Clinton failed early, didn't recover soon enough

[Royal Oak Rog]

This is about how I saw it too.

Brent Larkin's analysis: Clinton failed early, didn't recover soon enough
by Brent Larkin
Tuesday February 26, 2008, 11:26 PM
Plain Dealer editorial director Brent Larkin is a longtime veteran of the Northeast Ohio political scene. Tuesday night, he watched the Clinton-Obama debate. In this audio report, he says:

• Sen. Clinton opened too weak. The start of the debate had the biggest audience, and she failed to make up any ground.

• Midway through, she got angry -- visibly, audibly angry -- and that made a bad impression.

• She got stronger toward the end of the debate, but by then many voters had tuned out.

• There wasn't much she could have done to help herself, anyway. Sen. Obama is simply too deft at deflecting her attacks.

PULSE POLL
Q. Who won the debate at CSU?

Latest Poll Results:

Obama 67.9%
Clinton 17.2%
Draw 15.0%

http://www.cleveland.com/

[Royal Oak Rog]

1. woops, heres the link to the audio

http://www.cleveland.com/politics/index.ssf/2008/02/brent_larkins_analysis_clinton.html

[Mz Pip]

2. Her opening was strange

I didn't see SNL so I had no clue what she was talking about. Extra pillows? Huh?

She shouldn't have assumed everyone would 'get it.'

Other than that she did okay but didn't score big. Obama's presentation is always calm and reasoned. He presents the same demeanor at all the debates. There is never a question about which Obama we will see.

[Occam Bandage]

3. Unless, of course, she was betting that

the major networks would repeatedly air that sketch. No such luck so far.

[Mz Pip]

4. I haven't seen it

and I've been watching a lot of tv. :shrug:

[marions ghost]

9. ditto

Hillary should get off this fakey "attack Obama" behavior IMO. It's not working for her. People don't want to see so much division. They want unity. Pulling together. All Obama has to do is look calm and unflapped in the face of Hillary's faux indignation directed at him and he gets points. I'm sure he doesn't mind being the foil for her to demonstrate her toughness (which she overdoes at times). It works for him--he can be the kinder gentler (tough when necessary) guy, displaying a lot more balance and self control than Boosh and the Neocons ever could. Anyone can see that Obama's got his yin and yang thing worked out, where Hillary has to constantly prove she's a) not a pushover b) not too strident and aggressive unbecoming to a woman. She has to walk a tightrope on the yin-yang scale and it's hard for her.

With both Hill and Barack, it's reassuring just to have candidates who are intelligent and relatively "normal" in behavior after the Bush years. These "debates" are really public discussions and a chance to see the candidates in action. If the media didn't make it so adversarial, maybe the candidates could lighten up and be themselves.

This 'hit him hard' tactic at this juncture is not helpful to Senator Clinton. She should not go along with it. When she directs her indignation at the Bush regime, corporations, the media--she is more on target and wins with the public. Hillary looks more and more desperate. Obama's more positive message is winning. Public opinion is winning, because he reflects the attitude more people want to see no matter what he says IMO.

I wish Hillary could control that smirk on her face. Otherwise she's a savvy and at times effective politician and responsible public servant. But Obama has the edge in that he has his finger more on the pulse of the nation.

[Independent-Voter]

5. How about just "Clinton failed." Short, and to the point.

[Plausible]

6. I watched the debate. Can't agree

Overall, Obama and Clinton both did very well. The reporters appeared to be carrying water for McCain. I'd fail them. Also, Tim Russert was actually RUDE.shouting in the candidates faces.

That last question by NBC Brian Achorman sucked and Obama eloquently ignored it, followed up by a fine response by Clinton.

My poll: Obama an edge over Clinton but both did well. The questioning by the news McCain waterboys was pisspoor.

Can we find any real reporters to ask some real questions that real people want to know..............example, how will you shore up Social Security, how will you pull us from the brink we are on with the staggering national debt, ummm and why do the rich (overpaid) news people hate Americans?

[Royal Oak Rog]

7. Well I can't disagree that the questions totally sucked

Tim Russert is a bufoon, I won't even get in to that if you watched the debate you know what I mean.

But you have to agree that Obama is just much cooler under fire than Clinton, don't you?

I mean I realize that she's playing from behind and thats a tough chore,but he is just a smooth as they get. He wasn't president of the Harvard Law Reveiw because he can't think on his feet, and that's no knock to Hill she's pretty good herself. But this guy is a top flight mind and speaker, I don't care if he is a minority, he was going to be tough to beat. I think alot of people woke up to that through the campaign, I know I did.

I mean I still think Dennis Kicinich would make a better president, but that's a different story.

[Plausible]

8. I've come to the conclusion Obama and/or Clinton can beat McCain

Obama does have the charisma thing going on.

I think the Rethug machine will try to make mincemeat of either or both of them.

Then, too, thugs have the stealing elections thing down now.

[Carrieyazel]

10. Then why is the media saying today "no clear winner in Hillary/Obama debate?"