It's amazing, after all these debates, one of the two candidates on stage tonight will be the Democratic nominee for President. Very historic.

n/t

*Acknowledges John Edwards "who did such an outstanding job."

*Now we're down to two candidates after 17 debates.  Opportunity to make history; one of us two will end up being next President of United States.

*I was friends with Hillary Clinton before, I will be friends after. She's run a competitive race, it's because we love this country.

*Defining moment in history.  Planet in peril...economy...how do we take country in new direction, get past divisions. Choice is not about race, gender, religion. It's about past vs. future.  We are both Democrats, we want change that brings country together, pushes back against special interests in Washington.  We can solve any problem.

*Hopes to be next president.  Either Barack or I will raise our hand and swear to uphold constitution.

*Waiting there will be a stack of problems.  Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Economy not working for vast majority of Americans.  10s of millions of people w/out health insurance.  Energy crisis.  Global warming (U.S. must lead).  

*It is imperative that we have a president starting on Day #1 who can tackle these challenges, seize opportunities.

*Grateful for extraordinary service of John and Elizabeth Edwards.  37 million Americans living below poverty line.

*What are priorities and goals for America?  We need a problem solver, someone who will roll up their sleeves.  I'm offering that approach.  Let's have that conversation.

But what really strikes me is how superior both of our candidates are when compared to the clowns we saw last night.

90-day moratorium on mortgage foreclosures and a 5-year freeze on rates.  

the federal government is going to freeze foreclosures on mortgages under state law?  How exactly is that legal?

when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?

dead!

Differences between them: HRC's health plan is mandatory. No on interest freeze on mortgage.  Lack of oversight from Bush on the whole business.  Reduce interest of lobbyist in Washington.  Mentioned Edwards joining him on that campaign.  Other difference, opposed war in Iraq from the start.  

Clinton:  Whatever differences between us pale in comparison to the differences we have with Republicans.

*Health care -- we must have universal health care, it's a moral responsibility.  My plan is similar to Sen. Edwards' plan.

*Mortgage crisis - moratorium on foreclosures for 90 days to keep people in their homes.  Freeze interest rates for 5 years.

*Foreign affairs -- we've got to be realistic and optimistic.  We have serious threats, those who are plotting against us.  We've got to have a full diplomatic effort, but president shouldn't put prestige of office on line to meet with 5 of worst dictators in the world.

*What really is important -- Republicans are "more of the same."  We are not "more of the same" ("just by looking at us") we will change our country.

Obama:  A couple genuine policy differences worthy of debate.

Health care: We both want to emphasize prevention.  My view is that the reason people don't have health care is that they can't afford it.  I emphasize reducing costs.  Make it affordable, they will buy it.  Sen. Clinton believes we have to force people who don't have health insurance to buy it.  If you're going to mandate purchase of insurance and it's not affordable, there have to be enforcement mechanisms.

Mortgage crisis: Huge problem. We have to keep people in their homes.  $10 billion home foreclosure prevention fund.  I have not signed on to interest rate freeze; could hurt people we're trying to protect.  Lack of oversight on behalf of Bush administration on lending industry.  

I believe we need to reduce influence of lobbyists and special interests in lobbyists.  Increased ethics proposals...I don't take PAC money.

Iraq:  I was opposed to Iraq from the start. The next president has to show the kind of judgment to use our military power wisely. Elevate diplomacy as part of our arsenal to keep us safe.  Meet with Iran, offer carrots and sticks and they'll be more likely to change their behavior.

and they have actually been discussing substantive issues.

I expect this will deteriorate, but so far an excellent debate.

Obama

Every expert who looks at it says, anyone who wants health care who wants it will be able to get it under my plan.

The 15 million figure comes in...I dispute the notion that there are 15 million people who don't want it.

I mandate coverage for all children.

Young people, most likely to be healthy, insurance companies will allow people up to 25 years old to be covered under their parents' plan.

Under a mandate, you'll have problems with people not having coverage.  Massachusetts embarked on that experiment.  Still will be people who can't afford it.  Then what do you do about it?  Fine them?  Garnish their wages?  Sen. Clinton hasn't answered that question.

