The Great Debate
YOUNGSTOWN, OHIO: Greetings from the Ohio turnpike. My senior producer, Adi Raval, and I just attempted to leave Chicago鈥檚 very busy but somewhat dreaded O鈥橦are International Airport. A taste of the usual winter season was all it took for the airlines to cancel most of their flights to Washington, DC.
So we decided to drive, armed with McDonald鈥檚 coffee - not that bad actually - back to Washington. Duty calls and in this case, that means a piece on healthcare, the issue Americans are increasingly saying they care the most about, for tonight鈥檚 main TV news bulletin.
All of this time in the car allowed us to listen, but unfortunately not watch, last night鈥檚 debate between Senators Clinton and Obama in Hollywood.
People who watched the first ever television debate between Senator John F Kennedy and Vice President Nixon, preferred the upstart Democrat. While those who simply listened to it on the radio preferred the Republican.
What I found, simply by listening to the voices, was an Obama who sometimes came across as long-winded, ponderous and perhaps even pompous.
Hillary seemed at times better prepared and sharper.
And for those expecting fireworks between Clinton and Obama, what you got instead was 鈥淐linton, Obama go toe to toe, keep gloves on鈥 as the put it.
For what it鈥檚 worth, here is one of the debate.
So is the Democratic nomination fight close to being over? Who knows? But as we鈥檙e driving on the Ohio turnpike, I think of three things - the need for Starbucks that are open 24 hours a day, preferably drive-through. Secondly, the Democratic primary takes place here in March.
UPDATE: What was the third thing, asks Puzzled? A good point. This is what long road trips do to you... But I'll come up with something later.
Hello, I'm 
颁辞尘尘别苍迟蝉听听 Post your comment
When I listen I feel more alert to what is being said. When watching I guess I am more distracted. But there is a definite difference
Justin, you are so biaised it is unreal. Everytime you give an opnion it is simply wrongfooted the next day. As a fellow Brit I urge you to report and not opine.
I think the biggest shock is that you think McD'd coffee is not that bad. If your judgement of coffee is the same as your judgement on politics, then perhaps i should read another blog!!! Perhaps you have been on the road too long...rather like the candidates!
Can't beat the real deal, the smell, taste and flavour of freshly ground beans.....oh yeah, the politic's aint bad after that too!
Reading your blog it seems to me that you are intent on belittling Barack Obama throughout. Having watched and listened to the debate I could only see and hear pomposity in Hillary Clinton's repetitive emphasis on how experienced she was. I am glad you were lucky enough not to notice her fake laugh whenever attacked.Obama was natural, urbane and on Iraq devasatingly superior.
Why do people pay any money let alone extra money for coffee made from beans which are slightly burnt and has a bitter taste?
Why do people pay any attention let alone would vote to choose a politician who is not only slightly burnt but unripe as well? Barack Obama is cleary a man of great intelligence and charisma but how can he possibly be a successful president at this stage of his political life when he clearly needs time to ripen and mature? If he is elected, I predict it won't take many sips before we have a bitter case of buyers remorse. Too bad, had he waited 8 or 12 years from now, he might have made an exceptional president. If he is nominated but fails to get elected now, by then he will have become a spent force, an old face. What a waste.
What's the third thing you think of ? Don't keep us in suspense.
I watched the debate, comfortably installed in Geneva, Switzerland. Drinking not coffee, but the end of a bottle of white wine.
I got to bed at five o-clock in the morning, feeling more reassured about the USA鈥檚 prospects.
I wonder if other Europeans and viewers abroad feel the same way?
Here we had two charismatic candidates who had dropped the silly bickering and were showing real respect for voters. They presented reasoned policy differences, but reconfirmed the likelihood of a unified Democratic party to back either one or both of them.
Clinton is more convincing on health care, while Obama is more credible on Iraq.
Should the two run together? Let鈥檚 not forget that to win, the Democrats need to pick up some southern states. Would a Clinton-Obama or an Obama-Clinton ticket be able to do that?
You were thinking of three things on the turnpike - what's the third ? Or is it unprintable ?
What's the third thing? You need that Starbucks, Justin.
Pompous? Take a step back from the personal attacks on Obama, Justin Webb.
