CNN Democratic Debate Thread (7/23/07)

[Reaganfan]

Terrorism wasn't mentioned once...

We're going back to a 9/10 world, thankfully.

I guess you want America to be attacked...people like you make me sick. Why the hell would you want to fight terror like we didn't do pre-9/11? You a nutjob?

[StateBoiler]

Terrorism wasn't mentioned once...

We're going back to a 9/10 world, thankfully.

I guess you want America to be attacked...people like you make me sick. Why the hell would you want to fight terror like we didn't do pre-9/11? You a nutjob?

Yeeeeeeeeeees...we all want America to be attacked. I pray every night to God to have a nuke drop on my house.

[7,052,770]

Watching the debate now;

It is clear that anyone who accuses Hillary of being "pro-war" is outright lying.  How many times must she say that she wants to end the war before she becomes anti-war?

[TheresNoMoney]

Watching the debate now;

It is clear that anyone who accuses Hillary of being "pro-war" is outright lying. 

The point is that she was firmly in Bush's corner on the war until fairly recently, so it greatly detracts from her crediblity on this issue.  She flip-flopped on this issue later than any other candidate (while Obama and Kucinich opposed the war from the start).

[7,052,770]

Watching the debate now;

It is clear that anyone who accuses Hillary of being "pro-war" is outright lying.

The point is that she was firmly in Bush's corner on the war until fairly recently, so it greatly detracts from her crediblity on this issue.  She flip-flopped on this issue later than any other candidate (while Obama and Kucinich opposed the war from the start).

Oh come on, if Obama had been in the Senate at the time, he would have supported the war, don't be silly.  It's really easy for him to say that he opposed it now, when no one cared what some random IL legislator thought in early 2003.

[TheresNoMoney]

Oh come on, if Obama had been in the Senate at the time, he would have supported the war, don't be silly.

I highly doubt it. Just because he wasn't a US Senator doesn't mean that his opposition to the Iraq War isn't significant. It was still an unpopular position at the time, no matter what capacity he served in.

[Eraserhead]

Watching the debate now;

It is clear that anyone who accuses Hillary of being "pro-war" is outright lying.

The point is that she was firmly in Bush's corner on the war until fairly recently, so it greatly detracts from her crediblity on this issue.  She flip-flopped on this issue later than any other candidate (while Obama and Kucinich opposed the war from the start).

Oh come on, if Obama had been in the Senate at the time, he would have supported the war, don't be silly.  It's really easy for him to say that he opposed it now, when no one cared what some random IL legislator thought in early 2003.

Nice try Harry. There are some people with some actual convictions out there. Hillary just jumps to whatever position is popular at the moment.

[Boris]

* Clinton is trash. "Liberal has come to mean Big Government instead of freedom ... progressive is a good American word..." What the fuck? This is what passes for progressivism in the US?

She was merely commenting on how the Republicans have basically turned 'liberal' into a dirty word that means big government, high taxes, weak national defense, etc. Whether or not those descriptors are a good thing or not is of course debateable, but you can't deny that that's what 'liberal' means in America and that also is why the term 'progressive' is now popular. Although I still say that both are meaningless, one-dimensional terms, but whatever.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Agreed.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

His totally missed the point on the gun control question. What a dolt.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Which is why Gravel and Kucinich combine for a whopping 1% of the base's support? The 'mainstream' candidates are hardly out of touch with the country:

*They support withdrawal from Iraq, as does most of the country.
*They oppose gay marriage, as does most of the country.
*Two out of three candidates with a shot at winning the nomination supported the war in Iraq, as did most of the country.
*They are pro-choice, as is most of the country.
*They favor combating Global Warming, as does most of the country.
*They support Israel, as does most of the country.

Seriously, on what issues are they out of touch with the country on? Perhaps Universal Healthcare, but I've seen contradictory polls.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

All of the top candidates, Hillary, Obama, Edwards, Richardson, and Biden are all anti gay marriage. Unlike possibly all of the other spouses, Elizabeth Edwards is FOR gay marriage. I really don't see how gay marriage can be used to specifically attack Edwards.

[minionofmidas]

All of the top candidates, Hillary, Obama, Edwards, Richardson, and Biden are all anti gay marriage. Unlike possibly all of the other spouses, Elizabeth Edwards is FOR gay marriage. I really don't see how gay marriage can be used to specifically attack Edwards.

Umm... his wife's for it, so obviously he's secretly for it as well, so obviously he's a fagloving northeastern liberal who's out of touch with the American people. Besides, he ran on a ticket with that wellknown faglover from the fagloving state of Massachusetts.

See? Easy.