Clinton

This is a passionate cause of my public service.

We want to maximize choice for people.

Open Congressional health plan to you.  Make it affordable for everyone.  Lower costs aggressively. Improves quality.  Cover everyone by providing subsidies and capping premiums. It's designed to be affordable.  There are people who just feel they don't have to accept responsibility of health care. We can't get to core universal health care unless we do single payer (cotroversial) or mandate employers (controversial) or do what I'm proposing (shared responsibility).  Barack mandates
that parents get health care for their children.  We Democrats have to fight for universal health care. If you don't start there, you will be "nibbled to death."  Recognize what both John Edwards and I did - bite this bullet.  

Obama
If people are gaming the system, there are ways we can address that.  Pay back premiums for not getting in there in the first place.

Some of Clinton's subsidies won't be sufficient.

I want to not only cap premiums, I want to lower premiums.  People right now can't afford health insurance.  They never go to a doctor, that's something we all pay for.

Ted Kennedy said he is confident we will get universal health care with me as president.  Previous plans have failed because we didn't bring Democrats and Republicans to get it done.  Don't negotiate behind closed doors.  Enlist American people in this process.  Overcome special interests and lobbyists -- they will try to resist.  Make sure anybody in America who needs health care will get it.  Increase transparency and accountability to reduce power of special interests.  Let drug company make their argument in front of the American people.

Clinton:  It was an effort to begin this conversation which we are no continuing.

This issue is so important.  We have to regulate the health insurance industry differently.  They have to cover everyone, including every preexisting condition. Compete on cost and quality, don't cherry pick people and insure only the healthy.

Make it clear to drug companies that they deserve to be part of the solution.  We pay for research, clinical studies.  Have to give Medicare the right to negotiate with the drug companies to get prices down.

Carry the banner of universal health care.  Health care industry very clever and well funded.  I know this from 1993/1994.  I learned a lot about what people want, what people are willing to accept, how to get the political process to work.  

aka Jason Alexander

M.C.'d at Take Back America in D.C. this past summer.

Obama; I don't think the Republicans will be in strong position to argue fiscal responsibility when they've built up trillions in national debt.  McCain said it was irresponsible to cut taxes while we were going to war.  Straight talk express lost some wheels, now he favors tax cuts to rich people who don't need them and aren't asking for them.

My health care plan invests in prevention.  Cost savings.  We can save $150 billion per year under my plan.  Roll back Bush tax cuts on top 1%.  My plan is paid for.  Who are the tax cuts for, who are the tax hikes imposed on.  Warren Buffett said he could pay more than his secretary who has a higher tax rate.  Close tax loopholes and havens. Tax cuts to seniors making less than $50,000 per year.  Restore a sense of balance to economy.  Give child in East Los Angeles a chance at American dream as well.

Clinton:  The way I would pay for this is take Bush tax cuts set to expire, people making more than $250,000 per year, put that into subsidies for health care.  Modernization and efficiencies.   We spend more than anyone in the world, yet we don't get the best results.  Bush has given enormous tax giveaways to HMO's.  I would rein those in.  Move towards electronic medical records.  I've worked on bipartisan basis, starting with Newt Gingrich.  Rand says we would save $77 billion per year with electronic records.  Be more effective, more sensible how we cover everyone.

Obama: I'm not bashful about it.  The richest Americans will pay a little bit more.  We have a moral obligation to make sure everyone can get health care in this country.  There will be upfront costs.  Help rural hospitals buy computer software; that investment will pay huge dividends over the long haul.  Get a healthier population.

Clinton: We will go back to tax rates we had before Bush came to power. People did really well during that time period and will keep doing really well.

swatting away that idiotic question about immigration and high employment in the inner city, totally rejecting the premise of the question, which I actually found offensive.

substantively speaking.

Obama went negative, pointing out her difficulty in dealing with the issue initially.

I think his opening response to the question was quite strong.   I see no advantage to either one.  While I think he was wrong on that, he also pointed out that Richardson and he agree on the issue of licenses, which helps him in the Hispanic community.

Yes it is a privelege.