Additionally, I'd like to read more on the Republican candidates left in the race.
I think McCain will make an excellent Commander in Chief and he'll get my vote against Cliniton.
I watched the debate and have to say there were two things that struck me the most. Firstly, the clear effort from both candidates not to replicate the battle that took place betweeen McCain and Romney at the Reagan Library debate yesterday. They're both obviously well aware that the only people who benefit from the in-party fighting are the Republicans.
Secondly, the possibility of a dream-ticket (Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama) being mentioned. I'm not sure Obama would want to have Hillary as a vice-president, especially wth Bill roaming around The White House but is it possible that Hillary might choose Obama as her running mate?
Either way, I'm convinced more than ever that the Democrats will win in November. If John McCain wins the nomination, he's so disiked by so many conservatives (I turned over to Fox News during the break to see Sean Hannity telling Romney how dishonest he thought McCain was) I'm sure conservative Amercans won't bother to vote and with Demcorats coming out in droves, I can't see how the Republicans can retain the presidency. Even Rush Limbaugh has confessed that he might not bother voting this year.
Although I have found some of Justin Webb's blog's provoking on occassion, he is thought provoking as well and that's why I keep reading his blog. Blog is defined as "(n.) Short for Web log, a blog is a Web page that serves as a publicly accessible personal journal for an individual. Typically updated daily, blogs often reflect the personality of the author." by webopedia so if he writes an opinion in his personal journal, that's his prerogative.
I didn't watch, but my friends who did preferred Hillary, but aren't committed and haven't made up their minds -- neither have I yet. McDonalds coffee isn't bad in a pinch, and out here in the land where fast food was invented (San Bernardino, California, where both the Golden Arches, and that talking Chihuahua started life), the Starbucks drive throughs usually stay open until midnight, so that's really only a six hr gap without it, and one could, I guess stock up to cover the night.
I expect a blog written by someone at the 主播大秀 to offer some insight rather just personal opinion. Why and it what way were Barrack Obama's views "long-winded, ponderous and perhaps even pompous"? Without some context these words are meaningless.
It is useless to just give a link to someone else and expect that is enough (Fox News-an oxymoron if ever there was one!). Rather than pay Justin Webb's salary I would rather my money went to someone with ability to bring light onto this battle for the nomination for the presidency of the United States.
I am glad I am not the only one with the observation that Justin seems to have an unexplained positive bias for Hillary.
How on earth did Obama sound pompous??? Hillary with her take on the need for the Clinton's to clean up after the Bush's left me cold...
Obama is sincere, Hillary is more of the same politics as usual scenario clothed in the female gender.
it's a shame that in spite of the obvious bias in your writing, 主播大秀 still have you working for them, and this is exactly what my problem with the 主播大秀 is.
Why can't the 主播大秀 maintain its dispassionate reporting? Is that so hard to do?
Justin's blog, for all its unprofessional and biased content, shouldn't be given the kind of recognition the 主播大秀 currently accords it. If he wants to continue writing such trash, let him go and set up his own blog. I'm ashamed of the 主播大秀, really.
The important point of the evening for this American was that the change we must have in this country is generational.
We will never survive a Clinton "retread".
We must support the candidate who relates to the young people who have the most to lose if we old folks elect some other old policy people like Hillary and John McCain.
They had their chance, and squandered iit.
Obama is the choice for clear real change for our nation and our children's future.
Most people can see there's little that divides Clinton and Obama regarding Iraq. What's not being discussed is this: No matter how much the two talk about "change," neither a Clinton presidency nor an Obama one (nor a GOP one, for that matter) would alter American foreign policy. The United States will continue to intervene militarily abroad; to spend trillions in borrowed money to fund those interventions; to support Israel no matter what; and to despise the United Nations. These so-called debates are shallow performances by ambitious politicians designed by the media for a public with short attention spans.
But Justin, to get the real taste you have to be there, smell the coffee, take in the atmosphere, be part of it. There aren't just two senses, you know. Or do you?
Road trip! The most American of experiences. Why don't you drive to Denver for the convention? NPR has stations ALL the way to Colorado. Go West Young Justin!
You finally made me laugh ... McD's coffee isn't bad ... like English cuisine? We damn with faint praise.
