Official CNN/Youtube Democratic Debate Thread- Tonight, Monday July 23rd 7pm EST

[motivez]

He's likable, well spoken, and has an uplifting message that's easy to understand on it's face

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by thomez

I'm not questioning the network as much as I'm questioning the voters... obviously Obama is in that position for a reason, though I'm not sure what it is.

He's charismatic and he's exactly the kind of person who can bring together moderates and liberals...and even open-conservatives...for that bi-partisanship everyone (hard-core libertarians and extreme evangelical/neoconservative not included) wants

He's also extraordinarily brilliant and talented, which never hurts...yeah he lacks foreign policy experience but basically every president has except BushI and Nixon

[thomez]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

He's also extraordinarily brilliant and talented, which never hurts...yeah he lacks foreign policy experience but basically every president has except BushI and Nixon

really? what about John Adams? Thomas Jefferson?

false statements ftl

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by thomez

really? what about John Adams? Thomas Jefferson?

false statements ftl

Obviously I'm talking about the past 40 years

[thomez]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Obviously I'm talking about the past 40 years

obviously you didn't say that

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by thomez

obviously you didn't say that

I obviously said "basically", which means the statement was not an absolute

[thomez]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

I obviously said "basically", which means the statement was not an absolute

basically means it is close, your statement was not close to factually correct

[Publius]

Originally Posted by thomez

basically means it is close, your statement was not close to factually correct

Nowhere near factually correct.

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by thomez

basically means it is close, your statement was not close to factually correct

it could mean "covering for the most part"

Obama has foreign policy experience in that he's multi-cultered and lived overseas, etc...he does not have foreign policy as in he's previously worked out US agreements with foreign leaders...like Nixon talking on behalf of Ike to the leader of the Soviet Union, or Bush I running the CIA

While there may be a handful from our founding you can cite, for the most part, my statement holds true even to your standard

Unless you have a list of...I guess you would need 20+...presidents and their amazing foreign policy experience that greatly surpasses Obama before they entered their first presidential race

[DosEquis]

Joe Biden is the most experienced on the issues that are important today, AND not only was he the only candidate on both sides of the isle to come up with an exit strategy for Iraq, he did it in a bipartisan manner with Lugar nearly 2 years ago. Now we have republicans in their debate saying the same exit strategy as Biden if they were president. This plan would clearly win over many in government and it would be implimented.

Gravel is old and crazy, like a liberal version of Ted Stevens.

Edwards rubs me the wrong way, and i can't stand the guy

Chris Dodd, every time i see him i think "who is that".

Hillary has to much baggage, not much legitimate experience, and is hated by many

Obama is a great public figure but lacks any of the important experience

Kucinich is in the same boat as edwards with me.

Richardson drives me nuts every time he talks he says "When i was governor of new mexico" for any issue. "How would you handle katrina?" "Well when i was governor of new mexico we had a creek flood...i had a new bridge up 4 hours later"

[Thorgrim]

You don't need foreign policy experience after such a disasterous president...you just need someone with a level head who is open to diplomacy, it's not like anyone, I don't care if its Ben Franklin, could cure our diplomatic issues in 8 hours

+1 for Obama

[thatguyoverthere]

Gravel and Kucinich are my main men, just on basic philosophy. They don't have snowball's chances in hell, though. Nobody does, except Clinton and Obama. I'll go on record and say it will be a Clinton/Obama ticket for the Dems in 2008.

Obama is also right now the "anti-Hillary" vote. Democrats that aren't crazy about Hillary but still want to back a candidate with a real shot at getting the nomination are lining up behind him.

I have to agree about Edwards. I like that he's for helping the poor, but something about him just rubs me the wrong way.

I didn't like Obama's and Edwards' nuanced and complex answers to the gay marriage question. It's so tired and establishmentesque.

And Hillary looked comfortable and came across well, I thought.

[Thorgrim]

Gravel was my man until I found out later in the first debate that he's for a flat tax....ha

Kucinich:
Daily Kos: Why I say "ugh" on Kucinich

[jimeigh]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Gravel was my man until I found out later in the first debate that he's for a flat tax....ha

Kucinich:
Daily Kos: Why I say "ugh" on Kucinich

what's your problem with a flat tax?

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by jimeigh

what's your problem with a flat tax?

thats beyond the scope of this thread

[jimeigh]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

thats beyond the scope of this thread

sounds like a cop-out to me.

[WickedLou9]

Originally Posted by jimeigh

sounds like a cop-out to me.

Sounds like a topic for another thread to me.

[Thorgrim]

Romney is saying he might not participate in the youtubeCNN debate, because it's "silly" with "questions from snowmen"

can you smell the fear? And is the GOP guy who is about to win the ames strawpoll and on track to win the iowa caucus

[Scrum]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Romney is saying he might not participate in the youtubeCNN debate, because it's "silly" with "questions from snowmen"

can you smell the fear? And is the GOP guy who is about to win the ames strawpoll and on track to win the iowa caucus

The last thing the GOP wants is to answer questions from the American people.

[motivez]

With the Fox News folks posing the question to Democrats "If you can't face Fox News, how can you face Al Qaeda" .. wouldn't an appropriate question for the Republican candidates be "If you can't face ordinary people, how can you face Al Qaeda?"