But it is also a REALITY that millions of these people ARE HERE, WORKING in our economy.

From a pure public safety perspective, it makes NO SENSE to have undocumented people driving without licenses, meaning NO INSURANCE.  You can't get insurance without a license to drive.  This is by far the better policy position.

Going further, however, the issue of drivers' licenses for undocumented workers goes back to the issue of wanting punitive measures.  It's about punishing them.

It's not realistic to think that anyone can get around almost anywhere in America without being able to drive.  It's ridiculous to think that limiting licenses of any kind to only documented people is not going to make life unbearably impossible and very unfair for millions of people who are LIVING HERE and CONTRIBUTING to this nation and economy.

It is nothing but an attempt to make life difficult, it puts everyone at risk of having oodles of uninsured drivers on the roads, and furthermore, it's a thinly vield attempt to force people to deport themselves, basically.

This is not what we should be doing in the area of immigration.  Both Democratic candidates tonight got it EXACTLY right on this issue, but restricting any form of license from undocumented workers MAKES NO SENSE, and a huge mistake.

Besides, having them all with licenses let us know exactly who and where they are, and for a whole host of public safety, legal, business, and practical reasons, that is a net positive.

of many years, Mark Kleiman, with whom I overlapped at Haverford.  I don't think he will mind my posting the enter post here, but you can also read his work at Same Facts:  The Reality-Based Community.

At only one point did tonight's debate touch on my area of professional competence: driver's licenses for illegal aliens. That's an issue on which there is only one politically salable answer, and only answer that can actually be justified in terms of public safety and human decency. Alas, they're not the same answer.

People without driver's licenses are socially crippled in a dozen ways. Unless there were some strong argument on the other side, sheer humanitarian considerations would argue for allowing them to have the basic personal identification document.

Of course, it's not hard to buy a fake driver's license. So the ban on giving real driver's licenses to illegals supports the market in false documents, not something to which we should be indifferent given the terrorist threat.

People without driver's licenses can't get auto insurance. That's bad for the victims of the accidents they are involved in (and one more good reason for pay-at-the-pump no-fault auto insurance). It also, as Barack Obama correctly noted, encourages them to hit and run.

Most of all, though, not having a driver's license is an excellent reason for not wanting to talk to the police if, for example, you happened to be driving a car when you witnessed a crime. More than that, the no-license rule reminds illegals to avoid contact with authorities under any circumstances. Someone who is afraid to testify makes an attractive crime victim, and neighborhoods full of such people are safe places in which to commit crimes. Ask any big-city police chief where he stands on the driver's license issue, and you'll get an earful.

So on the one hand we have humanitarian and public-safety considerations, and on the other hand we have ... what, exactly? The hope that people will deport themselves, or not enter illegally, because they can't get a driver's license? As Obama said, people come to this country to work, not to drive.

When HRC was pressed to justify her position, she was reduced to saying that it wouldn't be "appropriate" to give a "privilege" such as a driver's license to illegals. In the immortal words of Wolfgang Pauli, "That isn't even wrong." It's pure assertion as a placeholder for an argument no one can make with a straight face.

Obama did a little waffling, asserting (as HRC did) that the problem would go away once there was "comprehensive immigration reform." But then he stated clearly what he's said before: he supports issuing licenses in the meantime.

Obama also rejected, as his opponent accepted and furthered, the questioner's attempt to use the immigration issue to stir up black-v.-brown tensions.

Licenses for illegals is hardly the most important issue in the world, but as a symbol of willingness to bit the political bullet when necessary in support of the right policy, it strikes me as pretty powerful. There wasn't much doubt which candidate looked Presidential. And it wasn't the one who used to live at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

Update Corrected to return Pauli's words to their rightful owner.

Obama: I have worked on the streets of Chicago with people who were laid off from steel plants -- black, white, Latino, Asian.  Before latest round of immigrants showed up, we had high unemployment among African Americans.  To blame economic problems on immigrants is scapegoating I will not subscribe to.  I believe we can be a nation of laws AND immigrants. Have to get control of borders. Have to crack down on employers who take advantage of situation, exploit workers.  Need a pathway to citizenship after they have paid a fine and learned English, if we don't they'll continue to undermine US wages.  Problems rooted in an economy out of balance, lack of investment in basic infrastructure, chronically underfunded education system.  Don't use immigration as tactic to divide, we need to bring country together.

