CNN

This is for Witheld- President Bill Clinton did a magnificant job in the 90's don't you think? And who was by his side??

If you want to vote Republican, then do so. Do not blame Hillary for your irrational thinking based on feeling and not intelligence.

Because of voters like you, President George W. Bush was put in the White House. Are you proud now?

OBAMA FOR PRESIDENT '08'

As an African American female and lifelong Democrat who has never voted any other way, and has ALWAYS supported Bill Clinton and who up until last night supported Hilary will no longer support the Clintons. I think Obama hit the nail on the head when he said it's hard to tell which Clinton he's running against. This was a very difficult decision to make and strangely enough Bill and Hillary made it for me. If she ends up getting the nomination I will vote Republican in the general election and will also work hard to not elect Hilary.

Where was Bill Clinton when Kerry was running – Seems to me he is interested in personal power rather than supporing his party. He detracts from the Democrats message and divides the party. Not very Presidental. By the way, if Hillary wins, who's going to protect the interns in the White House?

Dean taking sides in his comments on CNN on Hillary

If it is a Tie She may have to go longer to win".

Dem party is split. Is Dean OK with this?

GOP is LOL about the Dems.

GOP 2008

For the first time since JFK, a large portion of the Dem party may sway Ind. Or GOP.

Obama shot her down on all issues. What was her solution "make everyone choose a Government mandated healthcare"

Obama offers a better plan.

Many people believe in prayer as their form of healthcare. Edward and Hillary plan will not recognize it as a healthcare. Just give a religious exemption saying (no healthcare). People have had great success relying on the teaching of Christ Jesus. Material medical is respected for its efforts to help humanity. However, people have had great success in Spiritual medical healthcare. It should be the individual choice. I thought that was slogan for Dems. "Choice"

Sounds like the insurance and pharmaceutical are driving the mandate and lack of recognition issue.

I am Sure prayer is not a threat to the industry profit.

Obama lowers rates, but leaves the course of treatment in the hands of the patient, not a big government mandate.

I watched the debate last night and also listened to the comments made by analist. Now my question, I heard race and gender used as reasons to vote for a new leader for The United States.Why does race and gender have to do with a person who is qualified to be president? I also heard the term, Blacks, from anilist and Senitor Obahama and in the same sentance both refered to the Afro-American.
An American is some who was born in the US, or came from another country and got their citizenship. Don't a lote of people with white skin live in africa. Please leave Race and Gender out of the qualification for our next American President. The name calling and arguing is what children do in a school yard .

R Henson
North Carolina

Bill,
I could not disagree more. This is a fight for the Presidency of the United States, not a discussion about last night's football game. We can get coombiyah moments elsewhere.

We need more of precisely what we got in the first half of the debate.

I agree with Robin above on the coverage aspect btwn Hillary and Obama. They've been calling the Nevada win "tight" and "close" and stuff – give me a break (as Bill C would say), a candidate with 51% of the vote is a strong winner. She got 51% in Nevada and they've downplayed that on CNN... what, are they scared of Obama or something? He had a good showing, but she had a clear strong victory and that should be acknowledged. She is up 3 to 1 in terms of states over Obama. That's not small or "tight" – while a lot of activity is still to come, these pieces are significant so far. And Hillary had 65% of the Latino vote in Nevada. These are power numbers and she's building momentum. I've been a bit put off by CNN coverage intimating that it was a slight win. Sheesh!! We're not stupid, ya know.

I saw the second part of the debate, and now some of the "fireworks" of the first part in recaps. I do like Obama but having now seen him in a couple of debate formats, I see he's not really very good at forming good points, focusing, or straight-up answering. I'm getting the sense that he's good at the inspiring-speech kind of talk... but formless on issues, debates, and in-your-face challenges. Just not ready. Hillary is solid on these, well-formed answers, gets to the point, gets her point out there, doesn't falter, knows the issues and topics, and is strong and formidable. Edwards just had the unfortunate role of trying to scrap in there and be noticed, and he came off desperate and kind-of mean sounding. Ugh.

Obama needs to stop whining about Bill Clinton – hello, if your spouse was the former President, duh, you'd use him/her as much as possible. Hillary answered that question well last night. And Bill C being a master campaigner, of course he's going to get in the face of any challengers. Obama looks like a wimpy whiner when he complains about this.