I wish you'd try a sip of Obama's brew. I wonder why this charming and erudite fellow leaves you so cold. Ponderous? Other adjectives come to mind, such as unspun, thoughtful, or judicious. Come on, he was first in his class at Harvard Law and editor of the Law Review. He taught constitutional law. True, he speaks in whole sentences. Hillary is a slogan machine. Sound-bites, FOX-bites, Bill-bites and back-bites.
I agree with Chuck Sorenson, JFK's speechwriter. Obama has a certain integrity; we can tell where he's coming from because we know where he CAME from. Hillary is incomprehensible -- as a woman and as a "politician." Not only is she Rupert Murdoch's girl, ANNE COULTER says she will work for Hillary if McCain is the candidate. And I might have to support McCain.
Sorry, little off the track here, but if McCain and Hillary get the monination, do you reckon we'll see some of these... (democrats for Reagan ad from 1980...
(Washington, D.C.)
I agree with Gavin White (comment #2). Justin, you need to learn yourself a bit and come back with an objective view if you want to honestly inform people about this election.
Having followed your blog I was totally shocked to hear you describe "an Obama who sometimes came across as long-winded, ponderous and perhaps even pompous". Not.
But as we keep getting negative adjectives about Barack Obama from you, without any discussion of the whys and wherefores, perhaps I could respond in kind.
Your coverage of the US election is largely shallow, snide, underhand, and deceiving.
I only come here for the comments now, which at least have some SUBSTANCE.
If this blog was the only coverage of the election in Britain, people would get a totally skewed view of Barack Obama, who is the main danger to Justin's obviously favoured candidate. They wouldn't be that much wiser about anything else in this election either.
As an outsider I have been very impressed with the level of debate being carried on by the American candidates and the electorate. This quality of debate has not, unfortunately, been reflected in this 主播大秀 blog, which is, on the whole, crass. And not in an interesting way.
as an 'outsider' to the British culture I find it quite revealing how many people complained about biased reporting.
i read Justin's blog for its un-American view (not anti-American). the point that i'm trying to make here is it is his 'view' that attracts me to it.
if his view includes his likeness towards Clinton then so be it.
if i wanted 'colorless' reporting then i'd read the AP or USA today
andy, los angeles
Justin, I thought I was being overly sensitive in finding your blog so pro-Clinton and anti-Obama. But it's not only you, it's the whole 主播大秀 site...look at the photos you guys post of Obama (not very flattering). Why don't you explain to us why you don't like Barack?
As for me, I've only known a Bush or Clinton in the White House or at least a heartbeat from the Presidency. It's not working for me.
The general consensus is that Obama came out just ahead in the debate, but ultimately the California primary will be decided by women and Latinos. Hence, the importance of this change of endorsement by Lorna Brett Howard which has been circulating widely in video format:
Dear Mr. Webb,
What do you think about MoveOn's endorsement of Obama?
Obama surpassed the sixty-six percent threshold required for a MoveOn endorsement. Absolutely fantastic. Seventy-percent of 3.2 million Democrats either voted for Obama -- or against Clinton? I think both.
Hillary ... rejected by an organization Bill inspired. MoveOn began as an e-mail petition, requesting Congress drop impeachment proceedings, "censure President Clinton and move on."
Bill O'Reilly says MoveOn now owns the Democratic party. I hope so.
Is MoveOn a stronger force than the neo-cons at the New York Times?
Stronger than Fox News and it's sister organization, the 主播大秀? (I will NEVER forget the identically edited Bhutto/Frost interview. Shame on you.)
All the same, you do post anti-Hillary/anti-主播大秀/anti-Justin comments. We're engaging with you, Justin ... we readers ... you've succeeded in that regard. In some way, we are attempting to educate you. You're not naive, and not overly cynical, just a bit shallow. Depth requires insight, historical synthesis -- and editorial freedom, which you aren't allowed (except through reader's comments).
Let us pause for a moment and take a deep breath of genuine democracy. And another. Intoxicating.
Obama and MoveOn vs. Billary and Big Media.
Let the games begin.