Clinton:  Because of employers who exploit undocumented workers, there are job losses.  Have to be frank about that.  We need comprehensive immigration reform solution.  That is the answer. If we can tighten borders, crack down on employers who exploit workers, do more to help local communities to cope with costs, do more to help friends to the south create jobs for their people.  Talk about deporting 12-14 million people is not practical, I don't agree with that.  If you've committed a crime, you can't stay.  But for the vast majority, we'll give you a path to legalization.  Pay fine, back taxes. Learn English. Then, wait in line.  Then the labor market won't undercut wages. Only then can you get to privileges like drivers licenses. Need to solve problem, not exacerbate it.

Obama:  When immigration issue came up, I worked with Ted Kennedy, Dick Durbin, John McCain (although he may not admit it now) to move this issue forward aggressively.  This is not an issue that polls well, but it's the right thing to do...show leadership on the issue.  Workers' problems not caused primarily by immigration.  We have to stand up for these issues when it's tough, and that's what I've done.  Children brought here through no fault of their own can go to college.  There were those who were opposed and those who have flipped and have run away from this issue.  I have stood up consistently on this issue.  On drivers' license issue, we won't have to deal with this if we have comprehensive immigration reform.  People don't come here to drive, they come here to work.  Pathway to citizenship -- right approach for African Americans, Latinos, white workers.

Clinton: I cosponsored comprehensive immigration reform in 2004 before Barack came to the Senate.  Represent New York -- home of Statue of Liberty.  House of Representatives passed mean-spirited provision that would criminalize Good Samaritan, Jesus Christ himself.  Something I take very personally.  I've worked on behalf of immigrants.  Got farm workers' endorsement last week.  This has been turned into a political issue by those who are undermining values of America.  Practical, realistic approach, bring people together.  People are nervous about immigration, looking for explanation for their economic anxiety.  Americans wouldn't stand for rounding up immigrants.  It is not appropriate to give drivers' license to undocumented. It's a diversion from creating a coalition to change immigration system.

Obama:  Sen. Clinton gave a number of different answers over several weeks.  Initially said you were for it, then you said you were against it. This is a difficult political issue.  I agree with Bill Richardson that there is a public safety concern here.  I don't want a bunch of hit-and-run drivers because they're afraid of being deported.  Who is going to tackle this problem and solve it?  Practical, commonsense solution.

Clinton: If I recall, you were asked the same question and couldn't answer.  So this is a difficult issue.  We share many of the same values.  Respect dignity of every human being.  Have a united Democratic Party with fair minded Republicans to fix this broken system.

which I think favors Obama -  if he can be her equal on policy and in a debate,then I think he both neutralizes her claim based on "experience" and gains the edge on the desire for change.

I do think he made a bit of an error lowering himself by saying she had changed her position on drivers' licenses -   since there is already a difference on where you are now, let that sit there -  if the questioners want to challenge her on that point, so be it, and if not, it is not worth getting down and dirty

Obama:  A lot of Americans disagree that Hillary has best experience.  I've spent entire adult life trying to bring about change.  Worked as civil right attorney, turning down lucrative corporate jobs. Worked as state legislator for years.  In US Senate, worked on everything from nuclear proliferation to alternative energy.  Leadership needed is to bring people together, overcome special interests, talking straight to American people about how we'll solve these problems, putting in hard work to get things done.  I respect Hillary's record, but I think the skills I have are the right ones or I wouldn't be running for president.

Clinton: Go back 35 years. Got out of law school, worked for Children's Defense Fund.  Appointed to Legal Service Corporation.  I've run projects to provide aid to prisoners, expand rural health care, varied experiences in private, public, not-for-profit sector.  In White House, a lot of responsibility given to me.  Took on drug companies.  Children's health care.  Adoption and safe families act.  Work I did around the world.  Negotiating with governments, speaking on behalf of womens' rights and human rights.  Work across party lines with people who never thought they'd work with me. Try to make change in peoples' lives.

