Kerry won crap tonight. Dean won this debate.

[jeter]

The fact that everyone attacked him and that he wouldn't back down made him the winner alone.

Kerry was Kerry. Pumping up his record and trying to be Dean.

Sharpton was Sharpton.

Everyone played their roles. Gepthardt was invisible. Was he even there? Now that I think of it, I can't remember anything about him.

Edwards tried too hard.

Kuchinich looked as pesky and weasly as anytime.

CMB looked like she doesn't give a damn.

Lieberman was actually cool and calm. I thought he did okay.

Clark did well.

The two winners were Dean and Clark.

[KissMyAsscroft]

1. I agree 100%..

People think that Dean is "arrogant" lol..

Ummm...look at the Prez people...

People in this country want a tough guy candidate.

[Hieronymus]

2. Thank God,

Dean is looking more and more like a winner. With Graham on the ticket, who knows?
I still like Clark a lot.

:kick:

[jeter]

3. I think it will be Dean/Clark

That ticket just makes more sense. It's better for him and smarter for the party.

I still say Dean/Clark.

[caledesi]

17. And I love hearing you say it.. nt

[kayleybeth]

4. I disagree

Dean lost a lot of ground tonight. Did you not see the way the audience reacted to him? Spin it any way you like, but Dean was in trouble from the start of the debate and never did win over the audience tonight.

That said, I am not a Dean hater and will vote for him if he gets the nomination. I just worry that he is alienating black voters and southerners, the very votes we need to win in 2004. I wish he would just apologize for the confederate flag remarks and get it over with and move on.

Just my 2 cents.

[JNelson6563]

23. I saw all the reactions, not one or two

it did appear to be some rough going in the beginning of that cluster fu...er, "debate", but I noted after all was said and done, when Dean finally took a "Look here's the bottom line" approach he seemed to get some serious applause.

The folks I have talked to that saw it thought he had nothing to apologize for and that if we're smart we want every vote we can get. (And in anticipation I will tell you no, these aren't Deanies and one generally has no interest in politics)

I say let the confederate flag wavers come to the table, maybe once we get them there we can enlighten them all the further. Why should we give those votes to Jr as a gift?

Julie

[jeter]

34. Kay, the audience doesn't matter

It's about the substance of your message. He wasn't playing to the audience, he was playing to the larger audience in the American people.

What is the press going to say, "Dean attacked for Confederate Flag; Dean stands his ground."

Then people ask, "what's this all about?" And discover what this "controversy" is all about.

Dean won. He handled the questions well. Candidates don't win debates on the oohs and awes of the audience. Otherwise, Sharpton would have won them all.

[mbali]

40. The audience would have mattered

had Dean been a hit with them. Then we would have heard Dean supporters insist that the reaction of an "up close and personal" audience was all that mattered - that Dean wasn't playing to a larger audience, that his success with the people who were in the room with him demonstrated how great he is.

Nice try, though. I have to admire the Dean crowd's "love him no matter what he does" loyalty.

[jeter]

41. well mbali, you keep playing to the audience

And Dean will win the Iowa Caucus, New Hampshire and South Carolina Primaries instead.

Thanks for coming out though.

Reason Dean won the Debate: One issue will be talked about - The Confederate Flag issue and Dean's refusal to apologize. When people hear what this so-called "controversy" is all about. They'll think better of Dean and worse of the others.

Point: Dean won.

[pruner]

5. I totally agree

every article about the debate is focused on Dean… and the general spin on it is that he was attacked for making comments (that his opponents NOW find offensive) about trying to bridge racial & geographic divides.

he's also got front page articles & a major speech tomorrow which I'm attending :) about the matching funds vote… and that move totally alters the race. he has thrown down the gauntlet.

Dean is setting the course… his opponents (read: Kerry, Gephardt & Edwards) are running as fast as they can trying to catch up. Clark is drafting right behind (like long distance runners do).

I think this is very quickly gonna become a Dean vs. Clark race. Kerry, Gephardt & Edwards are gonna start to get cramps soon.

note: I haven't forgotten about Lieberman… I just don't consider him a serious candidate.