[7,052,770]

I don't really see what the big deal over Biden and the gun control question was.  He probably should've been more polite, but that guy clearly had a screw loose or two.
Even if you think he was way off, I don't see how a single gaffe can make you lose all of your respect for someone...everyone says dumb things from time to time, and most of us aren't under the pressure the candidates were under.


Anyhow, all of the candidates did a great job.  I really enjoyed the format.

[jokerman]

Biden a beacon of reason and common sense on foreign policy (and a few other issues) as usual.  Richardson had his good moments as well.  Obama definitely my favorite among the top tier; if Richardson doesn't pick up my support will go to Obama.

[Robespierre's Jaw]

I thought it was one of the best debates in the entire campaign, thus far. However, I hated some of the responses to questions on Health Care, especially from John Edwards.

He was going to state what his Health Care plan consisted on, however he didn't. He went on about his "Poverty" tour, and about a man that couldn't talk for 50 years. Though, it was an interesting story Edwards told, he didn't say what was in his Health Care plan. So, I was disapointed with that.

Also, when the candidates talked about something they liked and disliked about the candidate to their left. The only honest response came from former Senator Mike Gravel. Whilst, the others said they disliked anything about the candidate to their left. Edwards only came up with the stupid response about Hillary Clinton's blouse.

[True Democrat]

This debate turned me into a Biden supporter (I was formerly a Richardson supporter, but his answer on Darfur disappointed me).

[Reluctant Republican]

I don't really see what the big deal over Biden and the gun control question was.  He probably should've been more polite, but that guy clearly had a screw loose or two.
Even if you think he was way off, I don't see how a single gaffe can make you lose all of your respect for someone...everyone says dumb things from time to time, and most of us aren't under the pressure the candidates were under.


Anyhow, all of the candidates did a great job.  I really enjoyed the format.

I like where Biden stands on some things and he always has seemed to me to be one of the more knowledgeable and competent senators. But one think I always respect in a politician, or anyone for that matter, is civility. even though I don’t agree with him on everything, I’m supporting Ron Paul, because he has always struck me as a man who can disagree with someone but still be amicable to the person.  Biden’s quip just made him seem rude to me, and I lost some respect for him. Would I consider voting for him still? Most definitely, but any person who has to resort to demeaning another person, even one with an “extreme position” is not really fit to be President, IMHO. I’m sure Kucinich disagreed with the guy as well, but I highly doubt he would have responded in the same manner.

[True Democrat]

I don't really see what the big deal over Biden and the gun control question was.  He probably should've been more polite, but that guy clearly had a screw loose or two.
Even if you think he was way off, I don't see how a single gaffe can make you lose all of your respect for someone...everyone says dumb things from time to time, and most of us aren't under the pressure the candidates were under.


Anyhow, all of the candidates did a great job.  I really enjoyed the format.

I like where Biden stands on some things and he always has seemed to me to be one of the more knowledgeable and competent senators. But one think I always respect in a politician, or anyone for that matter, is civility. even though I don’t agree with him on everything, I’m supporting Ron Paul, because he has always struck me as a man who can disagree with someone but still be amicable to the person.  Biden’s quip just made him seem rude to me, and I lost some respect for him. Would I consider voting for him still? Most definitely, but any person who has to resort to demeaning another person, even one with an “extreme position” is not really fit to be President, IMHO. I’m sure Kucinich disagreed with the guy as well, but I highly doubt he would have responded in the same manner.

Biden has a problem with speaking his mind a bit too much (the gun comment, the comment about Kucinich's wife, and the statement about Indians working at 7/11 and Dunkin Donuts).  However, I believe that speaking his mind will ultimately help Biden because he's willing to tell it how it is.

[© tweed]

Watching the debate now;

It is clear that anyone who accuses Hillary of being "pro-war" is outright lying.

The point is that she was firmly in Bush's corner on the war until fairly recently, so it greatly detracts from her crediblity on this issue.  She flip-flopped on this issue later than any other candidate (while Obama and Kucinich opposed the war from the start).

Oh come on, if Obama had been in the Senate at the time, he would have supported the war, don't be silly.  It's really easy for him to say that he opposed it now, when no one cared what some random IL legislator thought in early 2003.

Obama said in an interview in December 2002 that he would have voted "no" on the resolution.

[Keystone Phil]

I don't really see what the big deal over Biden and the gun control question was.  He probably should've been more polite, but that guy clearly had a screw loose or two.
Even if you think he was way off, I don't see how a single gaffe can make you lose all of your respect for someone...everyone says dumb things from time to time, and most of us aren't under the pressure the candidates were under.


Anyhow, all of the candidates did a great job.  I really enjoyed the format.

