November 15th, 2007
10:06 PM ET
7 years ago

Dems focus on each other and not the GOP

(CNN) – As the Democratic presidential candidates fought for their chance to speak and clarify their stances in Thursday night's debate, their Republican contenders seemed to be the last thing on their minds. They threw jabs at each other and the Bush administration. Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-New York, even shot back at CNN's Campbell Brown, but still they made no mention of the Republican rivals.

In contrast, Clinton and the Democrats were the hot topic of conversation at last month's Republican debate held in Florida. Clinton's name was mentioned more than 35 times in the two hour debate.

"We're not going to keep Hillary Clinton out of the White House by acting like Hillary Clinton," Mitt Romney said.

Democrats chose instead to try to draw distinctions among themselves on issues ranging from health care to the Iraq war and other foreign hot spots.

– CNN's Emily Sherman

soundoff (13 Responses)
  1. Danielle

    The Democratic Party always attacks the Republican president but not the Republican candidates.

    November 15, 2007 10:07 pm at 10:07 pm |
  2. Greg, Phoenix, AZ

    what a worthless debate...

    NO ONE performed well tonight...

    November 15, 2007 10:11 pm at 10:11 pm |
  3. Bill, Des Moines, IA

    No offense, but the democrats are the only party that actually has a chance right now of developing a plan for the future and uniting the country. The democrats are battling for the future or lack there of for the party. The Republican candidates aren't going to deal with issues so they focus on the only thing they can do, fight imaginary enemies. Clinton is the only democratic candidate who fits the bill of their stereotypes. Any of the other democrats will do fine. Minus Richardson, he's irritating.

    November 15, 2007 10:21 pm at 10:21 pm |
  4. alexander.studios@yahoo.com

    nd when she does say somethings she sounds like a Republican! She has supported Bush twice on Iraq, on Iran, voted twice for Patriot Act.. The list goes on. What does she have to offer Democrats, or this Country. Like Edwards said, "why would we replace a set of Republican Corporatists with a set of Democratic Corporatists??

    November 15, 2007 10:51 pm at 10:51 pm |
  5. Global citizen linda, Columbus, Ohio

    Shame on you CNN! How could you loose control of the moderation of the debate and allow suppoters of some candidates to interupt the responses of candidates.

    I listened to the narrative you set up before the show and you are trying to stick to it.

    This was no different from a Jerry Springer show.

    November 15, 2007 10:56 pm at 10:56 pm |
  6. Andrew, Haslett, MI

    Of course the Democrats can't address the Republicans. They're too busy acting like Republicans and trying to focus on the party instead of the issues. They're so bent on getting a Democrat elected, they don't care who it is. They all said they would support anyone as long as it was a Democrat! What a joke.

    By the way, there is candidate who focuses on the issues and that is Ron Paul, a Republican. Check him out, you won't be disappointed.

    November 16, 2007 12:24 am at 12:24 am |
  7. Jack, OH

    The moderators were worthless and the audience members were equally ignorant for booing on important policy differences and cheering on miniscule issues like diamond and pearls...Am glad these debates are over.

    November 16, 2007 12:30 am at 12:30 am |
  8. CWalker Anamosa Iowa

    I think Obama and Edwards seemed to do all the mud slinging.I liked Dodd he seemed to realize how distracting the negative comments are on the Democratic party.Hillary really came out the winner and she will most likely get my vote with her calm yet smart replies.
    My husband is a Republican so Ive heard all the Hillary slams and its getting old.I SAY GO HILLARY

    November 16, 2007 12:59 am at 12:59 am |
  9. mark wilkes barre pa

    Great debate dems,, This is exactly how you lose the whitehouse again

    November 16, 2007 06:02 am at 6:02 am |
  10. Wayne, Greenville TX

    By the way, there is candidate who focuses on the issues and that is Ron Paul, a Republican. Check him out, you won't be disappointed.

    Posted By Andrew, Haslett, MI : November 16, 2007 12:24 am

    Ron Paul is a Republican in name only. He's more of a Libertarian, and a friend of mine who's a Libertarian told me that he thinks Ron Paul will run as a Libertarian if he doesn't get the GOP nomination. That will split the conservative vote and ensure that a Democrat sits in the White House on Jan 20, 2009.

    Which would be the best thing for this country.

    November 16, 2007 02:27 pm at 2:27 pm |
  11. Andrew, Haslett, MI

    Ron Paul is a Republican in name only. He's more of a Libertarian, and a friend of mine who's a Libertarian told me that he thinks Ron Paul will run as a Libertarian if he doesn't get the GOP nomination. That will split the conservative vote and ensure that a Democrat sits in the White House on Jan 20, 2009.

    Which would be the best thing for this country.
    Posted By Wayne, Greenville TX : November 16, 2007 2:27 pm

    Sorry Wayne, Ron Paul is a true conservative in the tradition of Barry Goldwater and is a representative of what the Republican party is supposed to be, unlike the big government, pro-war Republicans like Bush. Real Republicans don't steal freedom from the people, don't spend money like it's water and destroy the value of US currency, don't allow other entities like the UN and WTO to dictate anything to the US, and above all, don't sacrifice our civil liberties for any reason. Ron Paul is the only Republican in the whole bunch and although he has run as a Libertarian, he has said himself that he has no plan of running representing any other party. Frankly, I don't care what party he represents because he is one of the few candidates that actually has sensible ideas and isn't afraid to tell the truth and address the issues, rather than attack others and confuse the issues with doubletalk. I put Joe Biden, Dennis Kucinich, and Mike Gravel in the same category, but thanks to the media hounds of the top tier, these candidates can't get a fair shake and equal coverage.

    Sorry, but money-hungry politicians like the leading candidates don't deserve our vote. It's time the people vote for the candidate, not the party, and vote their conscience instead of following the party line like sheep. When candidates get most of their money from special interests, lobbyists, big corporations, and unions, we know where their priorities are. That can be said of all the major candidates, especially the ones who loan their own campaigns millions of dollars because they can't raise enough on their own merits!

    A Democrat would be the best thing for the country? That's exactly the kind of thinking that will keep this country in the mess that it's in. This country needs an independent voice who isn't afraid to stand up to their own party to speak the truth. Anybody who puts the party above the needs of America (and "national security" over human rights) doesn't deserve a single vote and that's what you'll get with Billery, Obama, and the rest.

    November 16, 2007 11:19 pm at 11:19 pm |
  12. laurinda,ny

    They had better stop attacking each other and save all that for those Republicans. If the Pubs get in, we will be in terrible shape. We might even have have to learn to speak Chinese and write it. I had a hard enough time trying to learn French, I could never master that.

    November 17, 2007 09:14 pm at 9:14 pm |
  13. Tom - Dedham, Mass

    Actually Karen (aka Laurinda), if the Democrats get in you better work on your Spanish and Mexican.

    November 19, 2007 08:51 am at 8:51 am |

Post a comment


 

CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.