[neebob]

6. Pesky and weasly?

Hrmph. DK is still my #1, but I have to admit he blew it. He came off as uncomfortable, angry, and yes, I will finally say it: shrill. I'm disappointed and weirdly attracted to Wes Clark.

[MessiahRp]

7. That's BS

Dean came off to the audience as the least applaused, least supported candidate. Kerry did okay, Wes Clark did okay, CMB and Kucinich did okay but the real winner of all of the debates so far has been Al Sharpton. Sharpton's sharp wit and sense of humor have captivated the live audiences and energized everyone watching these debates. The problem with Al is he's Black and He's a Reverand and that makes it hard for most Americans to support him.

Dean look horrid tonight and he got beat badly on the Confederate Flag issue tonight.

Rp

[pruner]

8. it's not about getting applause… it's about media coverage that follows

Dean OWNZ the media cycle this entire week.

wed – newspaper headlines about debate focused on Dean & front-page headlines about matching funds vote; major speech in NYC with heavy media attendance; 137,000+ person MeetUp

thurs - voting begins

fri - voting ends

sat - results announced

sun - talk shows & newspapers discuss vote results & implications


oh… and possible endorsements by the SEIU & others this week.

[MessiahRp]

10. See

I am a Kerry supporter and I can admit when another candidate shines, why can't Dean supporters ever get off their high horse and do the same... I mean not to classify all Dean supporters this way but DU has a lot of die hards who refuse to see Dean falter, even when he does.

Rp

[pruner]

11. I'm not saying Dean shined tonight

I'm saying nobody else is outshining him right now.

the fact that 75% of the 100 or so (debate-related) posts on the Kerry blog are about Dean only proves that.

[MessiahRp]

14. I think if we're honest

Most of DU is super heavy liberal and Dean and Clark got their support as the national voices against the war before and during it. People decided at those points to support either of them and regardless of what they do now they still appeal to people who were looking for voices against the war. Same reason DK has a nice underground following. But both Dean and Clark have waffled on issues and the war at some point and it's time to step back and look at all the candidates objectively.

I see Kerry as most electable because he has a strong military, environmental, and economic background. I think he can beat Bush head to head on the issues without coming off too far from the center and too combative. People shy away from voting for combatants because they feel they will be irrational in the White House and that's not really who you want with their fingers on the nuclear switch.

You can look at some others and say the same but I agreed with Dean and Clark about their positions on the war and I think Kerry came around, albeit after being like most congressional leaders and being duped first, but I waited to pick a candidate and listen intently on what everyone has to say.

Kerry has done well, but not terrific and I think the same for Clark and Dean and others. Sharpton's humor is getting him national attention in a non-political way with SNL.

Because Sharpton is funny and witty he is winning the debates. He won't win the election, but it would be dishonest to take these debates away from him.

Rp

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MessiahRp]

16. Ignoring People

that say what you may disagree with will make for a very small world. Try not to confine yourself to only exactly similar messages or you will find yourself lacking the information to increase knowledge of all issues there are to know.

Rp

[DemBones DemBones]

19. Well said and welcome to DU!

:hi:

[kayleybeth]

9. Good summation

I agree. Reverend Al won again, and Dean lost a LOT of ground on this one. The crowd was downright frosty to Dean tonight. He needs to apologize about the confederate flag remarks.

[KissMyAsscroft]

12. Sharpton is a fucking babbling moron...Reality Check.

Im sorry people but saying witty one liners does not a president make. He is a preacher, that is all. He knows how to work a crowd and it is really getting annoying wathing everyone here fall for it. He is a PARROT. He doesn't understand most of the shit that comes out of his mouth and hasn't ever held office. He is a PREACHER.

He has about as much chance of winning the election as I do of winning a Heisman Trophy. He is wasting everyone's time. He needs to drop out and shore up support for the frontrunner.

I like his little jabs too, they are funny and make me feel all warm and fuzzy too but that doesn't further any of our goals and frankly having him the race at all is horrible.

[kayleybeth]

15. Babbling Moron?

Sorry, but Al had the audience in the palm of his hand tonight. I agree that he has little chance of winning, but he won this debate, hands down, IMO.