I like where Biden stands on some things and he always has seemed to me to be one of the more knowledgeable and competent senators. But one think I always respect in a politician, or anyone for that matter, is civility. even though I don’t agree with him on everything, I’m supporting Ron Paul, because he has always struck me as a man who can disagree with someone but still be amicable to the person.  Biden’s quip just made him seem rude to me, and I lost some respect for him. Would I consider voting for him still? Most definitely, but any person who has to resort to demeaning another person, even one with an “extreme position” is not really fit to be President, IMHO. I’m sure Kucinich disagreed with the guy as well, but I highly doubt he would have responded in the same manner.

Biden has a problem with speaking his mind a bit too much (the gun comment, the comment about Kucinich's wife, and the statement about Indians working at 7/11 and Dunkin Donuts).  However, I believe that speaking his mind will ultimately help Biden because he's willing to tell it how it is.

There was no "telling it like it is" when it comes to that gun comment. He just wanted to be an asshole and throw a cheap shot for ten seconds of applause.

[Verily]

I don't really see what the big deal over Biden and the gun control question was.  He probably should've been more polite, but that guy clearly had a screw loose or two.
Even if you think he was way off, I don't see how a single gaffe can make you lose all of your respect for someone...everyone says dumb things from time to time, and most of us aren't under the pressure the candidates were under.


Anyhow, all of the candidates did a great job.  I really enjoyed the format.

I like where Biden stands on some things and he always has seemed to me to be one of the more knowledgeable and competent senators. But one think I always respect in a politician, or anyone for that matter, is civility. even though I don’t agree with him on everything, I’m supporting Ron Paul, because he has always struck me as a man who can disagree with someone but still be amicable to the person.  Biden’s quip just made him seem rude to me, and I lost some respect for him. Would I consider voting for him still? Most definitely, but any person who has to resort to demeaning another person, even one with an “extreme position” is not really fit to be President, IMHO. I’m sure Kucinich disagreed with the guy as well, but I highly doubt he would have responded in the same manner.

Biden has a problem with speaking his mind a bit too much (the gun comment, the comment about Kucinich's wife, and the statement about Indians working at 7/11 and Dunkin Donuts).  However, I believe that speaking his mind will ultimately help Biden because he's willing to tell it how it is.

There was no "telling it like it is" when it comes to that gun comment. He just wanted to be an asshole and throw a cheap shot for ten seconds of applause.

So someone who refers to their gun as their baby doesn't deserve ridicule? You don;t have to support gun control to see such a statement as absurd and dependent.

[Keystone Phil]

So someone who refers to their gun as their baby doesn't deserve ridicule? You don;t have to support gun control to see such a statement as absurd and dependent.

Why should it be any different than the amount of people that call their car their baby? I know plenty of people that do so (friends of mine especially) and while I think it is stupid, they don't deserve ridicule. Give me a break. Joe Biden is a notoriously nasty person who was only looking to throw a cheap shot. The guy is a joke.

[Verily]

So someone who refers to their gun as their baby doesn't deserve ridicule? You don;t have to support gun control to see such a statement as absurd and dependent.

Why should it be any different than the amount of people that call their car their baby? I know plenty of people that do so (friends of mine especially) and while I think it is stupid, they don't deserve ridicule. Give me a break. Joe Biden is a notoriously nasty person who was only looking to throw a cheap shot. The guy is a joke.

Well, a good part of it was the tone, but I would say that someone who calls their car their baby also deserves ridicule for putting way too emotion into a relationship with an inanimate object.

But, you're right, Biden is a nasty piece of work. If he didn't have a temper to rival John Bolton,  I might consider supporting him.

[Keystone Phil]

So someone who refers to their gun as their baby doesn't deserve ridicule? You don;t have to support gun control to see such a statement as absurd and dependent.

Why should it be any different than the amount of people that call their car their baby? I know plenty of people that do so (friends of mine especially) and while I think it is stupid, they don't deserve ridicule. Give me a break. Joe Biden is a notoriously nasty person who was only looking to throw a cheap shot. The guy is a joke.

Well, a good part of it was the tone, but I would say that someone who calls their car their baby also deserves ridicule for putting way too emotion into a relationship with an inanimate object.

That's fine that you think that but people are going to be different. As long as he isn't using that "baby" to hurt anyone, I don't see why he deserves ridicule.

[TheresNoMoney]

Biden is always entertaining, that's for sure. I do admire him for his direct, straight-talking style.

[Keystone Phil]

Biden is always entertaining, that's for sure. I do admire him for his direct, straight-talking style.

Thanks for your support.

[7,052,770]

There was no "telling it like it is" when it comes to that gun comment. He just wanted to be an asshole and throw a cheap shot for ten seconds of applause.

Are you actually suggesting he wanted to be an asshole?
Although Biden was 100% correct with his sentiments, it wasn't a wise thing to say, and I understand how people could misinterpret it.
So just call it a gaffe and move on.