ABC Facebook Debate - The Democrats

The second half of the ABC Facebook back to back, "Two Parties, One Night" debate was significantly more civil, but it was still a very interesting, substantive debate about some of the issues. I think of all the debates that have taken place over the course of this election cycle, and I seem to have ended up seeing most of them, this was my favourite. I think it helped that we had thinned fields on both sides, and that's something I want to come back to and talk about in another post, but I think it's also hats off to Charles Gibson. Gibson was a fantastic moderator, who wasn't afraid to push on the harder topics and ask the tough questions to the candidates. At some points he wasn't so much a moderator as someone who was participating in the debate, but I like that. I feel that the moderator represents the people in these debates, and we shouldn't just have the opportunity to moderate but get stuck in and challenge the candidates, so kudos to Charles Gibson.

And now to the candidates who participated in tonight's debate.

Barack Obama - He doesn't strike me as confident in the debates as when out campaigning. He isn't quite able to meet the oratorical heights that we would hope of Barack Obama when answering questions posed by moderators on national TV, but that's no exceptionally important. He still had a good night, though whether this debate performance will move things in his favor is probably unlikely. He was certainly helped out by John Edwards, who came to his rescue against Clinton and gave her two targets to shoot at.

John Edwards - His strategy seems to definitely be one of trying to push Hillary Clinton out of the race to make it a change election. I'm not sure he knows how to approach the differences between himself or Obama, or whether he wants to but instead prefers the association with him and the change message. Last night it seemed a bit as though Edwards was trying to court Obama, almost as if he was extending an olive branch to allow the two to work together and defeat Hillary Clinton. Very interesting. He wasn't as aggressive towards the other candidates as in previous debates, because I think the intimate format makes it much more difficult to be a dick and get away with it, but he spoke very passionately, particularly about his family.

Hillary Clinton - A good night for Hillary Clinton. She didn't seem burdened or knocked by the Iowa results, and you might almost have thought that from her performance this debate was taking place before the Caucus had taken place. But the one thing that did come through which was different was her perspective on the change issue. Edwards came after her by calling her 'the forces of the status quo' (though never used her name, but we know who he was referring to.) Her rebuts now seem to focus upon action. She's an agent of change not through word but deed. Iowans clearly didn't buy into the idea of Hillary Clinton as an agent of change though, and I'm not sure New Hampshire voters will either.

Bill Richardson - I liked Richardson a lot more than in previous debates tonight. He seemed much more comfortable than in any of the previous debates he's participated in. Perhaps because the field is so small and he feels that with the opportunity to be heard in these debates people will remember him when he's not part of a field of 'Also Rans'. He was pretty funny at times too - particularly with his line about hostage negotiation (when Obama, Edwards and Clinton were sparring he said "I've been in hostage negotiations more civil than this") and also when he was asked about what one thing he'd said in the debates he would take back. I'm still not sure he can translate this performance into much at the polls, but for once I wasn't annoyed that he was taking up air-time.