[KissMyAsscroft]

18. Thats because he says a bunch of crap...

that makes people FEEL good.

Nevermind the fact that he is an inexperienced loser, a PARROT, someone who has never held office, a joke, and a divisive figure in general for the Dems.

But hey...he's been "stabbed" LOL! That will win over that middle America! We need a candidate who's been STABBED! LOL! I can just see the women lining up for the new "thug in chief!" whatever...

I bet Chris Rock would have "won" the debates in your eyes too right?

Oh snap! Chris just said Dean was a racist! Damn Dawg! That comment was the BOMB YO!! LOL!

Whatever man.

Sharpton gets away with it because he has nothing to lose. He steals soundbites from more intelligent people and PARROTS them. He is a joke. He does not understand the issues.

It is insulting to me that my fellow Dems allow these clowns to run around with any credibility.

[kayleybeth]

24. whatever

You may not want to admit it, but Dean LOST this debate. Big time. He lost the audience early on and was never able to regain it. The Reverend Al may have zip chances of winning, but he OWNED the audience tonight, whether you like it or not. Sorry, but it's true.

[IndianaGreen]

30. Sharpton is a charlatan and former FBI drug informant

Sharpton is a charlatan that properly belongs as a carnival barker. Sharpton was the only racist on that debate last night!

New York lawsuit winds down
Sharpton, lawyers guilty of defamation in Brawley case
By David Walsh
25 July 1998

Maddox, Mason and Sharpton became Brawley's "advisers" and publicly identified Pagones as one of Brawley's attackers. Maddox and Mason are ardent black nationalists who have never let the truth stand in the way of their political aims. Maddox was suspended from the bar until 1999 for refusing to cooperate with an inquiry into his conduct during the Brawley case. Sharpton, a former FBI drug informant, who has distanced himself somewhat from Maddox and Mason in the recent period, used the Brawley case to advance his career and has risen to a position of prominence within the Democratic Party in New York City and state.

<snip>

There is a connection between the lying, defamatory character of the Brawley campaign and the role of racialism. Those, like Maddox, Mason and Sharpton, who preach racial animosity and strive for privileges for their particular color or nationality must lie in their presentation of social life. Society is not a collection of warring ethnic tribes; it is fundamentally divided along class lines, between the elite handful who control economic life and the vast majority of working people. Racialists make things up because their conceptions do not correspond to reality.

Brawley elicited sympathy not only from among nationalists at the time of her alleged attack, but no doubt as well from among black people and others outraged over the nature of the crime. If there is something to be learned here, it is the real danger of reacting to such a situation without weighing the facts and making a reasoned analysis. Such an analysis implies having a perspective on society and an understanding of its essential driving forces. Figures like Mason, Maddox and Sharpton, and their counterparts of every color and background, are dangerous individuals. They play on confusion, ignorance and prejudice to advance their own reactionary political aims. The lesson is: beware of demagogues!

http://www.wsws.org/news/1998/july1998/braw-j25.shtml

[Mike_from_NoVa]

46. Keep reminding people about Tawana, IG

Sharpton's gotta go. The Dem leadership has made a bad deal by letting him off the hook on his racist, race-baiting past. It's time to push the media to air his dirty laundry (and there's a lot more than just Tawana) and force him the heck out.

If Dean does this overtly himself, I will gain a lot of hope that he's the guy who can play the game the way it needs to be played to beat Bush. Whoever wins the nomination, this is not going to be a race for the timid.

[ma4t]

50. time to ban me

OK, this post will probably get me banned but I'm going to say it anyway.

It's time to admit that the Republicans are at least able to become embarrassed by the likes of Trent Lott when he says something stupid as he did about Strom Thurmond. Meanwhile Al "bloodsucking Jews" Sharpton is treated with dignity and respect by the other candidates at each appearance even though he has spouted racist comments more vile than anything Trent Lott ever came up with.

Why do the other candidates tolerate an unapologetic bigot in their midst?

[ma4t]

51. reach for the alert button

OK, this post will probably get me banned but I'm going to say it anyway.

