Last night I posted a call to action after one of the most unfair and uninformative debates ever. It got a overwhelming response and tons of donations poured in. But we can't just do that for one night. We have primaries to win still and we need to keep the focus on action up. We still need to be taking action. Calling voters in PA. Traveling to PA for GOTV. Donating to the campaign so they have the resources to win. Doing whatever you can. And so I bring you the third day of Obama Action Week.
There's a must-read perspective on the exchange between Clinton and Obama over social security, posted by awol over on DailyKos. The entire post is well worth a read and is very short. You can read it here. Here are some excerpts, but go read the full post:
There is arguably one fact, or more exactly, lie, that has been at the center of American politics for the last twenty-five years: the lie that raising taxes on a small group of wealthy Americans is actually raising taxes on ordinary, middle-class and working-class citizens.
This is a distortion that has been so endlessly recycled and recirculated, that it is easy to forget. It came up, ultimately, in both Gore's campaign against Bush and Kerry's campaign. Over and over again, Republicans give tax breaks to the rich, and claim that they are helping ordinary Americans.
I've never seen a debate among Democrats, however, where this same issue was articulated so clearly. [...]
This is the difference, quite simply, between a real framing of American society (and thus a framing that could begin to allow rational, fair and progressive economic policy) and a fantasy of American society -- the very fantasy that has been at the heart of Republican's anti-tax, anti-middle class economic policy for so long.
awol sees Clinton's claims that a tax increase would hurt the middle class and retirees as playing into an established tradition of Republicans pretending that any tax increase will be aimed at the middle class ––– as they have done with the estate tax.
Moreover, awol makes the broader claim that it is this very framing that has prevented America from implementing more progressive legislation, which makes it that much more unforgiveable that Clinton would be espousing these lines.
This same argument [...] will, one way or another, be at the center of our campaign against Republicans in 2008.
Obama's line -- that "the wealthiest 6% of Americans are NOT the middle-class" -- is a line that the Democratic party can unite behind, and win behind.
Obama calls out Clinton for engaging in scare tactics and fudging numbers.
First, she claimed that he would raise taxes by a trillion dollars, a figure possible only if Obama eliminated the cap on all payroll taxes for social security, which he has never argued for and sees no need for.
Second, she claimed that these tax increases would be borne by the "middle class," when Obama points out that tax would only impact Americans making more than $97,000 a year ––– the top 6% of wage-earners.
Third, Obama has made clear that he would implement a "donut hole." In other words, instead of directly lifting the bar on taxable income, he would skip to a higher income bracket.
(Thanks again to Elise for liveblogging! - promoted by psericks)
Who do you think won?
Sounds to me like CNN thinks Clinton won. They sure are playing some positive clips for her. How kind of them.
She did do well tonight. I'll give her that. But I wonder if Obama would have done even better if Wolf hadn't been trying to cut him off every 10 seconds.
Pre-Debate Show: We get to watch Lou Dobbs! There's nothing better than Lou Dobbs for a little pre-debate action! Anyone want to guess what he's talking about?
Um...obviously border drug wars and "illegal aliens" - can I say how much I absolutely despise the terms "illegal" and "alien" to describe human beings? Really upsetting.
We've got 15 minutes until the debate!
I'm fairly quick with typing, but I'm not a miracle worker, and I'm TiVo-less at the moment so I can't rewind for accuracy. So, whatever I add up here will be my own quick summary - consider this an early warning.
Anyone have thoughts on what will happen tonight? What should happen tonight? This is an open thread!
For most on you the most exciting part of last Tuesday night's Democratic Debate here in Philadelphia was what was said by the candidates inside the debate. For me it was all the people outside the debate screaming in support of their candidates. That isn't because I am unhappy with how my candidate did, in fact I agree with the Drexel students watching just outside. It is because I was the volunteer organizer responsible for making sure that Obama supporters were out in force showing their enthusiasm for Barack Obama.
I worked hard preparing for the event and had a great time showing my enthusiasm for Obama waving signs and screaming at the top of my lungs. I am so gratified that we had so many people come out, despite a very dreadful pre-party fear that no one would actually show up. My day was exhausting and crazy and I would absolutely recommend that all of you do something similar.
(For another more detailed run-down of the new declassification procedures, take a look at this Washington Post article. - promoted by psericks)
Much of the post-debate reporting this week has focused on Hillary Clinton's driver's license slip-up. But listening to Morning Edition on NPR this morning, I was pleasantly surprised to hear them finally discussing Hillary's obviously misleading response to Russert's question about her husband's attempt to keep the National Archives from releasing any of their White House correspondence until 2012. Obama pointed out during the debate that her answer was unsatisfactory, but until now the issue hasn't gotten much traction outside fiery condemnations from right-wing Clinton-haters like Rush Limbaugh and the Wall Street Journal's editorial board. To hear the story reported on a more respectable outlet like NPR gives me hope that this might actually have legs.
Last night at the debate there was a question about electability. Being placed so early and pointedly at the frontrunner it does remind us that the general election looms large and that this president will have to reconcile.