I'm seeing a winner in Hillary, and a wanna-be in Obama.

I am an African American female who left America in August 1986 to live, and work abroad to support our country, the United States of America. I left America because there were no equal opportunities there for Black Americans, Negroes, or African Americans, rather for "colored folks."

While I am an educator and highly equipped with educational credentials, I find myself to be "meek" and "humble" and open-mined. Although I miss my three adult children, painfully, I thank God everyday for the opportunity to live and work in four different countries since August 1986. I've lived and worked with some fantastic people from other countries and I've had some wonderful learning experiences with these people.

I am terribly humiliated, embarrassed, and offended to see African Americans support and praise the Clintons, opposed to supporting one of their very own kind. As far as I am concerned, Bill Clinton is not black. He is as white as the paper that I am writing on. The few crumbs that he gave to support a few African Americans, and a few black organizations does not warrant the praise he has received from some of the "so-called" black leaders in America. They certainly do not speak for me.

I have not seem any President support any legislation to keep black males and females from the prison system. I have not seen any President support any legislation to keep the abundance of drugs from entering and engaging in the economy of our country. I have not seen any President support any legislation which will keep the black homeless men and women from sleeping on benches in parks that houses statues of the white heroes overlooking them.

I am so very proud of Obama. Other than the leadership of Martin Luther King, and Malcolm X, I am very disappointed with the past leadership of blacks and black organizations. What have you done for our people?

Obama should be the next president of the United States. He has a brilliant mind. He is honest. He is kind. He shows compassion to all people from different walks of life, race, color, creed, culture.

The Clintons have ruled long enough. Give one of us a chance. I am certain that Obama's presidency will make a big difference to our country and his leadership in the position of President of the United States will certainly repair our damaged image.

Cozie

I watched the rebate in S.C.I will add is this Obama trying to get President just to prove he can to say the 1st black man to make history.We need A president who stands out with the truth knows what he are she is doing.Not to say I will be the first black to become President.This is not telling me he is good for the people nor run our country.

Tom Davie,

Instead of consistently bashing Obama, can you bring something to the table?

Ron Paul has completely different ideias than most of the Democrats, but still he is very respected. How can one not admire how a person can stood by his/her values, even when they are different?

Also, about Clinton's legacy? Which Clinton are you talking about? Bill or Hillary? Cuz if you talk about Hillary's magic 35, you have Obama's 20 years of experience. You cannot have it both ways. Maybe you should research before bashing.

If Obama becomes President will he vote PRESENT if we were, supposed, attack againg by terrorist.............? as he does, he did in the SENATE....... Obama is a very ambitious person, I don't think he cares for anything else. His EGO is enormous!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It was obvious that Hillary WON last night, and smashed Obama.
Obama was nervous, I don't want a president like him.

I think Bill Clinton should have been called to stand on the podium too because I am seeing four people running as democratic candidates. Bill is the fourth.

Clinton's political speak is not answers to questions–it is an unfortunate need to not come clean and speak clearly to the American People.

Obama's supporters were an absolute disgrace during the debate – they behave like spoilt brats who are not getting their way.

My concern about Edwards and Clinton is that they seem almost flabbergasted that Obama is in the race. Does anyone remember all the coverage about whether he was "black enough?" early in the race? Or all the other mud-slinging.

Does anyone notice that Obama AND Edwards EACH have held more years of elected office than Mrs. Clinton? And more years of public service prior to that? Or that although she claims 35 year of experience, she doesn't mention that includes her many years as a Republican? And if she gets to claim "being First Lady" as part of her record, then surely she should get the negative credit for how few "little people" got the benefit of pardons and how the White House was a revolving door of rich lobbyists and "Friends of Bill." Remember all the complaints about the Lincoln bedroom being "for sale?"

The problem I have with this race is that it was supposed to be coronation, not a choice for the American people. Now that we have a choice, the parties are all sparring like two year olds. I think the Democratic party should step in and set a standard – or realize that the squabbling will result in another Republican in office. I know of many people who are Independent, like myself, who are starting to like John McCain much better.

There's plenty of blame to go around, but I'd like the candidates to stop ganging up on each other like spoiled brats and focus on their job – representing the American people, not their own egos.