"All I know is that I don't want the pilot's wife flying the plane."

Can you explain it?

If you take away Hillary's time as First Lady of Arkansas and take away her time as First Lady of the US, exactly what experience does she have that qualifies her for POTUS that Obama doesn't have?  She is claiming that she knows how to fly because she is the pilot's wife.  Got it now?

so ignore 20 years of her life and she and Obama have the same experience?

I thought you were an Obama supporter. This sounds like an argument for Hillary.

Clinton:  The US government is much more than a business, it is a trust.  It is not out to make a profit. It is to help American people, to stand up to our values. We have a president who ran s CEO/MBA president and look what we got.

Obama:  Romney hasn't got a very good return on his investment in this campaign.

Clinton: Greatest respect for Kennedy family.  I have three of RFK's children supporting me.  We're going to get big change - having first woman president would be big change.  This is about the two of us, who will be best president on day #1, best nominee for Democratic Party, withstand whatever they do on other side of the aisle.  This is about your lives, your health care, whether we can once again be proud of our country.  Evaluate the two of us on your criteria.  Noone else will be on ballot.  Great tribute to Dem. Party that we're sitting here.

Obama: There were good things that happened during 8 years of Clinton Administration.  We're all Democrats.  I don't want to diminish accomplishments of those 8 years.  Ultimately, each of us have to be judged on our own merits.  I do think there was something that happened...you could see it at event with Ted and Carline Kennedy, we are bringing in a whole generation of new voters, which I think is exciting.  Call on American people to reach higher, don't settle...don't accept foreign policy that has seen our respect diminish around the world and hasn't made us safer.  Who can inspire American people to get back involved in their government again, push back special interests.  Number of people in Democratic primaries have doubled.  That changes the electoral map.

Clinton: I regret deeply that there is a Bush in the White House.  We are all judged on our own merits.  Grueling. Nobody has an advantage -- have to raise money, make case for yourself.  I'm very proud of my husband's administration.  It did take a Clinton to clean up after the first Bush, might take another one to clean up after the second Bush. (huge cheering)

That was a great line!

to clean up after President Jeb.

shoot me now

Then, is it Jenna, Barbara, of George P. Bush?

The Bush clan is way bigger, so advantage them.

4 More Beers!

But, being a Bush and all, she'd order 4 for the country, but only pay for one.

Because there never were any messes in the Clinton administration.  Right.

it depends on what the meaning of the word "clean" is.

Clinton: I will begin to withdraw troops within 60 days  1-2 brigades a month, all should be out within a year.  Need to plan and execute this right.  It's not only bringing our people out, we have to think about what we're going to do with 100,000 American civilians there, with Iraqis who sided with us.  Tell Iraqi government there is no more time, they're out of time, they have to take responsibility for their own country.  Have to be responsible as we can be.  This president intends to leave 130,000 troops in Iraq as he exits.  Irresponsible for Bush to not end what he's started.

Obama: Important to be as careful getting out as we were careless getting in.  I will end this war. No permanent bases in Iraq.  McCain suggests we might be there 100 years; indicates a profound lack of understanding.  We've got a big problem in Afghanistan, Pakistan.  China is strengthening.  Neglecting our economy, undermining our long-term security. Important for us to set a date, let Iraqis know we are serious.  Can't be muddy, fuzzy, they have to know we're serious. We have to be clear about what our mission is.  Difference between Clinton and me?  No mission creep, e.g., troops in Iraq to blunt Iranian influence.  Profound strategic error to go into this war in the first place.  I will be the Democrat most effective to go up against John McCain because I will offer a clear contrast.  I don't just want to end the war, I want to end the mindset that got us into war in the first place.

Clinton: Proud to have support of people like Rep Maxine Waters, member of out of Iraq caucus.  We have to send several messages at once.  Yes, we are withdrawing.  Iraqis have to get serious -- we will not be there indefinitely.  Send that message to region.  Iran, Syria will find themselves in difficult position as we withdraw -- be careful what you wish for.  Start diplomatic efforts immediately. Prevent President Bush from committing our country to ongoing presence in Iraq.

addressing the question of "progress" in Iraq, again not accepting the premises of the question.