As a Brit, I can only suggest that Obama seems to offer some of the vague hope and generalised dreams that Blair threw around in '97 and for years after...it 'sounds' good, 'looks' good...but the reality and delivery is somewhat harder to swallow. I can't help thinking Justin is offering you his opinion based (in part) on our experience of fairytale politics gone sour.
But agreed...some thoughts on what these people REALLY are about wouldn't go a miss!
I never met Hillary Clinton, but it seems as if she sees the poor, black, or weak like a missionary sees lost souls. The lost souls are necessarily flawed, broken and in dire need of the missionary鈥檚 help. Tired from years of often-thankless service, the missionary cannot but from time to time look at the natives in her flock with condescension and contempt.
I never met Barack Obama, but it seems as if he is the guy who lives in the house across the street who gets the neighborhood together one Sunday afternoon to mow the lawn and paint the house of the little old woman who lives by herself without any family. He sees us as being better then we tend to act, and believes we鈥檒l do our part to make our community a better place if given a little nudge and a chance.
I think it's true that from a British perspective, Barack Obama does sometimes come across as pompous and long-winded, but obviously most Americans don't view things in the same way.
your coffee predilections reveal much of the nature of the media elite. McDonald's coffee is good enough for most of us. Since you are not one of us, why should we use you as a source of news?
Anent the Starbucks coffee, Auntie Beeb must be paying Justin beaucoup bucks (forgive the pun!)to enable him to pay their inflated prices for a cup of joe. Even if I wanted to pay that much for a cuppa, I would be at a loss to interpret their confusing menu of coffee types. So any time we are on the road, it's McDonalds for me.
As to the elections, has anyone given any thought to the horrible prospect of Obama naming Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson to his Cabinet? I'm surprised that Bill has not thought of that chilling possibility in his current rampage on the campaign trail towards an illegal third term.
Your bias against Barack Obama continues. At least I know others have spotted this. Is there a possibilty an impartial report soon?
I remain convinced that Obama is the better candidate (for what my opinion is worth)
Fascinating point re radio vs TV. The mind's eye is extremely evocative and fed by radio. TV and other video forms tamp down our imaginations. Here's my take:
Obama and Hillary, two for the price of one? Love will find a way. "The longest and loudest applause line of the night came when CNN's Wolf Blitzer noted that many Democrats have said they'd like to see a Clinton-Obama or Obama-Clinton ticket in November," reports CNN re the May-December lovefest that was Democratic rivals Hillary Clinton's and Barack Obama's "last debate before next week's Super Tuesday contests. Neither ruled out the possibility of selecting the other as a running mate." Can you say bloodless reportage? The body language between the two during "post-debate pleasantries" crackled with sexual tension:
I watched the debate online with the feature that puts a graph over the top of the screen showing how a room of undecideds were reacting in realtime - often as hillary began to speak and BEFORE saying anything of substance the lines went high.. less so for barack.. only when he criticised bush or the gop did the line go way high... even when saying pretty much the same thing her line was always higher... read into that what you will.
However watching the debates back in sept. the graphs were often the other way round - with people not liking her even before she said anything.. (but having said that it was always Dennis Kucinich answers that got the best results).
the tone of the democratic debate last week seemed to be "lets not say anything quotable about each other anymore just in case we end up on the same ticket"
The Democratic nomination process was over before it began, which is why there were no "fireworks", nor any real "fight" to begin with. With candidates as alike as these, there's not much to fight about except personal perq's as the next Patronage Dispenser-in-Chief. As Ralph Nader once pithily observed, the only difference between the duopoly party candidates is the speed at which their knees hit the ground in front of their corporate paymasters. Billary are second to none in kissing rich lobbyists....err, feet. And Obama's knees must be pretty sore too, judging by the cool $32 million he raked in last month. Not much "change" in his style of corporate politics either. No, the best way to experience the mock "debate" is to watch it on the tube with the sound turned off. You won't miss anything that way and you'll be able to see it as the sham pantomime it really is. And if Americans are really so concerned about health care they'd better be thinking third party. Don't forget, it was little Goldwater Girl Hillary that squelched the last such attempt at such a plan when she was appointed chair of an exploratory committee by her nominal husband during his first term. Hillary & Obama, no "fireworks", just business as usual!