I find some of these comments posted idiotic here. Canadians telling us they prefer HILLARY., who cares who they prefer ? Taking words out of context from OBAMA will not work for you HILLARY supporters, and her and her husbands distortions and lies are burying her campaign. I am a registered democrat and I for one am sick of the CLINTONS. The CLINTONS have no ethics whatsoever and very little if any morality to speak of. I think they are both conniving pathological liars who will say anything and use anybody to get back in the WHITE HOUSE. Hell will freeze over before I vote for either of them ever again, but there is a clear choice for DEMOCRATS this time, BARACK OBAMA. A TRUE LEADER

Saddest moment of the night: John Edwards again returns the debate to issues, mentions the tragic story of a Kansas City mother bundling her kids up to stay warm because she can't afford the gas bill, and then tells those kids not to say anything at school or else social services will take them away from their home, and the next question is about whether or not Bill Clinton was the black president.

When your cities are burning, your people are starving, and you wonder why "God is angry" or seems to be frowning on you...think back to those little moments in your life, when you cheered silly moments like this one. And there was CNN – "the most trusted name in news" egging the stupidity on.

If the Democrats make the mistake to nominate Obama for the 2008 presidential elections,America will end up with a Republican at the White House.
And God help them then!

Wake up America! I have come to the conclusion that some Americans just don't get it!!!! They re-elected Bush to run for a second term and look at what he did to America's image globally....not to mention the war, economy, yada yada ya.... I could go on forever! Why they would want to make the same mistake with the Clintons is beyond my imagination. Who are they trying to fool; this is clearly about their restoration back to the white house! Bill is clearly trying to make up for his mistakes and make good his legacy which was cut short as a result of his impeachment. As for the comment about Bill being the "first black president", Martin Roland of CNN hit the nail on the head; why then did he let the genocide happen in Rwanda. ...pleaseeeeeeeeeee!
Obama is the only candidate who speaks & stands for "Unity", a word hardly mentioned by Hillary or any other nominee. All she talks about is fighting the Republicans. Who are the Republicans most likely to work with? ....Yes, OBAMA! The sign of great leaders like MLK Jr., are people who can share and persuade others to see their vision towards a common, good cause. How can American progress this way....think really hard about this! This is not about Race or Gender; please use common sense for god's sake when making your voting decisions; although it is said common sense isn’t that common!
I rest my case!

Obama for President!!!!

Canadians: Yes! Yes!

On Obama running against both Clintons: Obama is running against the Republicans. Remember?? And he's going to face a lot more opposition as President of the U.S. than he could ever face from either Clinton. My, my.

It is WAY too early to speculate about who could beat the potential maybe Republican nominee.

Its obvious from the debate that the audience is biased against Hillary. Obama was the one who started to make a personal attack on Hillary with his Walmart remark and got applause from the audience and when Hillary started to do the same to Obama,she was jeered by the audience.If this is any indication of the South Carolina primary, Obama should be winning it, with huge support from the African Americans.

This back-and-forth attacks between Obama and Hillary are a distaste and do not clarify the issues for the voters. The voters,of all political stripes, are the ones who lose in the end. That's politics and its a fact that voters have to know and learn to distinguish the real issues behind the smokes thrown up by the candidates. But still, what is particularly disappointing with the Obama campaign is despite their avowed promise to stay positive, they have made personal attacks on Hillary behind the scenes. His campaign's prodding of journalists to Hillary as Senator from Punjab and her remarks about MLK are examples. This is worse than Hillary's campaign attacks as at least, they have never said they would stay all positive in the campaign. James Carville was right to point out that Obama and his staffers come from the school of the rough and tumble of Chicago politics and would use negative tactics in the campaign.

Hence, let's all wake up and be clear that Obama is every bit as political as Hillary and others, despite his words of hope and opitmism. Talk is cheap. Only actions matter and Obama's actions is not necessarily more positive than others.

Just to keep it short safe and sound, Obama was the winner of tonights campaign. We all need to take a closer look at his policy in order to spot the future treasure to be tapped out of this icon.

Watching Hillary, all I can think about is how polarizing she is, how many political debts she has, and how she'll deal with Republican congressmen and women who hate her. Shock radio and 'fox' pseudo-news programing will have a field day with her in office.
I think Edwards and Obama can navigate getting legislation through and realizing a mandate more than Clinton. Bill had the possiblity of a mandate and squandered it on failed healthcare reform (led by Hillary) and his affair. How much of that sticks to Hillary? In reality, he was a centrist who helped usher us out fiscally away from Reaganomics – not much else. He lost congress and the presidency (not backing Gore sufficiently against Bush).
Edwards stands for reform and Obama talks the talk. Together, Edwards and Obama are much more unifying figures who can capitalize on that when it comes to leading the American people and getting Congress behind that agenda.

At his death, MLK was talking about us getting out of Viet Nam and global economic injustice. His legacy was not yet realized as a global leader, of social justice, beyond race.
In his letter from a Birmingham jail, he challenged everyone (the majority) sitting on the sideline to become "creative extremists," which in my view was for every one of us to step into the frame of social activism and social enterprise initiatives to help and pick up those being left behind. We all have a role in re-making this democracy what it can be, rather than letting the haters make cynics out of all of us.
Who will get us there? Edwards/Obama

Hillary wants to win at any cost – even if she brings down her own party. Her only chance of gaining the nomination is to alienate and diseffect enough traditional Dems to take the center. She's a hawkish centrist who plays old school politics. Same old/same old thing. Is that what we want? It makes for a risky general election for the general campaign for us Dems.
We Dems need to keep our eyes on the prize. We win with either Edwards or Obama. Edwards delegates are much more likely to go Obama than Clinton. A vote for either Edwards or Obama will help broker a true winner for the general election.

Did Hillary answer Edwards' question about campaign $$$ from lobbiests? She poo-pooed the question as so many degrees of seperation She extrapolated that if she took $$$ from a lobbiest, who is to say Edwards didn't take money from the spouse of a lobbiest, as if to imply, who really cares!!?. Well, I care. I think America cares. Doesn't it matter if we're going to change 'politics as usual?' I thought her answer was flip and showed disdain for those who really want to see change.

Did you notice that at the beginning of the debate, Hillary paid homage to the Black Congressional Caucus, but went right into policy wonk mode and overlooked the opportunity to say something about the MLK legacy. I was surprised that Obama kind of fumbled his openning. Yet, it was Edwards who gave the most respectful, succinct response, bringing up his unfinished legacy of economic justice, that also dovetailed nicely into the overall economic question. But, Hillary's brazen pandering to the congressional representatives in the audience was astonishing. She got something in later, but, whew, her focus is clear to me… win through expediency.

I hope all you partisan-candidate Democrats remember one thing: there will be only ONE Democratic nominee for president and some of your snipping comments at one candidate over another (Clinton over Obama, Obama over Clinton, Edwards over Obama and Clinton...) is just as petty as what went on between Clinton and Obama tonight. I am an uncommitted Democrat living in Canada and watched tonight's debate with great interest. While I am leaning toward Obama, I feel Clinton make take the nomination, but feel Edwards was the best on the stage tonight.

I don't give a rat's rump about Scneider's opinion

Dear Neighbours,

Canada's Universal health care is the way you should go. Many western nations have it. Don't keep listening to repuplicans. We don't have people on waite lists who are ready to die as you have heard. Unless of course its for a organ.

Re your debate tonight

I liked Obama's unity and lets work together message. However, he doesn't appear to handle the attacks well. Also doesn't seem to have a very strong record especially those votes where he only voted present. What's with that.

Hillary can take and give. I think she's your best bet to win against the Republicans.

For what it's worth from a neighbour to the north.

Could you even call the second-half a "debate?"

Was really hoping for some more tough questions. Instead we got a 90-minute "feel good" session on why Bush has ruined the country and how we need to stick together as democrats. ZZZZZzzzzzzzz

Clinton divides; Obama unites ... which makes more sense? Are we really that unevolved that we need to "fight the Republicans" ?? Something is very wrong there.

Hillary came out top and showed that she can handle anything even internationally. Obama can't even explain himself other than "yes we can" Yes we can what? Change should be translated in to actions not theory. Time will tell , and super Tuesday is coming. Obama you better be ready for more punches.