Take note, folks. Both Hillary and Obama are giving a textbook lesson on how to deal with an inept, insular, out-of-touch national media.

...is neither Obama nor Clinton (full disclosure, I'm a rabid Obama fan), the winner is the Democratic Party.

Either one of these candidates would be infinitely - INFINITELY!!! -- superior to any of the Republicans.  It's utterly stunning what a contrast there is in the quality level of the two parties' candidates.

Looking at the reality of the perceived flips and flops one could say that Romney was a Governor up in MA about the same way Kaine has been here if you look at the records. Some of the things Kaine would like to take us to, Romney accomplished as well in his state. I cetainly have never consider Romney as a typical conservative by todays standards in policy or governance and it is striking just how close his policies were to the platforms of some current Democratic Governors including Kaine. He is probably running away from the record on issues you do not here about just like Huckabee governance, fairly liberal lite in ARK. So it amazes me just how "conservative"less those remaining on teh Republican side truly are.

and insure a D victory in November!

I think there is little chance Obama would want Hillary as a VP for many  practical and political reasons, but it was a nice moment anyway.

n/t

The fact is that while I think Hillary would make the better president given the country's needs now, she bring a lot of baggage and drama with her. Some of it is her and Bill's fault, some of it is the fault of a craven and inept media, but it would be bound to present a huge problem for Obama once in office.

But more to the point, Bill and Hillary aren't VP types. They have their own agendas, and at this stage of their lives I don't think they would be willing to put them aside to pursue Obama's. Yes, Dick Cheney has his own operation in the Bush Administration; I don't think Obama would, or should, tolerate that kind of VP in his own admin.

Ultimately Hillary says it was because she trusted Bush and he didn't follow the rules. She will NEVER say her vote was a mistake. As she is now saying, she and Bill never had a problem with bombing Iraq.

Clinton: Believed strongly we needed to put inspectors into Iraq.  If I had known then what I know now, I never would have given Pres. Bush the authority.  He abused that authority.  Now, the question is how we go forward.  Republicans are still committed to George Bush's policy.  Democrats have much better grasp of reality we are confronting.  I welcome that debate with the Republicans.

Obama: I welcome the progress in Iraq.  Notion that we don't welcome progress in Iraq is ridiculous.  I want to get troops home safely and complete mission honorably.  The notion that we've succeeded because violence is a little lower...went from intolerable levels of violence and dysfunctional government...this has undermined our security while Afghanistan has slid into more chaos than before we went into Iraq. I always thought this was a bad idea, bad strategy, not just a problem of execution.  This was a conceptually flawed mission from start.  When we go to war, it should be because there's an imminent threat, troops trained and treated properly, etc.  Easier for us to make the argument if Republicans can't turn around and say, "but wait a minute, you supported this."

Clinton:  [Asked if she made a mistake voting to authorize war] I believe in coercive diplomacy.  Putting inspectors in was a good idea.  Threat of force to get people to change behavior is fine.  I said at the time, let inspectors do their job.  If I had been president, we would never have diverted attention from Afghanistan.  What are we going to do going forward?

[Blitzer asks if she was naive in trusting President Bush]

Good try, Wolf.  I certainly respect Sen. Obama making his speech in 2002.  When he came to the Senate, we had the same policy.  The case that was outlined was a credible case.  I was told personally by White House that they would use the resolution to put inspectors in.  We had evidence that they had a lot of bad stuff for a long time. He was a megalomaniac.  There were legitimate concerns about what he might do.

Obama: Don't want to belabor this.  The authorization was to use military force in Iraq.  Everyone understood that at the time, people were very clear about that.  Sen. Clinton has claimed she has experience on day 1.  It is important to be RIGHT on day 1. Judgment I exhibited on this and other issues relates to how I'll make decisions moving forward.  Terrorist threat is real, we have finite resources.  Need good intelligence, clear rationale.

"It's important to be correct on day one!"  

Each candidate has had two superb lines so far tonight (HRC's was about needing a Clinton to clean up Bush's mess).  Overall, so far, I'd rate the debate a tossup between the two Democrats, a HUGE win for the Democratic Party!

Reasoned, substantive, and embodying a united party ready to take the fight to the decrepit, and decomposing Republican Party.

Clinton:  Both Barack and I have passionate spouses.  I'm running for president and this is my campaign.  I want the campaign to stay focused on the issues that I'm concerned about, future of country.  I'm thrilled to have my husband and daughter campaigning for me, but it's my name on the ballot.  I will have to make the call as commander in chief.  At the end of the day, it's a lonely job in the White House.

I juts want to say, Chelsea Clinton has grown in a quite beautiful and impressive young woman.

Obama:  I respect Sen. Clinton.  Her service to this country's been extraordinary.  Lot more road to travel, premature and presumptuous to speculate about VP.  Need to restore a sense of what is possible in government.  People of integrity, independence, people willing to say "no" to me, no more yes men or women in the White House.  Give Americans the sense that the government's on their side, that government's listening to them. That's not what's happened over last 7 years.  Work for American people, that's why I'm working for American people.  I'm sure Hillary would be on anyone's short list.

Clinton:  Agree with everything Barack just said. This has been an extraordinary campaign.  Both of us overwhelmed by response we've engendered.  There is no doubt that we will have unified Democratic Party.  Monday night interactive town hall.

How the hell do you type that fast?

Other comments:
-  Obama's definitely getting scrappier, kind of like the little chihuahua that becomes meaner after he's had enough of the big dogs bullying him.  I think that's generally a good thing -- he needed to get over the "Obambi" label -- and I noticed he is already taking the fight to McCain in a number of his comments, which is the right approach.

-  Hillary is an outstanding debater, but it is also remarkable what a quick learner Obama is:  3 years into the Senate and he's already in the ring slugging it out with the best, toughest fighters out there. Amazing, if you think about it.

-  I went to CNN.com (don't have cable), and the two stories listed below the debate are "Cellmate: Mom said baby 'fit right in' microwave" and "Nude models on strike".  Is it any wonder Americans are so ill-informed?

That's what they pay me the big bucks for.  On second thought, why the heck am I doing this @#$% again, please remind me? :)

Because you brought and keep many of us involved and most importantly, bring new people into the discussion.  Keep it going!

I have two points:

1. I'm just proud to be a Democrat tonight.

2. Big loser tonight: The media, left without a simplistic storyline from tonight's debate.

He's not a great debater, far better speaker with a prepared speech.  But he kept toe-to-toe with Hillary tonight.  If Obama had any momentum going into tonight, I don't think she stopped it.  But Clinton definitely didn't look bad.  I honestly think that this debate may have eased some anger tensions, but besides that then trend that was there this morning likely won't change much.

but here is an opposite view.

South Carolina was a debacle for Clinton. She was bleeding badly, and Obama had momentum.

An excellent debate by both candidates stops that momentum and turns the voters' attention back where Clinton wants it: who do you think would be a better president -- wherever you come down on that question, it's better than the Bill and Hillary are out of control and playing the race card.

But to me, the most important message was the message of unity.

And again, it is pretty funny listening to the MSM try to fit the debate into the narrative they have been spinning for the last week.

That this was nothing special.  Polite, clean, positive.  I think it would take an Edwards "grow up you two" kind of moment to make any dramatic shift in the way things are going.  Could there be a minor shift?  Yeah.  But I don't think anything significant happened tonight.

just providing a a different perspective on it.

Great night for our party. I hope these candidates and their surrogates are able to keep up this level of debate through Tuesday, and make their positive case to the voters.

this unity idea is a trap that Clinton wants to box Obama in on. She she's the mojo he is swinging 32 million in 30 days speaks volumes. Obama should stay focused on the change message and Clinton is exactly the focus, in Democratic terms anyway, of that change.
If you noticed, and I think Obama did, Clinton constantly acts as if she is the change candidate because she references George Bush constantly, well news flash your not running against Bush your against Obama in the present but she is has done well to keep people focused on Bush failures than the real issues of change that Obama is wheeling.
Obama will be better served by continuing to remind base that Clinton is exactly the insider, establishment candidate that both Edwards and himself reeled against early in the campaigns. Obama should revist that focus.

which will be critical to winning the election in November.

explaining their positions.  A positive debate.