It's time to admit that the Republicans are at least able to become embarrassed by the likes of Trent Lott when he says something stupid as he did about Strom Thurmond. Meanwhile Al "bloodsucking Jews" Sharpton is treated with dignity and respect by the other candidates at each appearance even though he has spouted racist comments more vile than anything Trent Lott ever came up with.

Why do the other candidates tolerate an unapologetic bigot in their midst?

[jeter]

36. Kay, your problem

Is that you associate applause at one debate with winning and losing.

Sharpton is comic relief. Everyone accepts him as such. People like to hear him go off on Bush. But no one will vote for him.

THAT is how you determine who wins or loses debates. Who picks up support from this appearance. Which is exactly why I think Dean won it.

I've seen Dean in the past be ordinary. I criticized his performances in speeches and interviews. But he WILL pick up support.

Why do you think Kerry won? Why does anyone? Who's support did Kerry pick up last night.

It's actually funny to think that Dean lost yesterday because people cheered for others louder than him.

That is so dumb. He won because people saw him stand up for what he said. Now everyone will hear about it. Period.

They're going to say "that Dean is alright."

[MessiahRp]

38. Yeah well..

Out of the media coverage I watched all morning only one outlet had anyone giving praise. Ann Coulter-wannabe Laura Ingraham praised him on Imus on MSNBC. If that's who you want praising you after a debate then good luck because people that agree with her positions are 100% Bush. Not backing down doesn't win you a debate, it just shows you as ignorant to why you angered people to begin with.

Rp

[Atlant]

45. I love Al Sharpton.

I'd PAY to have Al Sharpton attend these debates.
In DU polls, I've voted him the winner of some of those
debates.

But the fact that he has the "applause lines" has no bearing
on who actually profits (with the voting public) from these
debates.

As far as I'm concerned, Dean continues to make headway.
Last night, thanks to Kerry's attempt to torpedo him, I
learned more about Dr. Dean's position on guns and I found
that I was much more in agreement with him than I'd expected.

And as much noise as the several candidates want to make
about the Confederate Flag, every time they try to spin
what Dean actually said, it only proves to me that several
of them are willing to "shade" the truth for their own
political gain.

As I said in another posting, Edwards last night moved
himself into the category of candidates FOR WHOM I
SIMPLY WILL NOT VOTE, no matter what.

I think Howard Dean did just fine last night.

(But I'd still pay to keep Al Sharpton in the debates.)

Atlant

[TankLV]

20. I beg to respectfully disagree.

1) I like the elloquence (sorry for the spelling) and bite of his jabs at bushco. He and Carol are the conscience of the party, as far as I'm concerned.

2) Of course they'll never get the nomination. Too much easy (if irrelevant) baggage. But they vocalize what alot of us would like to say, but the individual candidates cannot because the corporate whore media would eat them alive and turn the discussion away from the issues, again. They are spot-on whenever they speak. Mame one thing they have said that was wrong, a lie, or in error. I can't think of many, if one. No one can even criticize the usurper boy king for christ sake according to the networks, let alone say anything approaching what the other side did to Hillary, Bill and AL.

3) I hope, when the dust settles, that each and every one of these fine gentlemen & lady, and I mean that, would in some way become an active and integral part of the successful nominee's campaign, to lend their varied, strong and wonderfully iconoclastic viewpoints and talent to the struggle that lies ahead.

With all of us united against the criminals who now occupy Al Gore's House, it'll be a sweet ride to victory in 2004.

[Guaranteed]

22. He does really well one on one, though, too.

What he has is a firm grasp of "talking points." He knows how to be consistent and get his message across (without specifics, of course). But, since everyone knows he's not there as a serious candidate, no one demands the specifics of him. He's the megaphone of the campaign. He's the fire, the glitter. He attracts people and, in doing that, does a HUGE favor for the Democratic party.

I believe if and when we beat Bush we're going to owe a great debt to Sharpton for doing what he's done.

[Gman]

28. Do you have a problem with an African-American running for president

Are you frightened by the thought of Sharpton being the nominee rather than Dean?

