9/27 Debate Reviews

[Catchawave]

Salon.com’s Joan Walsh Said Edwards “Made a Strong Impression” and Named Edwards the Winner of the Debate. Chris Matthews posed the question, “Who won tonight’s debate?” and Salon.com’s Walsh responded, “I think Edwards made a strong impression and I think he pushed her back, he brushed her back a little bit. So I would go with Edwards.”

NBC's Chuck Todd: “Edwards Stood Out to Me,” “It Was One of His Better Performances.” “Of the candidates chasing Clinton, Edwards stood out to me. He seemed to realize he needed to prove contrast with Clinton on just about every answer he gave. It was one of his better performances. The guy is getting his William Jennings Bryan schtick down pat.” <http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/09/26/381964.aspx, “Some Quick Post-game Take-aways,” 9/26/07>

Newsweek’s Howard Fineman: “Edwards Has Emerged So Far the Most Forceful Challenger To” Clinton. “From where I sit, Edwards has emerged so far the most forceful challenger to her (other than Tim Russert).” <http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/thegaggle/archive/2007/09/26/fineman-debate-live-blog.aspx, 9/26/07>

Marc Ambinder: “Victory for JRE,” “Edwards Was Straightforward, Confident, Clear.” Edwards was Edwards on Centrum Silver: straightforward, confident, clear, knowledgeable, thoroughly encased in his own frame. Ying to the yang of both Obama and Clinton; If you’re new to nomination politics, then you’d think Edwards – and not Obama – was Hillary Clinton’s main foil. The war. Social Security. Health care. Campaign ethics. Clinton didn't take the punch, but she did move to dodge them, which is a victory for JRE. <http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2007/09/edwards_clinton_spats_stand_ou.php, “Edwards, Clinton Spats Sound Out,” 9/26/07>

ABC’s Rick Klein: “Edwards May Have Done Himself the Most Good Tonight.” “11:02 pm: Quick thoughts -- Hillary Clinton benefits whenever no one else distinguishes himself, and Edwards may have done himself the most good tonight. Obama squeezed in one good line, but I don't see that as enough for the evening.” <http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/09/live-blogging-d.html, 9/26/07>

NBC's Domenico Montanaro: Edwards Was “More Presidential” and “Looked Poised.” “Edwards looked poised in following up on his answer. Not angry or frustrated as we've seen him before, more presidential.” <http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/09/26/381656.aspx, “Edwards Pointing Out Differences,” 9/26/07>

Newsweek’s Howard Fineman: “Edwards Then Hits It out of the Park,” “Wins the Round” on Social Security. “Edwards then hits it out of the park, talking about a ‘protective zone’ of income between $97,500 and $200,000. His proposals sounded carefully thought through—whether you agree with it or not—and was much more specific than what Obama had to say on the topic. Hillary is talking too much about what her ‘husband’ did; she isn't being specific enough—Edwards wins the round.” <http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/thegaggle/archive/2007/09/26/fineman-debate-live-blog.aspx, 9/26/07>


NBC’s Athena Jones: Edwards Gets a “Whoop” for Promising to End Health Insurance for Congress if No Universal Health Care. “A whoop here for Edwards' promise to cut off health insurance coverage for members of Congress if they don't pass health care by July 2009.”<http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/09/26/381762.aspx, “Edwards health care reaction,” 9/26/07>

ABC’s Rick Klein: “Edwards Is the First to Draw Real Distinctions About” on Iraq. “9:07 pm: I'm ready to give the Big Three credit for intellectual honesty by saying troops will have to remain in Iraq for some years. But John Edwards is the first to draw real distinctions about what to do going forward. This won't be the last time he finds a way to set himself apart.” <http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/09/live-blogging-d.html, 9/26/07>

NBC's Domenico Montanaro: “Edwards Is Pressing the Distinctions with Clinton.” “Edwards is pressing the distinctions with Clinton. He said they had learned different things on their war vote and said this Iran vote was indicative of that. Will it matter? Edwards clearly wants to put her on the defensive. So far, he's the only one.” <http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/09/26/381710.aspx, “Edwards Pressing,” 9/26/07>

NBC’s Chuck Todd: “Edwards Seems on His Game Tonight.” “It's VERY early but Edwards seems on his game tonight.” <http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/09/26/381655.aspx, “Edwards Came To Debate With A Plan?” 9/26/07>

ABC’s Rick Klein: “I'd Give Edwards a Slight Edge in Making His Points and Making Them Solidly.”10:05 pm: “But I'd give Edwards a slight edge in making his points and making them solidly.” <http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/09/live-blogging-d.html, 9/26/07>

ABC’s Rick Klein: Edwards “Distinguished” Himself. “9:33 pm: One-fourth of the way in, Edwards and Richardson have distinguished themselves. If people were looking for a new, more aggressive Obama tonight, it doesn't look like they're going to get it.” <http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/09/live-blogging-d.html, 9/26/07>

Chris Matthew Said Edwards Came with a “Clear Strategy” to Differentiate Himself from Hillary Clinton. Chris Matthews said, “Senator John Edwards was one who came out with a clear strategy to differentiate himself from Hillary Clinton on the issue of combat troops in Iraq and U.S. military action potentially against Iran.”

[truebrit71]

1. An impressive set of quotes. I tivo'ed the debate and plan on watching it tonight...

...glad to hear that Sen Edwards made good forward progress in the debate. We all KNOW he's different than Hillary-DLClinton, he just needs to get out there and shout it from the roof-tops so that it becomes apparent to one and all...

[Catchawave]

2. OpenLeft - Chris Bowers

http://www.openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=1601

[Catchawave]

3. Taylor Marsh

http://www.taylormarsh.com/archives_view.php?id=26290

[Catchawave]

4. NYT - The Caucus

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/09/27/post-debate-wrap-up/

[Catchawave]

5. The New Republic

http://www.tnr.com/blog/the_plank?pid=146891

In the "spin room" after tonight's debate, Elizabeth Edwards suggested her husband offers Democrats a rare opportunity: the chance to nominate someone who is both the most progressive and the most electable candidate running. (At least among the plausible candidates.) It's an intriguing notion, one that would play well among the notoriously liberal and notoriously strategic-minded Democrats of Iowa. The only question is whether it's actually possible. That is, in moving aggressively to the left of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, does John Edwards invariably undercut the general-election appeal that almost won him the caucuses in 2004?
I think Edwards took a significant step toward answering that question tonight. He came out of the gate taking issue with what he described as Clinton's willingness to leave combat troops in Iraq for the indefinite future. And, in perhaps his best moment of the debate, he warned that Clinton's vote on a Joe Lieberman-sponsored Senate resolution targeting Iran's Revolutionary Guard represented a serious lapse in judgment.

But, despite his forcefulness, Edwards came off as controlled and reasonable. The Clinton campaign has taken to dismissing Edwards's increasingly strident attacks as acts of desperation. "Usually people have an aggressive attack strategy because they're falling rather than gaining" in the polls, was how Clinton strategist Mark Penn explained it during the post-game session. But there wasn't much trace of desperation in Edwards strikes tonight. On the Iran vote, for example, he didn't trash Hillary as a Lieberman-style war-monger. He acknowledged that the resolution was substantively limited, but suggested that even a limited measure was risky given the administration it would empower. "I voted for this war in Iraq," Edwards said. "Senator Clinton also voted for this war. We learned a very different lesson from that. ... hat I learned in my vote on Iraq was you cannot give this president the authority and you can't even give him the first step in that authority because he cannot be trusted."

....more