I noticed Clinton got a couple digs in at McCain late in the debate.  Obama's body shots at McCain in the first half though actually had me laughing.  He got a good jab in later in the second segment too (his digs at McCain were over Iraq and immigration reform -- Clinton got one in on the 100 years factor).  

their group of undecided voters went 60-40 for Clinton, whatever that is worth. I'm always wary of these types of so-called undecided groups.

After New Hampshire, one of the newsrooms showed that everybody loved Obama in the debate.  But we all know that the debate definitely went in Hillary's favor that night.

FWIW, "mano" is Spanish for "hand," not "man."

But maybe that's part of the joke. :)

to be funny...

Hillary has already proven herself to be a very quick and intelligent debater.  But Obama looked better than he ever has tonight.

Let's go back to 2000.  Polls gave the debate victories to Bush over Gore.  Why?  It wasn't the substance, it was expectations.  Bush was "an idiot", and Gore was "a wonk."  It shouldn't have been close.  But Bush held his own, and blew away the low expectations.  Low expectations that weren't there to save him in 2004, when Kerry crushed him in those debates.

Again, if Obama got anything from this debate, it was that he looked just as presidential as Hillary, which will help his image a bit.  But I really think that you can't really call either team a winner.  Both did well, and I really think little will have changed tomorrow.

She does much better when
1) Its just about her policies and experience (not Bill)
2) Not on the attack, and can be warm and wonky

Barack was a little quiet..or at least it seemed that Hillary was talking more.

I believe Barack skinned his knee a little on immigration.

They both jabbed hard at the Republicans and Bush..and I loved
both of their replies on not being "CEO's".

I'll give a slight edge on this evenings debate to Hillary..but nothing to diminish Barack's momentum.

For the most part Hillary talked too much for me and didn't get to the point fast enough. Nothing terrible it just wasn't as concise as I might like. I think she got a few more questions directly then Barrack.

I felt Obama framed things better and got to the Point(s)he wanted to make quicker. From a consumer standpoint I felt better educated well informed just from his delivery.

That a candidate's personality and passion isn't reflected by the tone of his supporters.  I'm somewhat disappointed to see that some Obama supporters felt the need to spew anger about Clinton in response to what was by FAR a more civil and even friendly discussion of the issues than what I and a lot of other people had been expecting.

Thankfully that appears to be a vocal minority, with a lot of other folks giving credit to both candidates regardless of who they may be supporting otherwise.  I wish those here who are capable of seeing the good in both sides would be a little more vocal about giving credit to both candidates so we could ratchet down the anger.

So: my 2 cents.  Hillary did very well. Obama hung with her.  Early on, this campaign was cast as a question of whether Democrats would vote with their heads for Clinton or their hearts for Obama.  I've thought for a long time that it is a profound mistake for either candidate to want us to choose between our heads or our hearts when we decide who to vote for; they should both want us to vote for them with BOTH our minds and our hearts, and our hands and our feet and whatever other organs we can get involved in the political process.  Obama has already had massive appeal for my heart; tonight he sealed the deal for me by proving I can also vote for him with my head.  I think both candidates would be credible nominees, but I eagerly hope for the success of Barack Obama this upcoming Tuesday.

Yes, it was an outstanding debate that made me proud to be a Democrat. Either of our candidates will be far more preferable than any of theirs.

Hillary and Barack "look like a ticket", I think Keith Olbermann said that last night afterwards, though I can't see that happening. Barack simply upstages her too much.

Here is what concerns me: Hillary once again showed complete, total, utter incoherence on Iraq. She cannot make sense out of her votes or statements. McCain, a true believer, will chew her up and spit her out.

McCain will want to debate Iraq, not the economy, and Hillary simply doesn't make sense there. Obama would be a far better adversary in challenging the assumptions and misconceptions McCain will offer.

Think about that.