaign?


    Parent
    Heh (none / 0) (#80)
    by jondee on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:50:56 PM EST


    Parent
    ha (none / 0) (#35)
    by Nasarius on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:57:29 PM EST
    Sounds about right to me.

    He was on the Colbert Report last night, and did a great job. Usually when guests try to counter-snark it's just uncomfortable, but Rendell even had Stephen laughing.

    Clinton on Colbert tonight! (none / 0) (#88)
    by Kathy on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 02:18:19 PM EST


    Parent
    Rendell is giving mixed messages (none / 0) (#36)
    by waldenpond on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 12:59:01 PM EST
    He might get caught up in the debate performance but the media focuses on his other statements.  The all Obama channel had Chuck Todd on this morning.  They were discussing how Clinton surrogates are too honest.  Listing Rendell, Barney Frank and now Terry McAuliffe in Oregon saying when asked when will it end?  'We'll have a nominee in June.'

    They continue to discuss Clinton's strength... From Mika of all people... she's trapped, if she goes after him, she's negative, but match it up against her people. eh... thy will be done in June.

    Too bad no one (none / 0) (#39)
    by jondee on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:00:02 PM EST
    including our favorite small town gal-of-the-people can bring themselves to mention the fact that the world's No. 1 producer of pre-9/11 "fine arts students" already has a nuclear detternant capable of delivering a more than adequate "massive responce" to an attack.

    But, broaching that inconvenient little detail might lessen the Iran-scare mongering, wouldnt it?

    you lol crack me up (none / 0) (#51)
    by Salo on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:13:06 PM EST
    This has NOTHING to do with clinton.

    Obama is facing these attackls now because ABC reckon Clinton is a spent force.

    Modertes and conservatives will flock to McCain after hearing about Obama's ties to Rezko and Auchi and Ayers and wright.

    Democrats couldn't care less if Obama has a bit of radical hauteur--moderates will abandon Obama as the press heats up the cross examination.

    There are about 10 lies that obama has already told that will sink him in November, and he keeps saying them as if they were fact.  When he's brooght to account for what he's said he'll be massacred by mccain.

    It must be me (none / 0) (#55)
    by madamab on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:15:34 PM EST
    but I'm missing the point of this post. Is Rendell's being excited over Hillary's strong performance really that noteworthy? Or is it the use of the words "Obama Kool-Aid drinker" that we are supposed to note?

    Not snarking, just not getting it.

    Well (none / 0) (#77)
    by nell on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:41:50 PM EST
    Rendell uses the term Obama kool-aid drinker on air too, especially in reference to Olberman =)

    Parent
    Really? Now I like Rendell (none / 0) (#89)
    by madamab on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 02:21:02 PM EST
    even more. :-)

    Parent
    Missed that Obama went after her first (none / 0) (#65)
    by Cream City on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:22:50 PM EST
    did you?  Dragging up from the past that he so says we ought not to talk about the tea-and-cookies crap she faced then, too.  But it wasn't other Dems doing it to her then, as his campaign has done from the start.  

    Wow, there was strong praise from (none / 0) (#76)
    by 1jpb on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:38:11 PM EST
    campaign supporters in the spin room.  You mean Rendell was talking to someone in the spin room and he (just about) managed to make "victory" every fourth word of his statement.  I wonder if that has ever happened in any other spin room in the history of politics?  Rendell's so called off the record hyperbole about knock outs was the embodiment of spin.

    For the record, I'm on the west coast.  So, I saw all the online reaction (including sort of following the live blog here.) before I saw the debate.  Maybe my views are unusual because I knew the attacks were coming, but I really think BO did quite well.  If he had smiled more he would have been perceived as doing a great job, but he doesn't have HRC's "skill" when it comes to manufacturing joy when answering probing questions.  For me, I prefer the less phony demeanor.

    Regarding the content, I think it was prudent for BO to leave some wiggle room on the issues, in particular listening to the military for tactics in Iraq, and some limited flexibility on taxes.  I agree that HRC abandoned nuance in favor of definitive statements.  She's got nothing to lose so she can make all kinds of promises, even if they could be problematic in the GE or later for an elected president.  And her new plan to have some sort of NATO/umbrella thing in the Middle East didn't seem to consider the problematic implications.  The time when HRC did try to leave wiggle room was on the gun issue in DC, but she wasn't very successful, she flailed more than BO did on any of his questions.

    Bottom line: BO did a good job.  Clearly, the moderators and HRC were piling on.  I think that the producers were joining in too: for some reason we saw a lot of shots of HRC supporters; Chelsea in particular.  And, HRC was fine, especially if you like political fratricide and throwing out prudent/nuanced answers because you're behind and you're grasping at straws.

    My grades:
    BO  B
    ABC  F (they were unfair to HRC a few times too)
    HRC  C

     

    Yes, you agree with (none / 0) (#82)
    by waldenpond on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 01:59:48 PM EST
    media who stated several times that it was bad for candidate Clinton to be firm (as voters want) and for Obama to be wishy-washy (which voters don't want.)  Yes, in the media world, Presidential now means dodging the issues and the talking heads EXACT words, which you are now using 'wiggle room' 'umbrella' 'problematic'....wait a minute... actually your whole third paragraph is word for word from MSNBC.  Never mind.

    Unfortunately for you, even MSNBC said he blew it (defensive, angry, righteous).  Ouch.

    Parent

    Read HRC's and Bush 41's lips....... n/t (none / 0) (#83)
    by 1jpb on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 02:02:41 PM EST


    Parent
    Undecided Voters At The Debate Gave The Win To HRC (none / 0) (#97)
    by MO Blue on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 04:22:59 PM EST
    50 % to 23%.  Guess they saw things differently then you did.

    Parent
    And she did.. (none / 0) (#93)
    by Salt on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 03:32:42 PM EST


    Hillary Made Her BEST Case Ever (none / 0) (#94)
    by mcdtracy on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 03:35:00 PM EST
    Hillary showed her political style to it's best advantage.

    She's so good at policy and in-fighting.

    But the problem for me is that those issue help don't offset her polling negatives with voters. They can't empathize or relate to her and what she is willing to say. They hate the negative campaigning.

    It's a core democrat value.

    She got the greatest bump from her showing human qualities... choking up and treating Obama with respect in previous debates. Now she's going back to the in-fighting approach. The steel fist came out.

    Halstoon (none / 0) (#111)
    by Jeralyn on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 10:33:31 AM EST
    Stop the personal insults against Hillary supporters. I'm deleting those comments.

    Tell me... (none / 0) (#112)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 10:40:50 AM EST
    ...why this person gets a warning and you feel the need to delete my post and rating without so much as a peep?


    Parent
    Rendell Off The Record: Hillary Scored Decisive Victory | 104 comments (104 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment