Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

MTV/MySpace Presidential Super Dialogue

Miss the MTV/MySpace presidential super dialogue, co-moderated by The Fix, last night?

1. Shame on you.

2. Here at The Fix we believe in second chances. The full dialogue -- featuring Sens. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) and Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) as well as former governor Mike Huckabee (R-Ark.) and Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) is below. Enjoy!


By Chris Cillizza  |  February 3, 2008; 9:05 PM ET
Categories:  Eye on 2008  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: '08 Hopefuls To Talk With MTV, MySpace and The Fix
Next: FixCam Week in Preview: Super Tuesday Edition

Comments

She's at it again:
"Clinton, voice almost gone, worn down by sleepless nights and days on the campaign trail, wiped a tear from her eye as she visited Yale University, where her political journey started as an earnest 1970s student in bell-bottom pants.

"Well I said I would not tear up, already we are not exactly on the path," said Clinton, 60, in an emotional moment, as she battled Obama for votes in northeastern Connecticut and Massachusetts."

This while the L.A. Times, MoveOn.Org, La Opinion', the SEIU in Los Angeles, Maria Shriver, and Democratic Progessives of America all endorsed Obama, as well as Eisenhowers granddaughter, RFK's youngest who is a feminist,all ALL the other endorsements you must be aware are happening.
Why do you think this is? Do you think we are Obama "nuts'? Do you think the editors of all these newspapers and the leaders of all these organizations are just "snowed" by Obama's rhetoric?
If you don't think he's vetted, imagine you are Bill Clinton; Rezco is all they've got and that's already been pretty fully "vetted." If Clinton has to stoop to kindergarden papers to try to smear him or call him a Jesse Jackson type (love the subtlety there Bill), then I would say the R's have nothing to use against him.
The only thing that will unite Republicans will be a Clinton nomination.
Don't let your cynicism rule you. Obama is The Real Thing and all of the people who have endorsed him and support him can see this. Take off your sh*t covered glasses and have some hope again!

Posted by: sheridan1 | February 4, 2008 4:29 PM | Report abuse

Boutan: all the other "debates" have eventually had transcripts, yet I've been unable to find one for this. And, the individual videos aren't even available yet. Once again, I don't have hours to sit through this. I also found this:

http://mashable.com/2008/02/03/myspace-debate-tech/

mageduley falsely claims that Obama has been vetted, and then throws out a music video.

rfpiktor falsely claims that Obama isn't part of an "entrenched Establishment machine". As for him being a people's president, he might be right:

http://www.slate.com/id/2182933/#obamahispander

Posted by: LonewackoDotCom | February 4, 2008 12:47 PM | Report abuse

Leave it to MTV (along with MySpace and AP) to show CNN, ABC News, Fox News, et al. How to host a professional candidates forum.The questions were intelligent and thoughtful, the moderators displayed moderation, and the candidates were given time to answer in complete sentences. There were none of the rude interruptions, such as Ron Paul had to endure from the noxious Anderson Cooper, or the staged cat fights and fits of pique that characterized the previous so-called debates. Everyone should take the time to watch this forum.

Posted by: wgaryjohnson | February 4, 2008 12:33 PM | Report abuse

Your liberal media at work-- ABC now seems to be a fully-owned subsidiary of the RNC

--ABC News' Jake Tapper has caused quite a stir with an item about a speech Bill Clinton delivered in Denver.

'In a long, and interesting speech, he characterized what the U.S. and other industrialized nations need to do to combat global warming this way: "We just have to slow down our economy and cut back our greenhouse gas emissions 'cause we have to save the planet for our grandchildren."

'At a time that the nation is worried about a recession is that really the characterization his wife would want him making? "Slow down our economy"?

I don't really think there's much debate that, at least initially, a full commitment to reduce greenhouse gases would slow down the economy....So was this a moment of candor?'

Actually, no, it's a moment taken out of context in such a way as to change the meaning of the sentence. Consider what Clinton actually said.

"And maybe America, and Europe, and Japan, and Canada -- the rich counties -- would say, 'OK, we just have to slow down our economy and cut back our greenhouse gas emissions 'cause we have to save the planet for our grandchildren.' We could do that.

But if we did that, you know as well as I do, China and India and Indonesia and Vietnam and Mexico and Brazil and the Ukraine, and all the other countries will never agree to stay poor to save the planet for our grandchildren. The only way we can do this is if we get back in the world's fight against global warming and prove it is good economics that we will create more jobs to build a sustainable economy that saves the planet for our children and grandchildren. It is the only way it will work."

Tapper appears to have gotten the story backwards. He wrote that Clinton "characterized what the U.S. and other industrialized nations need to do to combat global warming this way: 'We just have to slow down our economy and cut back our greenhouse gas emissions 'cause we have to save the planet for our grandchildren.'" Clinton actually argued the opposite.

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/14426.html

Posted by: drindl | February 4, 2008 12:08 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: trisha2 | February 4, 2008 11:52 AM | Report abuse

I don't remember the last time there were so few posts in a morning. I know it's a lame topic, but come on!

Posted by: Blarg | February 4, 2008 11:34 AM | Report abuse

Good job CC.

I'm an independent and Ron Paul seems like the only Republican I could vote for this election. Too bad Obama already got my vote.

I noticed Hillary's answer about the Iraq war got less and less people that hated it as she mentioned Bush after every sentence.

Obama Supporter Map: http://www.obamaworldwide.com/SupporterMap.aspx

Obama Supporter Messages: http://www.obamaworldwide.com/Posts.aspx?pid=6

Posted by: ObamaForPrez | February 4, 2008 9:02 AM | Report abuse

Chris: It's good to know that somebody's guess is a good as a high costing poll by old what's his name. You should keep this in mind why you refer to polls in the future as being worthwhile. Hey, isn't that it polls require religious or faithful belief. Why not be the first to wise up; of course it'll cost readership, but then maybe not.

Posted by: usarownow | February 4, 2008 8:58 AM | Report abuse

McCain and Romney didn't attend the event? I wonder if that will hurt them among young voters. I'm sure there were at least a few young Republicans or independents out there who decided to vote for Huckabee last night.

Posted by: Blarg | February 4, 2008 8:58 AM | Report abuse

Has anybody thought that if Obama becomes president, he will be a people's president.

The people will be represented in the White House, not the entrenched Establishment machine of either party.

Posted by: rfpiktor | February 4, 2008 8:47 AM | Report abuse

Obama, yes he can.

Posted by: rfpiktor | February 4, 2008 8:43 AM | Report abuse

What role will the fact that 80% of the country beleives the economy is tanking have on the election?

'The WP fronts its latest poll that is another illustration of just how much of a role the economy is likely to play in the presidential race. More than eight in 10 people ranked the economy as "not so good" or "poor" and the majority believe the country has already entered into a recession. Most Americans also aren't confident that the stimulus package currently making its way through Congress will improve the situation.

The budget that the White House will propose today will call for $515 billion for the Pentagon, which is the highest level, adjusted for inflation, since World War II. '

Think of what we accomplished in 3 years of WWII with that money, compared to what we [haven't] accomplished in 5 years in Iraq--and who will establish a real plan for a phased withdrawal, rather than simply a status quo for years to come?

Posted by: drindl | February 4, 2008 8:14 AM | Report abuse

If you are an Ancien Regime cheerleader, do not read this!

Suffolk Poll:

Obama 40%

Billarys 39%
--------------------------------

Rasmussen poll:

Obama 45%

Billarys 44%


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/ca/california_democratic_primary-259.html

Posted by: rfpiktor | February 4, 2008 5:56 AM | Report abuse

Tell me it ain't so:

Obama 45%

Billarys 41%

Reuters/CSpan/Zogby California poll:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/poll-tracker.htm

Posted by: rfpiktor | February 4, 2008 5:48 AM | Report abuse

You think Hillary is the champion of women's issues. Think again. I think a president of the National Organization for Women (NOW) would dissagree. See why she left the Hillary campaign after IA and NH.
This made my decision on Hillary easy.
http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=OVuMYKs8iJs

On ethical campaigning well there is no comparison:
Hillary laughs WHEN CAUGHT CHEATING

Interview on MSNBC after Hillary's self proclaimed Victory in FL. She vowed to use every backroom arm twisting tactic she has in her arsenal to make sure Florida delegates counted. This exchange is particularly telling, it happens at about 6:10 into the clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yxlaayFMBZA
Keith asked her about a statement from the Obama campaign -

Olbermann: (reading from the statement)
When Sen Clinton was campaigning in Iowa and New Hampshire she said that states like MI and FL that wont award delegates quoting you "don't count for anything"

Now that Sen Clinton has lost badly in SC she is trying to assign meaning to a contest that awards zero delegates and where no campaigning has occurred.

Hillary: ha, ha, ha

Olberman: beyond the laughter, what is your reaction to that?

Hillary: Well you know, that's typical campaign jargon.
(then blah blah blah - never answers the question)

If Hillary thinks breaking the rules is typical in campaigning, will breaking/bending the laws of our nation as president be typical leadership? We have one of those, don't we?

Posted by: mageduley | February 4, 2008 4:44 AM | Report abuse

Obama has been fully vetted. As a matter of fact the 2 Chicago newspapers that the Hillary campaign are so fond of quoting, are both endorsing Obama.

It is not hard to know why Obama is appealing to voters both young and old. Watch the music video featuring his NH speech. It is sweeping the net and has had almost a million views. It is sweeping through the blogs like wildfire.

Maybe after seeing it, people will remember what it was like to be a proud American instead of listening to rovian mud slingers.

http://dipdive.com

Posted by: mageduley | February 4, 2008 4:36 AM | Report abuse

During this campaign Senator Obama has referred to his work on a nuclear energy bill as one of his major accomplishments while in the US Senate. A recent New York Times article looked at his work on this bill and found that one of his biggest contributors the Exelon Company, a nuclear energy company, and the GOP had a lot of influence in the changes to this bill, that anti-nuclear energy groups in Illinois were very unhappy with these changes, and that Obama's campaign manager worked for Exelon. While Obama and his campaign have tried to explain this away what he can not seem to explain is why he calls this one of his biggest accomplishments when it did not even pass the US Senate.