[IndianaGreen]

31. Why don't we nominate O.J. Simpson?

He is as much of a lying weasel as Sharpton and, unlike Sharpton, he was acquitted by a jury of his peers.

[sendero]

39. no....

... Kerry et al needs to apologize for twisting Dean's words as an attack strategy.

[teryang]

43. Kerry diminishes his stature every time he does it

...it doesn't even ring true with the kind of people who seriously consider voting for Kerry, who are his target audience. I don't want to hear him criticize dean with convoluted statements. I want to hear more about Kerry's domestic program ideas. I want him to take more critical and definite views on foreign policy. If he doesn't do this he's losing voters. He should just be courteous to Dean. I can't imagine who is advising Kerry to do this. I think they are incompetent.

[jeter]

35. Ha Ha Ha, Jesus are you guys running Sharpton's campaign?

It's not about who gets the most applause. It's about Dean not backing down.

Had he backed down and said, "yes I'm sorry. I made a mistake." Then the media would be talking about "Dean's mistake."

But he stood his ground. Took a few oohs and awes. But maintained his position. Now the story is about Dean standing his ground and an explanation about what he said. Which, in truth, is hardly controversial. Watch for other candidates to drop this soon. The goal was to get Dean to back down and they failed. Now all the media attention is on Dean again.

Dean won. Clark came in second.

[Guaranteed]

21. I tend to agree.

When everyone gangs up on someone, if they don't totally self-destruct, they automatically win.

On edit: Not simply because they survived, but also because they've been unintentionally or otherwise nominated the frontrunner of the campaign. I have the distinct feeling that the candidates know very well that they're doing this, but don't have a choice because they're desperate. They're counting on Dean caving and blowing it under the pressure.

[JNelson6563]

25. Hey!!

Where did you get that sig line???? That's one of my favorites, used to use it myself!

Julie

[jeter]

37. Exactly BullGoose, that's my point

The goal was for Dean to say, "I made a mistake. I'm sorry." Then the others would have pounced on him. "Dean's mistake." "He can't be president." "He shoots his mouth off."

But it backfired. He didn't back down. Now the media will write about that.

Dean won.

[Andromeda]

26. That sounds right to me.

Clark came out looking the best because he took the high road, unlike Kerry, Edwards and Sharpton. He was articulate and the most credible when talking about the military and the war in Iraq.

Carol Mosley-Braun stuck up for Dean when he was attacked by the others. She seemed to "get it" and the others didn't.

It didn't help or hurt Sharpton because Sharpton does what Sharpton does. No surprises there.

Kerry didn't surprise me either. He was pontificating in his usual laborious and tedious manner. Going after Dean was a mistake because he doesn't do it well. It just makes him look more desperate.

Gephardt was missing in action because of another commitment.

Kucinich sounded shrill. He has a tendency to shout and I found it annoying. Maybe he just feels that nobody is listening to him.

Edwards, who is usually a gentleman, was out of character tonight and it was not flattering. He looks better when he stays above the fray. Maybe he feels that he has nothing to lose by going after Dean.

Dean held his own against the attacks from Kerry, Edwards and
Sharpton and stood his ground when Sharpton demanded that he apologize. That showed some guts.

Lieberman did surprisingly well tonight and this time he bashed Bush instead of Dean.

[Gman]

27. Dean McKakis is a sure loser

Some people have learned nothing from last night.

[IndianaGreen]

32. I guess this means you voted against Dukakis

I am so glad that you dropped any pretense of where your loyalties lie!

[tlb]

29. Nobody won the debate, nobody lost much ground

though Dean did lose ground.

Small point but I had to suppress a giggle when David Kucinich got up. He gets excited when he is on a roll and it looked to me he was imitating Mich Jaggers stage movements.

Teh techno-beat mini-music videos the campaigns offered were SO much pandering, Dean's particulalry. Lieberman's wasn't much better.

Only Sharpton dressed for this debate as he would for the non-MTV debates. A point in his favor, he didn't pander.

[GCP]

33. I agree - horrible videos by Lieberman and Dean

Dean lost last night because he looked pissed off the whole time. If he can't react with more of a poker face when people are attacking him, it will become a sport among pundits and interviewers to try and get him angry.

