2008 Democratic Candidates: Up Close, Unfiltered and Uncomfortable

Posted by Adam Howard at 4:02 PM on August 4, 2007.

I just saw the most entertaining 2008 Democratic debate so far.

Now maybe it was more exciting because I saw it in person but as many others pointed out at the Yearly Kos convention, this afternoon's debate was more like how the CNN/YouTube debate should have been. There was more audience interaction, a less obtrusive moderator and the candidates really had to be on their toes (they had to deal with boos on a regular basis). Before I go through the debate blow by blow, here are some quick thoughts on who appeared:

Hillary Clinton

By far the most polarizing attendee at the convention. She ruffled many feathers before she even arrived when an announcement was made that she would only be appearing in the candidates' forum not in an individual "breakout session" as had been previously promised. Now in her defense, this was supposedly communicated to the convention's organizers far in advance but as we all know politics is often about perception. It was perceived as yet another slight from a candidate seen as adversarial to the netroots, the Obama campaign pounced and suddenly Clinton was able to make to time to appear, albeit before the debate and in what I am told was a "very corporate, staged" sort of manner (but more on that later).

As in all previous debates, Clinton was very prepared, well spoken etc. but she really wasn't ready for this audience and generally came off as arrogant--as if she had the nomination in the bag and was simply paying her respects to the other candidates and to the audience. She got almost universal bad reviews from the people I spoke to. She likes to make it about Bush, never criticizes American policy or society in any way. It comes across as a message purely meant for a general election audience but what she fails to recognize is that she hasn't necessarily won over her own base yet.

John Edwards

In his case, I felt the pendulum swung way in the other direction from Hillary. While at first he was the most energetic and crowd pleasing of the candidates as the debate wore on he began to seem like he was simply pandering to what he knew was a left wing crowd and it appeared that he was making a lot of promises he couldn't back up in the hopes of just getting a big crowd response. His desperation showed and it also alienated some attendees.

Barack Obama

It was his birthday today, plus this is home town and it showed. He was a little shaky on his first question but then he seemed to settle comfortably in between Edwards and Clinton, not literally but philosophically. He took his time with his responses and had the audience on his side consistently. But what distinguished him from Clinton and Edwards was that his responses were often surprising, he would often raise issues that you just don't hear about or if you do you don't hear them expressed in this way. He seems more confident and he's chosen, I think, a clever response when his judgment is questioned--which is that he rails against the "conventional wisdom" on foreign policy. It's a dig at Hillary but not as obvious as some of Edwards can be. He was clearly the biggest hit with the audience.

Chris Dodd

But not far behind was Chris Dodd who garnered a lot of good will with convention attendees with his terrific appearance on "The O'Reilly Factor" where he defended the progressive blogosphere against O'Reilly's ridiculous attacks. When I watch him though I feel a sense of pity. He often has to follow a candidate like Edwards or Obama who he isn't that fundamentally different from but who's the bigger star or bigger attraction and he doesn't have much to build on. When he does grab a hold of a point that wins over the crowd he seems stunned to be receiving any kind of adulation at all so he lets his voice rise more and more until it becomes this indecipherable shout that can just be confusing and a little grating. Still, he seems like a strong VP candidate right now, not a strong dark horse candidate.

Bill Richardson

Richardson seems to be filling that fourth choice role, at least that is if the polls are to be believed. Richardson had volunteers handing out cookies before the debate which I must admit weren't very good but I won't hold that against him. Richardson had some good lines and moments throughout but his "I was a governor" routine is just about as stale now as Hillary's "I've lived through this" routine. You've got to come with something more than experience to win over people. John Kerry was one of the most experienced people to run for president in the last 30 years but it didn't matter to voters.

Mike Gravel

Gravel was pretty subdued compared to other debates but he did make a lot of really tough, savage criticisms not so much on any candidate specifically but on politicians and our electoral system in general. I couldn't help being a little irritated to hear someone who's been a politician for far longer than I've been alive lecturing me on how corrupt and evil politicians are. I would love to ask Gravel why he chose this moment to get involved in politics again. Maybe it was the war--I've never heard an answer on this. I'd like to see him running for Senate again in Alaska where he could easily beat a Ted Stevens. Still, the man makes good points and he keeps the others honest so what can you do?

Dennis Kucinich

Which leads me to Kucinich who is definitely unafraid to call the other candidates out on their hypocrisy and spinelessness especially on the war. Still, he may have had the fewest real standout moments at the debate. He gets very worked up and passionate about the war and to a lesser extent health care and he got a big response to a quip about impeaching Bush and Cheney but for a candidate who probably represents the audiences' beliefs more than any other candidate onstage he didn't seem to provoke too much passion.

NOW as for the debate...

