Story here. Wow, I realized this presidental campaign cycle was off to an early start, but still! This is the earliest candidates’ debate ever! And the Pubs’ will be the second-earliest.
Anyway, all eight announced Dem candidates (Clinton, Obama, Edwards, Richardson, Dodd, Biden, Kucinich and Gravel) will be participating. Let’s see how it goes.
On talk radio this morning they mentioned that while this debate is earlier than in the past, it’s not that early. Last time around the first dem debate was in May. This time it’s in April.
So, the threshold of when a presidential campaign actually begins is creeping earlier than ever, it’s not that much earlier than last time around.
Similarly, there is actually one less candidate in this debate than in the first debate last time around. I had been thinking that the field was unusually crowded.
I would say, however, that every candidate this time around is in it to win it. (Or at least in it to have a shot at the VP spot!) Last time we had Sharpton who was in it to get some name recognition, and Braun who was in it to counteract Sharpton. These candidates are a bit more serious. Obama isn’t just a token black candidate. He’s a serious candidate who also happens to be black.
I’ll watch the debate. I think it will be more serious than the early dem debates last time around, and thus less fun to watch.
It will be a good show. I look for them to hit Hillary hard on Iraq over and over again. I wouldn’t say that they all have a chance. There is definitely a top tier of Hillary and Obama, a middle tier of Edwards and Richardson, and a bottom tier of Biden, Dodd, Kuchinich, and Gravel. As a result of the debate, it’s conceivable that someone could move up a tier and much less likely that someone drops a level. They’ll probably end up about where they started in the polls.
Crap, I forgot to DVR it. Hopefully, MSNBC will do a repeat instead of just non-stop punditry…
Seems like no one really gained any ground, except insofar as the leaders gain ground simply by not making any mistakes. I think Bill Richardson isn’t going to propel himself into the top three with a debate performance like that. Gravel came off like your slightly crazy grandpa.
That never fazed Ross Perot! 
Hmm, I wonder who the modern political equivalent of Stockdale is. Perhaps an actual robot. We have the technology.
Presumably the Pub candidates will criticize Bush’s handling of Iraq as well. That got me thinking, has there ever been another situation in which candidates from both parties disagreed so strongly with the sitting President?
McCain won’t. (Will he?)
I missed the first 30 mins, but I found the quality of the questions distinctly unimpressive. Who is your favorite supreme court judge? What the hell does that tell me about a candidate? I can draw some inferences, but any conclusion I draw from the answer will be based on my own filter of how I perceive the named justice. It tells me nothing about what the candidates governing philosophy is.
How would you pay for your health care plan? How about what is your health care plan (how its paid for is a subset of that question). God. Could our media be any more frivolous?
He did on The Daily Show last night.
Like three times.
That would be encouraging, if McCain were not far, far too old and (more importantly) too psychotic-conservative to make a decent presidential candidate.
As it is, the best viable alternative is Teh Hillary. 
Everyone and their dog will say the Iraqi war was mismanaged. The sticking point is that McCain still thinks it was a good idea to invade and wants us to stay there into the indefinite future. I’m not voting for anyone who thinks Iraq was a good idea.
I was afraid these debates were going to be boring without Sharpton this time around, but Gravels rants are really making up for it.
I thought MSNBC did a poor job. The questions were uneven and the top tier candidates got too much time. The hardball questions favored Hillary, she got to field a question she knew was coming and had rehearsed beforehand. Edwards got to talk about his haircut and poor Richardson fielded a very tough question on cutting Gonzales extra slack because he is Hispanic. The question about drug testing welfare recipients was moronic as was the “who’s your fave SC justice?”
Hillary seemed a bit robotic to me, Obama wasn’t as nimble as he should have been, Edwards was unimpressive. Biden impressed me more than anyone else and I thought Dodd did well. Richardson didn’t seem to help his cause much and Kuchinich and Gravel were just there for comic relief. In fairness to Gravel, though he appeared to be auditioning for a run with Ross Perot, he said a lot of things that need to be said. The US for years has grossly overestimated threats from abroad and it’s about time someone said there isn’t any bogeyman.
You know, reviewing all his debate statements on YouTube, he doesn’t come off as crazy. Testy, but not crazy. Possibly the sanest one on the podium. And looking at his political views, he wouldn’t make a bad POTUS.
Except he’s too old. 77. That’s six years older than McCain!
Piffle. He’s showing none of the signs of dotage that Ronnie had, and neither his age nor McCain’s bothers me, which is more than I can say for Ronnie or Bob Dole.