Democratic Debate Commentary

This Sunday I watched the Democratic debate for Presidential hopefuls in the '08
election, and I liked what I saw. Despite the high-tension between the fellow-party members and the feeling that some of the candidates were holding back and trying to only make a good impression on TV, I got a better understanding of the major Democratic nominees. I feel that from what was said in the debate, Barack stands as the most favorable candidate, able to answer questions articulately and live up to the moral expectations and standards of his constituents and the American people. To put it in terms of who gained ground and who lost ground due to the debate, I will try to explain, in my opinion, the shift for each candidate due to the debate. Obama lost no ground, putting on an excellent performance, receiving applause for every smooth quip and powerful response. Clinton lost a little ground, despite having the last statement and winning the crowd with her story of her mother and the woman suffrage movement encouraging her to follow her dreams. Throughout the debate, she could be seen wincing whenever the "War in Iraq" was mentioned, and when asked why she voted in favor of the war, she stumbled around, saying that Bush's primary intentions misled her into believing he wouldn't abuse the war-funding. Chris Dodd stayed even-even, mainly cuz he played it safe, using brief responses and truncated sentences to answer the questions thrown at him. Biden actually gained little, and I mean "little" ground, by making the crowd laugh and by supporting the Performance-based pay for teachers and portraying himself as a huge education-sympathizer. South Carolinan John Edwards, a crowd favorite, lost slightly more ground than Clinton because he had no "woman empowerment and struggle angle" like Clinton had. He simply didn't answer the big questions with enough power, energy, nor conviction. He appeared a bit distracted whenever asked a question. Bill Richardson lost signigicant ground due to his own admittal of falliability. One rule to politics is always let others remind you that you are falliable, such as advisors and campaign managers; allow them to bring you back down to earth. Most voters tend to shirk away from leaders who don't stand out from the crowd enough. If you admit to your own mistakes, especially little personal ones that don't concern the public, you probably don't stand out from the crowd too much, or even if you do, that isn't the paradigm you cause others to view you with. Mike Gravel, my fav, gained a fair amount of ground, especially since he was able to get media-coverage and TV "facetime", as the youngsters call it. He got to exhibit his amount of power and energy on some of the difficult issues, he may have even brought more energy to the table than Edwards. However, he limited his own gain at one point in the debate by arguing in a gruffy tone with Stephanopolis, sounding like a crotchety, cranky, old dotard (geezer). I truly love this man's energy and wish to correct what's so corrupt about this government, but I fear he doesn't have the voice, nor marketability to win as many voters over as the younger candidates. So that is why I feel he missed out on being the leading ground-gainer from this debate; the leading ground-gainer was none other than Dennis Kucinich, an extreme liberal Representative from Ohio, who explained in simple words why the national government is so corrupt. He placed emphasis on the fact that the House's link to the constituents keeps it from accumulating as much corruption as the Senate. He also layed out an easy plan to raise funding for education and raising the minimum earning wage for teachers to $40,000; he explained that he is busy trying to pass a bill in the House that would take money from other programs and allow the goverment to help provide subsidies to the education program. Plus, he challeged some of the conventional thinking amongst the other democratic candidates, refusing to just follow the herd. His daring, independent comments were rewarded with applause from the audience. At least now, many Americans know Kucinich's face and many of his beliefs and ideas. Yet, even with all the ground he gained, Kucinich is still miles behind the front-runners such as Obama, Clinton, Edwards, and Dodd. However, I feel he closed the gap between him and the others (Biden, Richardson, and Gravel). Go Obama, go Gravel for '08! Whooooooooo Hoooooooooo!