It was moderated pretty ably considering he's a print journalist by the New York Times' Matt Bai and was comprised by questions written by Yearly Kos attendees. A few times questions were asked by audience members themselves and the rest were handled by Bai and a co-host, Joan McCarter. Candidates had 90 seconds to respond to direct questions and 45 for follow ups but this was largely, thankfully discarded early on and having the candidates sitting instead of standing behind podiums gave the whole thing a much more natural vibe.

Obama, Edwards and Dodd probably received the loudest ovations. Hillary got a smattering of applause and groans and then there was a small group of Hillary volunteers who appeared to have been shipped in who would go ape at random moments during the debate when Clinton made a remotely well-received remark. The debate was broken up in three sections. The first focused on domestic policy, the second foreign and the final on their personal philosophy and experience.

Right of the bat, the first question wasn't nice, polite or obvious.

McCarter took Richardson to task for saying he'd use the anti-Miranda rights Justice Byron White as a model for his Supreme Court appointments. Richardson smiled, but also seemed to acknowledge with his body language that this was not going to be like any previous debate. He said, "I screwed that one up" and got a big laugh

He went on to say he would ask any Supreme Court contender, "do you consider Roe v. Wade to be civil, settled law?" and if the answer was no, he wouldn't appoint them. He also said he felt the Supreme Court would be the most careful, important appointment a president could make.

Dodd said he wouldn't support any other Bush Supreme Court nominee for the duration of his presidency because the president doesn't appoint people who uphold the constitution and he said nothing has disturbed him more about the Bush White House than their "trampling all over the constitution."

Hillary Clinton was asked about what she meant when she referred to "battle scars " from her attempts to reform health care in '93 and '94

Hillary called the fact that there were 44 uninsured Americans a disgrace and she highlighted the idea (that Edwards would later dispute) that all the candidates onstage were in favor of universal health care and that "universal health care is an American value worth fighting for." She said she couldn't tell you all the mistakes she made in the 90s in ninety seconds but she said that you do need a strategy not just a plan in order to fight the members of congress and the insurance companies who will be putting a lot of money behind spreading lies and myths about what universal health care would mean. She called this her "highest domestic priority."

Obama's first question was on budget deficits

He seemed a little rocky at first but he scored a big applause line where he said one major step would be to "not spend 275 million dollars every day in Iraq." Obama is learning quickly that he needs to keep hammering away on Iraq especially when he's right next to Sen. Clinton and he seems to have her beat on this issue every time or at least he did with the audience who respect his being against the war from the beginning stance.

On health care he made it clear he would tolerate some deficits because he was not going "to shortchange children on education or neglect Americans without insurance."

When the deficit question turned to Edwards he broke out in what felt like a really energetic newly formed stump speech. He said, "This is a room filled with people who want change" and said that this election should be about which candidate will really bring about change. He had a decent dig on Clinton who had implied that part of her strategy to promote universal health care would involve reaching out to the medical industry.

Edwards said, "I don't think oil and and insurance companies or going to compromise and give up their power. You need someone who had fought these people their entire lives and has beaten them." The audience went nuts and it became clear from then on that a distinction was forming. Clinton's attitude seemed to be "you don't like me, I don't like you--but we're going to have to work together because I'm the inevitable nominee." Edwards seemed to be coming from a place of, "I know what you want to hear and I'm going to say it because I desperately need your vote and I desperately need to start making this feel like a real race." But I digress.

Richardson followed Edwards bombast with more droning on about he'd balanced five budgets while governor of New Mexico and one point drew some hisses and boos for calling for a balanced budget amendment but then he salvaged himself by saying he would go after corporate greed.

A question about the effects of media consolidation-which you'd never hear at a traditional debate came next

Chris Dodd got a huge ovation here, as expected, by mentioning his stand-off with Bill O'Reilly in defense of Yearly Kos. He also announced that he had called on the Justice Department to investigate Rupert Murdoch's purchase of Dow Jones. "Media consolidation should be a major issue to every American," Dodd said, adding, "Thank the lord there is a Daily Kos."

Hillary's response on the question was in contrast pretty devoid of any passion. She never addressed Murdoch specifically...surprise, surprise and said something about the need for more competition.

Kucinich was asked was government programs need to be shut down

Kucinich's quick answer was "anything that perpetuates the nuclear power industry." He then changed subjects and began talking about he was for universal health care and how the "American people are already paying for a universal standard of care they're just not getting it." I scribbled in my notes that during this answer Hillary appeared to be nodding in agreement but also had an expression on her face as if she hadn't actually been listening to a word Kucinich said. It was a smiling politely but I've got the mute button on nod.