Justin, you are so biaised it is unreal. Everytime you give an opnion it is simply wrongfooted the next day. As a fellow Brit I urge you to report and not opine.
Firstly Mr. White this is a blog and, in case you're unfamiliar with the format, opining is the point.
Secondly, about Obama's performance last night, Justin was spot on. I watched the debate with a crowd of interns from the Hillary base camp in Arlington, Virginia which, as an Obama fan since long before the race even began - can anyone remember back that far - was interesting, to say the least. While Clinton (more or less) answered the questions, retaining my interest and making some concrete policy commitments Obama tended to speak alot while saying very little.
He reminded me of a guy in one of my classes at university who would talk and talk as if hoping that eventually he would get the right answer. Tedious verging on embarrassing at times.
I wasn't swayed completely by Hillary's performance but at least I listened to what she had to say and one would hope the ardent advocates of Obama did the same. Come November they may be required to vote for her and they could regret it if they don't.
The US presidential election is very important for americans as well as the world now. It is also a time to a significant change for americans and they have to choose the best candidate for the president of USA in November election. All the candidates have great speeches and commitments for their fellow citizens.In comparison,both paties have outstanding candidates to be reelected as a new president of USA. In my opinion,whichever parties win this election,they have responsibity for americans and the world as well.I guess by looking at the results so far,i think Democratic party will win the November presidential election 2008.But we can not underestimate Republican party too. Because John McCain is also a well prepared and sharp candidate. I pray 'May god bless americans'.
I support both parties's candidates because i believe they all are well-prepared,sharp and seem to be ready for americans.As for me,i prefer Democratic party to win the November presidential election. Democratic party was on power when i was a young boy. Then,i really did not know how the party was and want to see how the party is. 2 consecutive terms in power for Republican party is enough i think. Let's see how much Democratic party can handle the world's issues and its country's issues.
Justin, I love reading your blog but more for the comments than the content. Sorry, but I never tire of reading "Why are you so anti-Obama? Hillary is a big business, old politics, insincere robot. Bill should be in jail. Why do you support them? Shouldn't the 主播大秀 be impartial?"
For what it's worth, I would love to see Obama win but think Hillary will take the nomination. You're a journalist and can only report your experiences so keep writing what you think and damn the critics!
Justin, you are so biaised it is unreal. Everytime you give an opnion it is simply wrongfooted the next day. As a fellow Brit I urge you to report and not opine.
Firstly Mr. White this is a blog and, in case you're unfamiliar with the format, opining is the point.
Secondly, about Obama's performance last night, Justin was spot on. I watched the debate with a crowd of interns from the Hillary base camp in Arlington, Virginia which, as an Obama fan since long before the race even began - can anyone remember back that far - was interesting, to say the least. While Clinton (more or less) answered the questions, retaining my interest and making some concrete policy commitments Obama tended to speak alot while saying very little.
He reminded me of a guy in one of my classes at university who would talk and talk as if hoping that eventually he would get the right answer. Tedious verging on embarrassing at times.
I wasn't swayed completely by Hillary's performance but at least I listened to what she had to say and one would hope the ardent advocates of Obama did the same. Come November they may be required to vote for her and they could regret it if they don't.
I was surprised that you mentioned nothing about the scandalous discussion of the Iraq war.
Hillary's claims are i) that she didn't vote for 'war', she voted for 'more inspectors in Iraq' (which happened to include giving Bush the right to go to war -- which he happened to use) and ii) that it's time the Iraqis stopped relying on the USA.
i) is a straight lie. ii) is shocking: you vote for a war, mess up a country and then accuse them of relying on you too heavily.
I don't care if you found Obama 'pompous'. I find Hillary radically evil.
Dan Quayle shared the youth and good looks of a great former President, but then-Sen Lloyd Bentsen put him in his place:
|| "Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy."
Likewise, a candidate may deliver even more fiery oratory than Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, but
|| Barack Obama is no JFK, Abraham Lincoln,
|| Ronald Reagan or even Bill Clinton.
it's drive thru not through :)
A Black American President, or a Female White president, the world might be ready for it, but I doubt America is. Everyone says, there are no race issues here, or gender; and they keep saying it, and keep saying it, I wonder why?