Now on to what others are saying...
First off, the reaction from the guest commentators on CNN was remarkably positive, and that's even assuming that they were playing to their host, AC himself. I was particularly encouraged by David Gergen's reaction. If the conventional wisdom quickly settles on this format as a positive - Gergen even went so far as to saying something along the lines of "there is no going back now" - then there really will be no going back. And sure, the format may have been silly at times, but I actually think that's a feature, not a bug. This is direct citizen participation we're talking about here, and its taking place in a part of the process that in the past had only been open to elites. And let's be honest - if a little silliness is what it takes to attract more Americans to participate in the political process, that cannot possibly be a bad thing, can it?
On to the blogs...
Josh Marshall liked it, then didn't, then did again. And yes Josh, you are being "old fashioned." The songs might have been silly, but I think we actually did learn something very valuable from the candidates' responses. People in this country have for far too long believed their representatives to be something other than human, a perception that I believe has some profoundly negative effects on our democracy. If it takes a silly song to get these people to lighten up and show that they are human, well, then that means they really are like most of us.
Andrew Sullivan says it grew on him as the night progressed. Although I agree with him that the marriage question was the one question that best highlighted the unique advantages of this format, I don't share his response to it. Edwards' reaction was that although he is personally opposed to gay marriage on religious grounds, he would not under any circumstances impose those religious beliefs on others. You may not like that answer, but it seems clear enough to me. Did I miss something?
Marc Ambinder sees Hillary as a big winner tonight, and his reasoning hits on something that's been concerning me for some time. Like it or not, we are stuck in Iraq, and getting out won't be easy. Obama's got the soundbite on this - "we have to be as careful getting out as we were careless getting in" - but that idea may ultimately be what turns one of Clinton's greatest weaknesses into a strength. The conventional wisdom is that her support for the war will be a deal-breaker for "the base." A year ago I too was convinced that was right, but the more I watch this process evolve, the less convinced I am, and at this point I could honestly see it go either way. Everything hinges on what happens between now and then, I suppose. And how's that for an insight!
Matt Yglesias focuses in on the horserace dynamic here. And I think he's right: Edwards and Obama are biding their time, waiting to strike the frontrunner when we're far, far closer to primary day. In a four day golf tournament Saturday is called "moving day," and in this race, we haven't even nearly hit the equivalent mark. He's right: stay tuned.
Joe Klein like the new format, but as Klein points out, Drudge apparently hated it. Good. Ana Marie Cox liveblogged, and she's as hilarious as always.
Digby likes it, as did CNN viewers
Speaking of which...why are CNN and YouTube so slow with uploading highlights? Hello? Is this thing on? Are the tubes clogged? Chris Dodd already has his debate coverage up, including the code necessary to publish to my site. If this guy can do it, why can't YouTube?
Over at Tapped, Garance Franke-Ruta loved the debate, and like the real-time CNN viewers, though Obama owned the night. And Dana Goldstein thinks the format humanizes the process. I couldn't agree more.
And last but not least... SUSA has a rapid response poll out tonight. Clinton won - in no small part due to overwhelming support from women - but Obama and Biden(!) saw the biggest gains on their overall positive ratings.
Subscribe to this blog's feed
