All in all, this was a pretty dull event. Everyone was ridiculously civil, there were no fireworks, and no memorable quips from anyone. In fact, even when the panel of journalists set the candidates up to attack one another, no one took the bait. From where I sat, none of the serious candidates gained or lost much from the event.
If I had to pick a big loser, I’d make it Fox News Channel, which broadcast the debate. No, it’s not just because I’m disgusted by the network’s right-wing ideology. The problem was FNC ran the show like a high school AV club. The cameras showed the wrong candidates during the introductions (we saw Kerry when they were introducing Kucinich, Clark when they were introducing Edwards, etc.) and the panel of journalists were frequently confused as to whose turn it was to ask questions. Real professional, guys.
Worse, at 9:45 eastern, Peter Jennings, a co-host, said, “We have only about 15 minutes left, so we’re going to take another break, and we’ll be right back.” And then Fox News decided, without explanation, to stop showing the event. The network went straight to the studio to start conservative commentary, as if the debate was over. It wasn’t. The transcript shows the last 15 minutes actually had plenty of questions and answers that viewers at home never saw because Fox News didn’t feel like airing the whole thing. It was nothing short of bizarre.
Anyway, here’s what I thought about the various candidates, in the order they appeared:
* Dean — He seemed fine, using the standard rhetoric Dean’s used for about a year (minus the attacks on his rivals). Dean joked a bit about the now-infamous scream from Monday night and gave a forceful, if not entirely persuasive, appeal on how Dems can and should compete for votes in the South. The low-point for Dean, from my perspective, was when he was asked about whether he shared “mainstream values” with the American public. Dean responded, “Well, let’s talk first about money. The president of the United States can’t balance a budget. We’ve not had one Republican president in 34 years balance the budget. You can’t trust right-wing Republicans with your money.” Howard, the question was about values, not budget policy. It was a blown opportunity.
* Clark — He seems to get more comfortable with every debate, but Clark seemed to get lousy questions last night. Oddly enough, his best and most forceful answer came in response to a question about his pro-choice beliefs — which no one saw because it was in the last 15 minutes which Fox News didn’t broadcast. Clark was also asked about Michael Moore having called Bush a “deserter” at a Clark rally. Peter Jennings said it was “a reckless charge not supported by the facts.” Clark handled it well, I thought, by saying he was focused on the future, not the past. Nevertheless, the conservatives are having fits because Clark failed to repudiate Moore’s comment. It’s a good thing Clark didn’t repudiate it — it’s a charge that has some merit. If we’re lucky, the incident will reignite a discussion about where Bush was in 1973 when he was supposed to be in the National Guard.
* Edwards — Another good night for Edwards, who seems emboldened by his success in Iowa. He had one stupid question that effectively asked him to share the full extent of his knowledge about Islam. Since this isn’t a campaign for Theologian-In-Chief, I have no idea why anyone would consider this relevant. Edwards did flub a question about the Defense of Marriage Act pretty badly, but he at least has the excuse of not having been in Congress when it passed. He was much better when questioned about his vote on the $87 billion expenditure on Iraq.
* Kerry — If Kerry wanted to get out of this debate without hurting himself in New Hampshire, he succeeded. He gave a solid answer on military recruiting instead of a draft and demonstrated depth on environmental policy with his answer on MTBE. Kerry acted like he wanted to run out the clock by avoiding anything risky or controversial. I can’t say I blame him.
* Kucinich — Dennis’ shtick is getting old in a hurry. Sure, he only mentioned bi-lateral trade twice (a record low), but otherwise looked way out of his league — because he is. And again, Kucinich showed his charts about NAFTA. At least we could see them this time, as opposed to when he used similar charts during an Iowa radio debate last month.
* Sharpton — Despite not being a real candidate, Sharpton is usually a strong presence in these debates through the power of his presentation. Not last night. The panelists didn’t go easy on Sharpton, asking the kinds of substantive questions presidential candidates are supposed to get. Sharpton’s answer about Iran was largely incoherent and he answered a question about the Federal Reserve by talking about the International Monetary Fund. When corrected, Sharpton appeared to have no idea what the Federal Reserve does. This was not only the worst of his debate performances, it was also the low-point of his campaign so far.
* Lieberman — Joe was back to being booed by a Democratic audience again, this time for his forceful support for the war in Iraq. And unlike Edwards, Lieberman appears to want to be our Theologian-In-Chief, mentioning God twice and the word “faith,” by my count, six times. Yes Joe, we get it, you’re religious. Lieberman also had the most shameless pander of any candidate in any debate I’ve seen so far, raising his right hand to vow, “I pledge to the death to protect the New Hampshire primary, so help me God.” It was pretty nauseating.