Edwards said that his first day as president (which is rapidly becoming a VERY busy day) he would shut down Guantanamo. "There will be no illegal spying, there would be no secret prisons. The government does not belong to the president of the united state it belongs to you," he said--which I thought was one of the best lines of the debate. He then moved on to an issue that he stuck to for the rest of the debate and for which he won a standing ovation--he called on all Democrats to reject lobbyist contributions, noting that Obama has and hinting, correctly, without mentioned her name, that Hillary hasn't. This moment was striking because it really came across that Edwards knew his audience better than maybe anyone else on stage and he knew that he had trapped Hillary on a sticky point.

Mike Gravel was finally drawn into the debate on an unusual subject, his support for the abolition of the IRS and the institution of a 23 percent sales tax

This revelation was met with a few boos which Gravel seemed totally unaffected by and he even joked that his tax proposal would never have any chance of passing anyway. He talked about how while the candidates on stage were "all good people, they're part of a system that doesn't work." "What you've been hearing is what you heard four years ago, and eight years ago and you'll hear it twelve years from now," he said.

Next came the foreign policy portion of the debate and Iraq was the first issue mentioned

Hillary patted herself on the back for voting against the last appropriations bill and pointed to her “careful” three-point plan to get us out of Iraq. “You can’t just wake up and say I want to move 160,000 troops,” a very reasonable point. What was irritating was that she came back to this “putting pressure of the Iraqis” bit that she’s become so fond of. “They have to step up,” she says.

Kucinich slammed the other Dems in congress for claiming they don’t have the resources to get the troops out. He says they should make Bush use the 97 billion they recently granted him to pay for troop withdrawal. “Tell the president to stop it now and if he doesn’t he ought to be impeached.” As I’m sure you can imagine, impeachment was very popular with the Yearly Kos crowd. Dodd argued, “I’d rather have 25 votes on something meaningful than 51 on something that doesn’t matter.”

Richardson got a nice laugh with his mention of a “One point plan to get us out of Iraq—get out and get out now with no residual forces.” What was refreshing was Richardson had a little bit more backup for this pledge than I’ve heard previously. He pointed out that “we moved 500,000 troops in a 4 month period during Gulf War I.”

Gravel got his biggest applause when he said the Senate should just repeatedly vote on cloture without an August recess until they get enough votes but suggested that the Democrats simply don’t have the will.

Next up, Obama was asked to address the terrorism issue

Obama talked about the need to continue pursuing the culprits of 9/11, “they weren’t in Iraq by the way.” He admitted that America has played a role in fanning anti-American sentiment and he railed against the “conventional thinking” on foreign policy in Washington. “We ought to double our foreign aid, we need to engage our foes as well as our friends."

When Edwards addressed terrorism he announced, “No we are not safer,” even though he wasn’t asked if he thought we were and then he went out of his way to say that Sen. Clinton thinks we are. Edwards said that “Bush had used the global war on terror to justify every bad thing hes done” and that we should not “accept George W. Bush’s framing on this issue.” He called the Bush foreign policy “a foreign policy of convenience and the American people have paid for it.”

Hillary weighed in next and was careful and gave yet another calibrated general election response which was, “I don’t feel there’s much anti-American sentiment as much as anti-Bush.” She said there was a global war on terrorists not terrorism, which is really a tactic.

Kucinich talked about his position as being “strength through peace”, where diplomacy and international law are the guiding principles.

Next Obama was asked about how he would deal with China

Sen. Obama got a strong response when he said, “Well, if China’s our banker we can’t exactly influence them.” He talked about China being a competitor but not necessarily an enemy. He believes that China’s “presence in the world has been as pronounced as ours has been absent.” “We are neglecting the challenges around the world and China has taken advantage of that.”

Following Obama, Dodd spoke eloquently in favor of American embracing other languages and traveling the world to experience other cultures. He spoke of his time in the Peace Corps and said he would seek to expand it when elected president.

Pakistan was the next major country brought into the discussion

Edwards talked about this own personal experience meeting with Musharraf and argued that we need to invest in education for young people in that part of the world instead of spending 500 million in Iraq. Richardson complained that we’ve been appeasing Musharraf up until now.

Then the final part of the debate came about and for some reason—I thought this would be the most contentious, and I was right

The first question was sort of a fun one, all the ‘08 Democratic candidates were asked if they would have an official White House blogger while president. They all said yes, with Edwards saying he’d hire his wife Elizabeth for the job (which was wildly popular with the crowd) and Gravel saying he’d blog for himself.

Gravel was then asked about the corrupt politicians in Alaska, and this branched off into a more in depth discussions of the election challenges facing Democrats

“All politicians walk in the mud,” Gravel said, well, gravely. He talked about money being the corrupting agent in politics and how the media is run by five corporations.