This is not the only time Obama has stretched the truth in this race as he has also claimed that he does not take lobbying money when he has taken federal lobbying money in his past races and takes state lobbying money now, has claimed to hate outside independent groups but is not trying to prevent them from helping him, and has claimed to have run a positive campaign when he also is using Republican like tactics to attack Hillary on her universal health care plan while Obama claims to have an universal health care plan but his plan will not cover between 10 and 20 million people.

And Obama says that Hillary will say anything to get elected? When will the people and the press start to look at Obama's statements?

Posted by: ericr1970 | February 4, 2008 3:29 AM | Report abuse


During this campaign Senator Obama has referred to his work on a nuclear energy bill as one of his major accomplishments while in the US Senate. A recent New York Times article looked at his work on this bill and found that one of his biggest contributors the Exelon Company, a nuclear energy company, and the GOP had a lot of influence in the changes to this bill, that anti-nuclear energy groups in Illinois were very unhappy with these changes, and that Obama's campaign manager worked for Exelon. While Obama and his campaign have tried to explain this away what he can not seem to explain is why he calls this one of his biggest accomplishments when it did not even pass the US Senate.

This is not the only time Obama has stretched the truth in this race as he has also claimed that he does not take lobbying money when he has taken federal lobbying money in his past races and takes state lobbying money now, has claimed to hate outside independent groups but is not trying to prevent them from helping him, and has claimed to have run a positive campaign when he also is using Republican like tactics to attack Hillary on her universal health care plan while Obama claims to have an universal health care plan but his plan will not cover between 10 and 20 million people.

And Obama says that Hillary will say anything to get elected? When will the people and the press start to look at Obama's statements?

Posted by: ericr1970 | February 4, 2008 3:28 AM | Report abuse

Lonewacko...

Please don't blog unless you actually have seen or read the post. It is simply ridiculous and you look like a fool.

CC seems quite open to critique, but do the guy a favour and at least watch him before your criticise him for what you "guess" he did or didn't do. Goose.

Posted by: Boutan | February 4, 2008 12:49 AM | Report abuse

Watching this on TV would be bad enough, but I don't have two hours to sit in front of my computer screen watching CC ask what are no doubt completely puffball questions. A transcript would be better.

I'm going to guess that CC didn't ask about immigration, or if he did asked only puffball questions. That's despite it being the most vulnerable issue for everyone except Paul.

I doubt whether CC asked Obama to defend taking part in an event organized by those linked to the Mexican government and Mexican political parties:

http://nomoreblather.com/barack-obama-and-the-immigration-marches

I doubt whether CC asked Hillary why she's supported allowing illegal aliens to take college discounts from U.S. citizens:

http://nomoreblather.com/hillary-clinton-dream-act

And, I doubt whether CC asked Huck about the deal he made with Mexico:

http://nomoreblather.com/mike-huckabee-mexican-consulate

If someone who's familiar with those issues - and who isn't corrupt - ever presses them on those issues it would have a serious impact on their political careers.

Don't expect the WaPo to ask the candidates about those issues: they're just a propaganda source. Regular citizens are going to have to go to the candidates' appearances and ask those questions themselves, and then upload the responses.

Posted by: LonewackoDotCom | February 3, 2008 11:52 PM | Report abuse

I thought Obama's reasoning for why he doesn't think "marriage" should be used to define a homosexual relationship was very reasonable. Typically I have no tolerance for the bigots who want to deny homosexuals equal rights (under United States tax code) but by Obama giving the literal word "marriage" to religious zealots while guaranteeing equal rights among homosexual partnerships in his administration, he paved a clear path to the future of gay rights while respecting those who think their religious views are more important than public policy and equality.

I missed most of Hillary's Q&A, but Huckabee was completely ridiculous and Ron Paul was surprisingly good.

Huckabee's comment about how his daughter got angry about taxes and his response was "you've just become a conservative" is one of the stupidest rehashed jokes on the list of stupid political jokes. Note to Huckabee - because your immature juvenile doesn't understand the need for taxes doesn't mean she's a Republican, though your reasoning might explain why Republicans continually act like immature juveniles.

Ron Paul - you're nails on your position regarding American imperialism (it's causing the violence abroad) but man, some of your taxation comments are simply off the charts. Wake up man, it's not the 1800s and forcing people to pay for things with gold and silver is a bit outdated.

All in all they were good questions and responses and I was glad to see our man CC in a different way from his mug shot up at the top of the page.

Note to CC aka The Beard - take a new press pic with the beard! I don't think you realize how fierce that beard really is. You look like a totally sweet lumberjack who, at the same time, knows politics better than he knows cutting down giant trees. I'm telling you, it's a nice one-two punch!

Posted by: thecrisis | February 3, 2008 9:25 PM | Report abuse

Chris, you did a great job. I was astounded by how bad Hillary did in all the instant polls, but to her credit, as she talked the less severe of the red piece of the polling pie seemed to get bigger. So if there is any solace, its that people when she talks go from hating her to just not voting for her.

http://www.politicalinaction.com

Posted by: bschick20 | February 3, 2008 9:16 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company