Obama is still leading in the online MSNBC poll. Possibly the most interesting part of the poll was this though:
To me, this illustrates the kind of dynamic that Clinton really can't allow to develop. Not only did Clinton repeatedly dodge questions last night --- on social security, on driver's licenses, on Iran, on transparency and opening up her records --- but there is something at work here that is very dangerous for Clinton.
Although supporters, as they always do in these online polls, boosted their own candidate, they all see Clinton as their chief opponent. Is there an anti-Clinton feeling developing among Democrats? Obviously this is a non-scientific poll, but it could be a warning sign.
This kind of dynamic can be particularly tough to overcome in Iowa, where caucus voters are allowed to make a second choice if their candidate is not considered viable in the first round of voting.
2. Drexel University Poll:
What did students at Drexel University in Philadelphia, where the debate was hosted, think of the debate? The response was overwhelming:
Hundreds of Drexel students used open-vote.com to choose Barack Obama as the winner of tonight’s debate. As of 11:25pm, Senator Obama led with 45% of the more than 200 votes cast, followed by Senator Clinton with 17% and Senator Edwards with 15%.
That's a 28 point margin! Obama also clearly won a pre-debate poll the site has been conducting over the last week on who students plan to support for President:
Throughout the past week, more than 500 Drexel students also voted on which candidate they plan on voting for in the primary[...] Obama leads on the Democratic side with 46% of 500 votes and Giuliani leads on the Republican side with 22% of 416 votes.
I checked again on the results of the poll this morning. On the debate poll, with now nearly 500 votes cast, Obama maintained a lead of 47% to Clinton's 18%. On the general poll, with now 725 votes cast, Obama leads by a margin of nearly two-to-one, with 46% as well.
Obama just showed that he is learning when it comes to debates. Asked whether he would pledge to keep Iran from developing nuclear weapons, Obama used it as a launching pad to offer a broad indictment of the Bush Administration.
"We have been governed by fear for the last six years," Obama said. "It is very important for us to draw a clear line -- we will not be governed by fear.
It was a nice moment for Obama especially because both Clinton and Edwards, whose answers had preceded his own, simply said they would do everything in their power to keep Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.
These debates are about creating opportunities and taking advantage of them. Obama just did it.
Opportunity in America:
"There is no doubt that my background is not typical of a presidential candidate," Obama said. "That is part of what is so powerful about America." That appeal to the opportunity of America is a powerful one and an argument where Obama has a unique place in the debate. He seems far more at home (in this debate and more generally in the campaign) when talking about how he experiences make him a different -- and better -- candidate than when trying to knock Clinton down.
Now that's fast. Obama's campaign already has a YouTube video up of... this debate highlighting Obama's "Turn the Page" answer. Kind of freaky. You can watch the debate, while watching the debate.
Clinton on Defensive
Attacks = Clinton Air Time
We've heard from anti-Clinton Democratic voters that they'd embrace the Obama-Edwards ticket. Tonight they seem to have forged an effective partnership, but Edwards has said he's not interested in the VP spot after his 2004 experience.
For your convenience, here is an open thread for the debate. Please share your reactions to the exchanges, any notable quotes you find particularly telling, ideas you have, and anything else.
And if you need anything to fire you up, or get you ready to go, Chris Matthews just called Obama an "also-ran minority candidate."
I'll be posting my own thoughts below, in the diary text and in the thread.
Don't forget to stop by tonight if you're watching the debate! Zenbowl will be live-blogging, and I'm sure there will be a lively discussion.
[UPDATE2] The debate will be broadcast from 9-11 pm EST from Drexel University in Philadelphia on MSNBC. You can also watch it on msnbc.com or on the Drexel University website here.
[UPDATE] What debate advice is Obama getting today from bloggers?
Of course he should attack Clinton, and, if he's smart, he'll focus on her endorsement of the Kyl-Lieberman amendment and her shilly-shallying over torture. But what he should really be doing is attacking Giuliani. The major worry many Democrats have is that Obama cannot stand up to Rudy-style "all-my-opponents-are-terrorists" politics. Give Rudy hell, tonight, Obama. That's what you really have to prove.
If Obama is looking for an issue where the politics and the substance both point in the same direction it's sitting right in front of him: Iran.
In front of everyone's eyes we are creeping toward a catastrophic replay of the mistakes the country made half a decade ago in Iraq. You hear the same arguments -- 'time is not on our side,' etc. All nonsense. Even among the 'sensible' people on this issue the common assumption is that yes, eventually we may need to go to war. But we need to give more time to diplomacy, etc. This is all nonsense and it's a set of shared assumptions that now appears to unite Hillary with all the Republican candidates. At least that's one way to interpret her recent remarks. This is an issue that goes to the heart of America's future role in the world. And it's an issue that could work for him. Or someone, if they'd pick it up and start talking sense.
Something I've been wondering about: Take this poll and vote for the issue on which Obama should distinguish himself most forcefully from Clinton. (Under "There's more")
