Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Another Break?

The Fix loves politics more than the average guy but wasn't this a 90-minute debate? And didn't the debate start at 8? And isn't it 9:40?

Just asking....

By Chris Cillizza  |  January 31, 2008; 9:44 PM ET
Categories:  Eye on 2008  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Clinton, Obama Spar On Electability
Next: Clinton on Clinton, Part Two


I agree Boko has a point. Still, better a cackle than a snort....

I just wonder where she picked up this rather annoying sort of laugh. Park Ridge? Wellesley? I doubt it, as I'm sure peer pressure would have been against it. I certainly don't remember it from her days as First Lady. Frankly, I've never run into someone whose laugh changed this late in life. Perhaps I've led a sheltered life....

Posted by: TomJx | February 1, 2008 4:25 AM | Report abuse

Both the Republican and the Democratic debates were originally scheduled to be two hours. The Republican candidates requested their debate be cut to 90 minutes. (Apparently CNN/Politico/LA Times did this by cutting Huckabee's and Paul's input, rather than cutting questions.)

Posted by: TomJx | February 1, 2008 4:20 AM | Report abuse

drindl, I could not help but notice. I think it is a nervous tic - although Boko could have something.

It was the best debate they could have possibly had and they addressed Iraq with some sense of responsibility.

But Ds do not understand the problem with granting citizenship as a reward for coming here illegally.

The question she could not answer on the Levin Amendment could have been mine.

She did well. She was even likeable. He did well. He is more likeable.

To that audience of Big Donors his point on bringing out new voters may have been worth

Posted by: mark_in_austin | January 31, 2008 10:45 PM | Report abuse

Mark, isn't there some occult significance to that? i.e. when she cackles three times, you have to throw a pinch of salt over your shoulder or you are doomed to walk the earth without rest, soliciting campaign funds from Chinese businessmen who disappear without warning?

Posted by: bokonon13 | January 31, 2008 10:15 PM | Report abuse

Who won the CNN Democratic Debate in California?


Posted by: PollM | January 31, 2008 10:13 PM | Report abuse

'I think both candidates tried to defuse the divisiveness, thankfully.

thank you jimD, for an adult response.

Posted by: drindl | January 31, 2008 10:10 PM | Report abuse

I agree claudialong. Why is it we have to contend with people (I'm talking to you Boutan) wanting to stoop to silly statements about the way a person laughs, etc? This has been a great debate. Either would be a great president. Time for everyone to start seeing this. I believe both will be great Presidents, and reiterate my call for HRC to be the nominee with BO to be her running mate. An unstoppable team. That's 12-16 years of great times for the US.

Posted by: anthonyrimell | January 31, 2008 10:09 PM | Report abuse

Cackle? I'm sorry, Mark, but aren't you supposed to be the one with substance? You sound like zouk, for chrissake. They were both good--this was head and shoulders above the R debate. Please.

Posted by: drindl | January 31, 2008 10:03 PM | Report abuse

What a contrast. Last night's schoolyard sillyfest vs. a cogent discussion of real issues. McCain's just Giuliani with a war record. Romney has gone as far as he can go. Either Democrat runs circles around the hack Republicans.

Posted by: CallMeLiberal | January 31, 2008 9:57 PM | Report abuse

It was supposed to be a 90-minute debate - kudos to whoever got them to go an extra half-hour and to the questioners in letting them give long, thoughtful, substantive answers!

Posted by: dhbecker | January 31, 2008 9:55 PM | Report abuse

Cackle, cackle, cackle...

I wanted to slit my throat...

Posted by: Boutan | January 31, 2008 9:54 PM | Report abuse

I think both candidates tried to defuse the divisiveness, thankfully.

Posted by: jimd52 | January 31, 2008 9:53 PM | Report abuse

Ill forgive them but because, in spite of the lameness of Mr Blitzer, this is a superb debate, substantive, respectful but still showing clearly what both candidacies are about.
People are going to be able to judge them on who they are rather than on what soundbite will play better on cable later and that's wonderful
If it was not for the celebrity cut-to, you would show last night's debate and tonight's to an average voter and you would guarantee yourself a November landslide for the Dems.

Posted by: doriansaintier | January 31, 2008 9:51 PM | Report abuse

HRC has cackled thrice. Once when asked if she could control her husband.

Then when asked about being on a ticket together with BHO...

Posted by: mark_in_austin | January 31, 2008 9:49 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company