YouTube Democratic Debate

Gut Response - If people were forced to read a transcript of the candidates positions without names or faces attached, there might be a lot more of this - - showing in the actual polls. Those results come from a blind poll that asks for the user to enter their stance on issues and then matches up with what candidate best matches up. Mine matched up with Gravel followed closely by Kucinich. As some people know, Kucinich has great politics for the current Democratic (or Independent as some of us have turned) voter, but the Democratic voter most likely is shoved up one of the three butts of Clinbamawards.

Of the three part Democratic leadership harshly referred to above - they danced around many issues last night. They stepped on their own feet only a few times when pressured by the 'others', but mostly they behaved well and still seem to be biding time until someone else screws up.

One of the moments that surely raised eyebrows came from Mr. Obama when he voiced his intention of speaking to the leadership in countries that have been strictly off limits recently, including Iran, North Korea, Venezuela, Syria and *gasp* Cuba??? Obama does appear to be the candidate with the most presence - his physicality, strong voice and rhetoric are surely some of his biggest assets. They also aren't bad characteristics to have as a leader of a nation.

Still, the candidate who has my ear continues to be Delaware Senator Joe Biden. He's no bullshit like Mike Gravel but with less of the angry old man in the corner syndrome going on. His realistic outlook on Iraq I think will be a revelation for him as pulling out becomes more of an option. Even Hillary agreed with him that withdrawing isn't going to happen like tugging the yo yo back in; it will take time and money and security so that troops that are supposedly on their way home actually make it.

Biden's realist solution to Iraq, a division of the country under a federal system with localized governments, is a stretch that probably would never politically succeed, but ideologically it sounds like one of the best possible resolutions. He has an impressive record of experience on the Foreign Relations Committee, which is a credential the country's next leader could certainly use.

Kucinich and Richardson were sound. I don't feel like Dodd did much for himself except for having the best candidate video that included a white rabbit perched nearby and the prompter asking something along the lines of "So how many white hairs would you say you have?" I mentioned what I thought were mild political performances by Obama, Clinton and Edwards (his strangehold on the poverty issue aside).

Unsurprisingly, when the last question raised was for each candidate to voice something he disliked about the policy of the person to their left, only desperate for a voice - or the opportunity to speak - Mike Gravel actually said something useful to the voter. Who knew there were so many jokers up on stage? The jokers should really show up when the Republicans get their shot at the YouTubers.

In the end I thought the format was pretty successful and certainly a new twist on the debate format that can sometimes seem so outrageously staged to make it uninteresting. Although this was most likely almost as filtered and prepared, it at least has the feel of legitimate participation by the people that will be voting. Could these debates really alter the landscape that seems so destined to funnel toward a three horse race for the Democratic nomination? I hope so.