I hate stuff like this - the media fixates on some innane, ultimately unimportant aspect of these debates and suddenly no one is paying attention to what was actually said becuase, well, so-and-so wasn't gripping the side of the podium.

You Americans use all the wrong criteria to judge the veracity of your politicians.

Before CNN starts going down the road critiqueing their looks, maybe you can explain how it looked to those of us who wanted a real discussion of the issues, with equal time for ALL of the candidates to respond. Stop trying to pick our next president for us.

I'll meet you half way though, when candidates are close in views and ideals- it's hard to tell them apart- so I guess people will resort to look for body language.

Furthermore, Hillary just kept shunting blame for everything over to the republicans and the president. Obama was the only one who emphasized uniting the country and crossing party lines. Obama's a uniter and Hillary's a divider. We do not need more division in our country right now. That's for sure.

I agree with comment about Hillary being a STEPFORD candidate. At the Democratic Natl. Convention I saw her sitting with Chelsea, SIPPING CHAMPAGNE like she was some Victorian la dee da Aristocrat, or the Queen. "Establishment" & representing New Richistan, just like BUSH.

Obama & Edwards were pretty good. Gravel was speaking some truth. If Dennis Kucinich wasn't physically SHORT & kindof like the "MAD Magazine What Me Worry? character, he might have a real chance of getting elected.

Oh, wait! BUSH looks kindof like the "What Me Worry" MAD Mag. guy, & HE got elected President. Go Figure!

Check out "MAD WAR ON BUSH" book by MAD Magazine, it's HILARIOUS by the way.

One thing that CNN is doing that really bothers me. Could we do without the "body language expert", a "graph showing how people react" as the candidates talked, and anything else along that line? To me, this distracts from what is really important – the candidate and their responses to the questions. They should not have to be under additional pressure to watch body language, etc.

Thanks for this opportunity to email you.

I will take issue with Dimitrius on her comment that hands in pockets denotes nervousness. It also denotes casualness...and as with any language, it takes more than one cue or utterance to get the complete message.

I like Obama, but I just don't think he's got the experience behind him to take on a job like this. He needs a couple more terms as a Senator and then he'll be ready for the top job.

You guys did not provide captioning for the deaf and hard of hearing viewers. Saying it is beyond your technological capabilities is bogus. I think it's time for some of us to start filing lawsuits to force CNN.com to do the right thing when it comes to captioning.

These two would certainly make a STRONG Democratic ticket!

The only candidate who is pandering is Kucinich. Listen to everything he says. He desperately wants people to love him.

Everyone up there is playing the game.

But Clinton is playing it well, you can't deny that. She gets my vote because I believe she would do the best job as president of the United States.

Her only thoughtful response was the one about the feud between Hillary and the Edwards on who is going to look out for women's rights more, and it was a terrible response. First she did some little cheerleader routine, saying (paraphrased)"Isn't it great that the focus has become who will better serve women's rights? Isn't that just awesome?" to roaring applause. How is that an answer? She goes on to say that she has been a woman all her life and thus has been fighting for women's rights all her life. Fighting for women's rights because you yourself are a woman is extremely selfish. Fighting for women's rights even though you aren't a woman because it's the right thing to do displays not only selflessness but a general respect for all people and a yearning for equality. The whole "I'm a better soldier for women's rights because I'm a woman" argument does not work.

The woman issue was also raised when the questioner asked about the critics who say she isn't "woman enough." She answers this by first claiming that the fact that she's a woman plays no role in her being a leader. Then she ends that response by saying that because she is a woman, if she was elected as a leader, the rest of the world would look at the United States in a more fond and respectful manner. But you just said that you being a woman makes NO DIFFERENCE, Mrs. Clinton; you can't have it both ways.

She panders to what she thinks people want to see/hear (people called her "manly" between these two most recent debates, so she went from wearing a dark colored, business suit-like outfit to this pink, feminine thing she had on), but anyone with real experience knows that you can't please everyone, and thus you can't let what people say about you affect your opinions and appearances. She claims that what she believes is what a majority of Americans believe at any given time, just so she becomes more popular. Well I'm not falling for her obvious pandering, and it sickens me that so many people in this country are falling for it.

Making a point that these clowns are challenging Hillary is like me challenging Shaq in one on one.

CNN has obviously decided that Hillary Clinton is their candidate for President. That's good....I want this phony coverage and idiotic debates to continue.

Let's see her body language when she is confronted next year by a "real" candidate with "real" executive experience (Governor/Mayor)Let's discuss all of the illegal activity and nonsense her family has gotten away with in the last 30 years......she doesn't have a prayer.

Hillary Clinton needs to watch recent movies/tv shows and come off like those female "Presidents"... Or better yet, much like "M." (played by Judy Dench, brilliantly) in recent 007 films. (I.e. elegant, strong and as M said "Just because I am a woman, doesn't mean that I dont have the b*lls to handle this job")

I agree Hillary should have worn a better jacket (Her first Executive order should be to burn that thing) but the truth is that she stood out. She looked like the President and appeared surrounded by Vice Presidential candidates.

This was one of the concerns I had in earlier post in that people automatically connect economic prosperity to the Clintons and assume all will be right again with Hillary. Well, all was well because of dot-coms and inflated build up in the market and we have already off-shored a good majority of our production since then which has magnified trade defecit and it is not attributable to any political changes since Bill was in office so its hard to assume that Hillary will bring the same economic success.

Again, I think Hillary is a polarizing figure in politics and worry that electing her will not help unite our country. As Josh from Missouri put it, "Aren’t we all Americans first and Democrats/Republicans like…fiftieth?"

Isnt one of the biggest complaints of the Bush administration that they havent united the country and nothing can get done? How will this be any different with Hillary?

In my opinion, Americans want change and everyone is begging not to have more of the same so I hope that people take this to heart and choose any one of the uniting figures running. I just dont believe in my heart that Hillary is one of these.

I was very impressed by the way Anderson handled the debate.

Who has the MOST Presidental appearance???? Not, who can best lead the country????

And, of course, now instead of substance we receive sound bites...

Until we stand up and say we want more, we'll get just what we deserve....

More of the same ~ smoke & mirrors versus leadership & vision.

Finally, Hillary was the only person standing on a riser. I wonder if this was a request of her campaign, so that she would not come off as shorter than teh other candidates (and thereby portrayed, at least subconsciously, as inferior.) Or, was this CNN's planning, so that the candidates would all appear of equal height?

I agree that change is what we need and that's why I would advocate someone with a record of achievement in actually managing an organization. Career politicians do not give us what we need.

Be careful. Our current president was the Governor of Texas with a "wealth" of business and political experience. Change is what we need.

Also, keep in mind how close the primaries are in this election cycle. Several key states have moved the elections up - to January and February. It's not too early to start thinking about your candidate of choice.

Take care. And yes, I ask that you do the same - Keep an open mind.

We don't really have true statesmen(or women) running for office. Ever notice how senators and representatives typically are unable to achieve the presidency? Governors are much more likely to be elected president due to their executive experience and having to actually be responsible for their state while in office.

It scares me to death that people see someone with 2 years of senate duty as being experienced enough to be president or that a rich ambulance chaser could actually try to pawn himself off as one of the common folk.

Personally, I would like to see a competent business person try their hand at leading this country. We elected one as governor here in TN (Bredesen-Democrat)and he has done an incredible job of not only getting things done, but of crossing party lines in a common sense fashion.

In any case, hope everyone keeps an open mind as the campaign trudges on for the next 15 months.

Bravo CNN, you’re continued lowering of the news, editorial, and political bar seems to know no bounds.

Posted By J. Scott : July 23, 2007 10:58 pm
End Quote

This really was unnecessary.

CNN reports on a number of stories every day. Yes, some of them might be a little off the beaten path, but I believe that this one is important.

Regardless of political affiliations, I would rather have a someone leading this country who was confident and strong. Anyone can learn to talk like that, but our individual subconscious habits (fidgeting, rocking back and forth during a presentation, etc.) are much harder to control. By being in control of those subconscious habits, people are creating an outward display in their own inner confidence.

Don't just assume that words mean everything.
Ever heard the saying: "Actions speak louder than words"?

As for the article: I agree that Clinton definitely appeared the more "professional" of the candidates, and am looking forward to the Republican version of the debate.

Also, I was pleasantly surprised about the new format utilizing average citizens. It created a small town forum environment and significantly increased candor with the candidates.

Fortunately, more focus was placed on moving the country forward (replacing fossil fuels, paying down our children’s children’s debt, funding science, low graduation rates, rising extremism, should the US be the world police?, diplomacy…). Only so much time, but we need to understand these issues to move forward.

Obama is gifted and he will have a great future once he does his homework and grows up he will be in line. He is got a lot to learn. Wanting to sit down with Fidel and Chavez did not set in right down in South Florida….He is inexperienced in foreign policy.

Mr. Edwards looks fake, nervous and really dropped the ball a couple of times… Richardson is a great candidate as well and very knowledgeable. The rest of the pack came across as 12 angry men and a nut case.

And yes i keep hearing all this support for Hillary but when i see pictures of her, even the pic attached to this article her eyes seem to be cold, calculating as if a hunter or a killer. i know this is one sided but the eyes are the windows to the soul and if you can't keep eye contact then i don't have respect for you. furthermore rolling your eyes when a republican speaks or someone you don't agree with just shows the lack of human respect she has.