Did anyone else out there watch the CNN dem debate last night. I know that it was a big TV night, what with the Sopranos and the MTV something awards (with the beautiful Sarah Silverman), but should you have watched them, I would like to hear your opinions. Did you like the format? Who seemed like a big winner? big loser? Was it a fair setup and execution? Anyone surprise you?
I thought that Dennis Kucinich gave a strong showing, of course his views are most in line with my own. He actually got applause, I was so proud of DK. Though I think that CNN tried to make him look bad from the beginning. In the very first shot, you could see ol' Denny standing on a box... *sigh*... most rational, yet doomed by the media.
Richardson, who isn't a bad candidate especially considering his foreign policy experience, was extremely overshadowed. He was the candidate who seemed to lose the most in the debate. He didn't come off as strong or a leader or even a straight-talker, all qualities I always admired him for.
Dodd tried to make a good showing, but didn't really make ripples to me. Gravel, though he makes great points, comes across as either perpetually angry or a badly-drawn cartoon. Biden was full of passion and seemed to have a rational thoughtful position on most things, but some of it came off as fake which is tragic cause it might have been real.
The big three: Clinton and Obama both have such a sizable lead in the polls that they could and did skid by without saying anything. These two had the most face time and the least substance. But let's not forget that polls means very little, just ask Howard Dean. Edwards seemed like a
winner in the debate last night, he got to challenge the top two a few times. Edwards also got to talk some about healthcare, a strong issue for him, but to me I wished he would have talked more about wage disparity in the US.
This debate seemed most successful for Edwards. Though I think that we might see Kucinich rise to maybe 3 or 5 percent soon.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I agree with a number of points made here. DK came out looking quite good, and I would imagine his standing goes up TO about 3 to 5%. It is a sad statement about the media, the American public, or both that a candidate with well-thought out policy proposals for almost every issue (contrast with other candidates, like Hillary and Obama that go out of their way NOT to articulate policies), that wants global eradication of nuclear weapons, supports not-for-profit health care in the US, and advocates peace, diplomacy, and respect for human rights should rank so low in the polls. Yes, the guy is a little weird looking, but that is a pretty lame-ass reason for him to poll so low. Do Americans really choose candidates based on such trivial things? Probably. Go democracy.
On a related note, yes, the media has done nothing but pander to the top three and done almost everything they could to ignore those candidates trailing in the polls (e.g. DK, Dodd, Gravel). If you want a break down of the talk time for each candidate you can check this site:
http://www.chrisdodd.com/node/1377
Another example of such inanity is that on CNN's web poll for the debates this morning one of the questions is "Who was the snappiest dresser?" Seriously? WTF? How does this matter at all? I guess I should be relatively happy DK came in 4th in this category, though I don't see why. What I can't get is how many viewers, as well as political analysts, chose either Obama or Clinton as the winner, neither of whom said anything interesting.
Other surprises...Well, Biden was kind of on fire. Not sure I agree with him on most things, but it was nice to see some passion, especially about the dire need to intervene in Darfur. Gravel had a couple of zings, but nothing policy wise that seemed notable.
The only other thing that really stood out was Edwards actually apologizing and admitting being wrong on the Iraq vote. That NEVER happens in politics, and I really respect that he overcame this taboo. Politics (and society) in general could really benefit from politicians/leaders that are willing to admit that them made a bad decision. Good position for Edwards, and it won him goodly amount of applause.
I enjoy watching these debates, but it is sad that so much about them is contrived, and seems just to reinforce those that are already ahead in the polls, event though they don't say anything novel.
Post a Comment