Obama spoke up and gave one of my favorite remarks of the night when he said “the only way change is going to happen is if we attack the political map”, that we must get new voters into the system. He pointed out that the state of Mississippi is 40 percent black and could be put in play but only if the Democratic voter base is expanded. After these remarks Kucinich was surprisingly booed for saying that people aren’t coming out to vote because they don’t think the parties are any different.

Hillary was applauded for saying that “Howard Dean is exactly right” to employ a 50 state strategy and that she would do the same when she is the nominee. “I want to be the president of everybody,” she volunteered. She said she will go to so-called red states and say, “You may think you don’t want to vote for a Democrat but let’s have a conversation because I think we have a lot more in common than you think.” She tried to use her experience in New York state as an example of her success with this but I just don’t buy that because Clinton won over rural New York against the shittiest of opponents she will necessarily do the same in real red country.

Richardson pointed out that now five out seven southwestern governors are Democrats and called for verifiable paper ballots and an end to the suppression of minority voters by Republicans. It was around this time I became convinced that Richardson and Edwards, even if they were being sincere, appeared to be the most shameless about not addressing the specific question and just endorsing concepts that they knew the crowd would go wild for.

Speaking of which–this led to the most intriguing moment of the debate. Edwards renewed an earlier call to remove all lobbyist money from Democratic party politics. He called for “real change, real reform,” pointing out that he and and Obama never took money from lobbyist in Washington. This was clearly a challenge to Hillary. She badly bombed with her response.

"I don't think that based on my 35 years fighting for what I believe in, that anybody thinks I'm going to be influenced by a lobbyist."

Ok—there were several things that struck me about this answer. The whole “you gotta trust me” vibe to it. The condescending arrogance of it, like “uh you know I’m amazing so don’t even try it” and then the obvious refusal to just directly answer whether she would or wouldn’t stop accepting lobbyist money. It all felt similar to her attitude about apologizing for her Iraq vote.

Instead of taking a progressive stand she ended up defending lobbyists as having done some positive work for Americans and while there’s undoubtedly some truth to that it was an awkward position to choose: defender of lobbyists, especially in front of the Yearly Kos crowd. She tried to argue that she didn’t see why lobbyist contributions would or should influence her and then the boos came. Instead of handling it affably she seemed to show that the audience was getting under her skin and she made a remark implying she’d expected this and said, "This gives us a real sense of reality with my being here."

Dodd seized the moment and calling for public financing over lobbying and was met with a huge standing ovation. All the candidates said they ideally support public financing.

Obama then saw an opportunity for himself and criticized Hillary for implying that a senator wouldn’t be influenced by lobby contributions. He pointed out that insurance industry definitely has “an agenda”. He talked about passing the first campaign finance reform legislation in Illinois in the past 25 years, he talked about the ethics bill he passed with Feingold with a lot of Democratic resistance. I could feel the group seeing a rare opportunity to make Hillary look bad.

Edwards addressed the audience and asked if any of them had lobbyists working for them in Washington (a dig at Hillary’s suggestion that lobbyists were working for regular Americans) and when basically no hands went up he said, “You are not represented by Washington lobbyists.

Not so fast Edwards, Kucinich countered by saying Edwards takes money from hedge funds and Edwards became a little flustered. He refused to say he wouldn’t take money from Wall Street but he insisted he would never take from those who made a living lobbying in Washington.

The conversation then shifted to how the candidates would reform Homeland Security

Edwards again highlighted that Hillary Clinton thinks we’re safer and he does not and a few seconds later she took the bait. Richardson said he would put appointees in the Homeland Security Department who knew what they’re doing, close Guantanamo, take FEMA out of Homeland Security and respect the Geneva Conventions.

Obama said we need to worry about what we’re gonna do with the executive branch and that whoever his attorney general is they won’t “consider the constitution an inconvenience”.

Hillary argued that we are safer in that we are better prepared but the level of incompetence at the department of Homeland Security under Bush jeopardizes what progress we’ve made. She got a big laugh by referring to Cheney’s fourth branch of government claim and relented on the lobbying issue enough to say that she would work to introduce a constitutional amendment on public financing as president.

Richardson got the last laugh of the debate by saying his vice president would be a member of the executive branch.

Who won?

I don't know. I think Obama was actually the most poised and presidential and he had the most appreciation from the crowd on the whole. Edwards and Richardson probably got off the best red meat lines and seemed the most passionate about their positions. Dodd also seemed really sincere and may have won a few converts. Hilary, while as one attendee called her "a total pro", was the most awkward I've ever seen her in a debate and it made me nervous, that if indeed she does become the nominee, how well her personality will wear on people over time.

Tagged as: gravel, kucinich, dodd, richardson, edwards, obama, clinton, yearly kos, election08

Adam Howard is the editor of PEEK.