Also, did anybody else find the jumping on and off seats annoying and pandering?

Why couldn't they just sit back and chill instead of jumping up and down like a bunch of jack-in-the-boxes.

[Justice]

42. My take on the Debate...

Kerry did pretty well when he answered the questions, but poorly when he attacked Dean. Viewers laughed at the gun photos of Kerry when he was attacking Dean; Kerry wasted his time with Paula Zahn blasting Dean. My prediction is that Kerry is hurting Dean marginally with his attacks, but that people will not come to Kerry instead b/c they are sick of negative comments.

Sharpton is great in the debates. His soundbites are solid. He has the uncanny ability to challenge the very point that other people are glossing over - this nonsense about even if you didn't agree with the US attacking Iraq, now that we are there, we have to finish what we started. Sharpton says - no - what is that - wrong is wrong. That direct attack challenges Bush's rhetoric.

Gepthardt made a mistake to not be there. His absence was unnoticed. Having said that everyone gave Dean a pass a few weeks ago because he missed an event due to a prior commitment - so we ought to do the same for Dick. More than anything, his absence shows that fewer participants a better debate makes.

Edwards made good points on the southern issue.

Kuchinich was more focused than other times. Still can't win.

CMB - some of her answers were not as polished. The "leave with dignity" answer left me puzzled - what does that mean?

Lieberman was not impressive. He floundered on some answers I thought. I thought it was sort of interesting that he did not want to name his college - as if that would make him look bad.

Clark stayed out of the whole confederate flag thing, which frankly made him look good. He also did well on the embargo question, the question about gays generally -- but hedged a bit on the don't ask don't tell.

Dean dug himself nearly out of a hole on the confederate flag issue. I wish Dean could joke a bit - that would have helped him last night to deal with the flack. He did well on the gun question I thought, but almost too summarily, like he is tired of saying what he is for (you might not have caught all the components true meaning if you didn't know the issues well). I thought Dean was a little flat. I don't think he won by not losing.

[teryang]

44. I agree with your observations

I think the studio set up may have hurt Dean. My wife and I watched for several minutes but the seating arrangement and camera angles kept us from seeing Dean. We were saying where's Dean, isn't he there? It was awhile before we caught a very partial glimpse of his face and realized he was participating. It may just be a coin toss. I felt Clark got a similar shaft on an earlier debate.

[blm]

48. Drawing a contrast between positions is NOT an attack.

Calling your opponent's character into question or calling them names is an attack.

[blm]

47. Kerry has one of the best records of any Dem lawmaker in modern history.

One would have to be totally oblivious of the last 30 years to think he is a nonentity.

Kerry speaks ELEGANTLY, COMPREHENSIVELY, and with great DEPTH. How do YOU think he is trying to be Dean who sounds like he gets his scripts from bitter internet message boards?

[blm]

49. Please share with us how you see Kerry pretending to be Dean.

.

[Curse10sBitch]

52. Man, he's just got to apologize for the flag thing

The point he was trying to make was perfectly valid; in fact, everyone else made the same point: we gotta reach out to everybody, blah blah blah. But he couldn't have picked a worse way to make his point, and he's gonna keep getting his ass kicked for it until he admits that he chose his words poorly.

He didn't actually manage to recover until right near the end, with the "buckshot out of my ass" point - which was well-taken.

What we're already seeing in the media is a) Dean's taking hits for the comment and b) he refuses to apologize, which makes him look like...well, a guy who refuses to cop to his mistakes.

I'm not a Dean-basher by any means; I think he's got good politics, and I'll happily vote for him. But I don't think the mainstream perception will be that he won the debate. Far from it.

Me personally, I think Al Sharpton won. I'm on record saying I wouldn't vote for him because of his anti-Semitic comments, but he's the most well-spoken of the candidates by a long shot.

Kerry did real well also, as did Edwards, despite the fact that he still looks like he needs a fake ID to buy alcohol.

Clark: easily the prettiest of the candidates. Is he wearing eyeliner?