So what did you think?

I liked the format of the CNN/YouTube debate. (Videos of the questions asked  HERE) There were some very good questions and Anderson Cooper pushed to have the candidates answer the questions rather than give dull pat answers. Thus I found it very interesting.

One of my favorite questions was would you work as president for minimum wage. I believe all basically said yes (added: Dodd said no) which I suppose was aimed at imparting that they are like everyone else. I think it was the wrong answer though. They ought to have said the equivalent of Fuck No! No One in America should have to work for minimum wage.

So what did you think of the format and the debate???

And I thought Edwards had the best candidate video.....

Comments

[mdhatter]

Nice comeback.

[Sandia Blanca]

Way to neutralize an issue--plus it lends itself nicely to the Iraq-Vietnam analogy the 'Pubs hate.

[gene214]

I've been making the rounds of my favorite blogs, just to get a feel for what people thought of the "debates". First of all, I thought the format was pretty fucking weird. Most of the videos featured idiots mugging for the camera and asking bizarre softball questions ("Who was your favorite teacher"??!! What the fuck was that??!!) As for Edward's campaign video - yeah, great move. Don't show a campaign video discussing the real issues, no don't do that. Much more productive to show some silly piece of shit featuring the song "Hair"- poking fun at a reichwing talkingpoint that just won't die - Yuk yuk yuk. And before anybody starts in calling me a troll with no sense of humor or get a life or whatever, I'd just like to point out that you are NOT going to see any of this silly bullshit during the GOP debate. What you're going to see during that debate are 10 hardcore fascist sociopaths who are going to absolutely shit on the Democrats because of what was done tonight. Every reichwing pundit is going to really do a number on Democrats. I don't know where this bullshit idea started that we Democrats have to show we have a sense of humor. We're not fucking court jesters! This is literally a battle for the future of this country, and the other side is most definitely not taking any prisoners. Yeah, there were a few good points, but they were lost amongst the jerkoff videos. Sorry if I seem a little harsh (ok, more than a little) but this is not going to help the Democrats.

[darrelplant]

I'm wondering if anyone else noticed the use of the Gravel-cam, which filled the screen with a tight, cropped close-up of Mike Gravel's face.

I saw it a couple of times during the debate when Gravel got into one of his rants, but either didn't notice or missed any similar shots of the other candidates.

[notanumber]

LOVE IT!! I WANT A LONG PLAY VERSION!!! Whoever created this - Keep them coming! Thanks!

[BuggyQ]

Ahem, gene214, did you look at the Edwards video? Did you see the whole second half of it, with picture after picture of Iraq violence, Katrina devastation, the Mission Accomplished shot, etc.? It seems to me that Edwards was making exactly your point--that talking about hair is stupid, let's get back to talking about the real issues. I thought it was a remarkably effective ad.

And don't dismiss the power of snark. Ridicule is one of the more powerful weapons in the political arsenal.

Finally, I'd like to remind you that CNN was the final arbiter of which videos got to the final debate. There were, I suspect, a vast number of videos that were sober, substantive, and thoughtful. But CNN chose not to air many those. You want to go off on somebody for that, go off on CNN.

That said, I thought there were some very good questions about very important issues. My favorite was the two women asking if they would be allowed to marry each other if the candidate became president. That was, I think, the strength of this format. Those issues became personalized--it wasn't just "will you allow teh scary gays to destroy marriage?" It became about these women, who were anything but scary.

[Hoppy]

I only watched a short stretch of the debates, and I am increasingly disillusioned about the value of any of the debates. Who really cares how well those people can think on their feet and talk without sounding like programmed idiots? If this is an important part of how we chose a president we are royally fucked.

Our current president should be an object lesson to all of us. The way to chose a president is to evaluate what the person has done with his/her life. How has he/she performed in other elective offices? How well did he/she do in previous enterprises? Anyone can assume a position they think will appeal to the most voters - Mitt, anyone? But, no one can hide from their past record. And, that is the only real way to evaluate them.

If a candidate has no past record to evaluate, he/she has no business being a candidate for president. Also, "born again" just doesn't cut it. If you fuck up with your first 40 years of life, you lose - don't pass go - just get out of my face.