Barack did not praise Reagan. I find it very dangerous when we can live in America where comments can be taken out of context or not presented in their full context and then employed by a candidate to support their agenda while attacking another candidate's platform. It takes away from us dealing with the real issues and it portends bad things for the way in which that individual might work in the White House. After all, George Bush is KNOWN for taking things out of context to support his one-sided agendas.

Barack pointed out just as he stated that Reagan was able to pull individuals from varying political perspectives together at a time when America was needing change. He also stated that the Republicans have presented ideas for 10, 15 years and that we've heard them all before, intimating that the Republicans candidates are only presenting the same hackneyed arguments on what needs to be done with this country. Barack never said those were good ideas. Philosophically, he was right about Reagan's transformative power in drawing people together even if it was for the wrong cause. Reagan did something that others did not do to the detriment on this country. Barack is simply making the case that the strategy by Reagan is right even if his politics are TOTALLY WRONG! He's also suggesting that the Democrats must employ the same strategy in pulling people from across the aisle to support their interest while presenting a different agenda to America–one that will offer change and hope to a a people who have lost confident in their government and their basic belief that America cares about each and everyone of its citizens.

To parse words and try to offer shibboleths for the media and to manipulate the public is totally unfair. It is very clear that Barack was not asserting that the Republicans have good ideas. I can't say it enough, it frightens me to see these sort of tactics coming from the Democratic party. I think Barack is right–some of us will do anything to get elected. It should be about the vitality of the American people but it seems more about visibility for certain candidates.

Clearly Hillary won the debate tonight. What are Obama's voting credentials in the senate that merit his candidacy as compared to Hillary's?

He came across to me tonight as a candidate who has risen to the level of throwing out the jabs and barbs contrary to what his position on this has been in the past.

He has become the candidate of change alright....he changes his rhetoric every time when he is challenged by Hillary. His comments about the Reagan issue is an example.

Hillary has stepped up to the plate and confronted the issues of health care,economy, and bringing our troops home. Her positions are clear. She gets my vote.

GO HILLARY!!!!!!!!!

Obama is trying to hurt Hillary, and is losing focus on the key issues because of it.
If this is what he does, then I do not want him in the White House.
I want a candidate who will tell me what he or she will do to make this country better, and not play dirty for his own cause.
Red flags go up around Obama every time he speaks.
He needs to stop this garbage fast.
Better Hillary than him.

George Vreeland Hill

The Rezko deal has to be more investigated..Obama is not what he seems!

Obama is proving to have a GLASS JAW , which is the Clinton strategy to prove.

Obama does much better giving speeches where nobody can challenge him on anything.

January 22, 2008 12:12 am ET

"A Problem is Not as Permanent As Its Solutions"

As a Professional African American male (who at this time is undecided). and a register Independent.

I watch the debate this evening I must honestly say it was exciting to say the least. However I was disappointed with Sen Obama and Sen Clinton. I was impressed Sen Edwards affords to redirect the debate to the core issues affecting our country today.

While watching the debate I thought of a quote I believe? from Abraham Lincoln:

"We are not enemies, We are Friends, Though Passions may have stranded it must not break the bounds of our affections"

I believe that Sen Clinton and Sen Obama should to take heed to the quote mention above.

Now I respect their passion, yet at this time moving forward it would be smart and prudent for one, if not both of them to realize that these personal attacks will only give media more filler for their programs.

Programs that rarely report stories or information that truly speak to the core issues of America as a whole in my opinion.

Sen Obama Sen Clinton I Beg you Stop this! show America Democratic, Republican, Independents "We are Ready for Change" As you both have offer change for this country.

A country in my opinion has for the last eight years has lost creditability, not just with the international community, but more important with the citizens of our homeland

We are not enemies, We are Friends, Though Passion may have strand, It must not break the bounds of our affections……………….

Lets talk about the solution's for our country!

Shawn Martin
Novato CA

Obama has been the one who got attacked constantly since his win in Iowa from the Clintons. It has become a mess that he needs to stand up and clarify the clouds that they created to blind our vision and judgment. Edwards has been viciously attacked since he is not the front-runner and does not carry the kind of leadership the country needs. Therefore, he does look like a good guy, the mediator and peace-maker right now. I like him, but am not convinced of his leadership and background to advance him in this election. Obama has run an admirable and exciting campaign and the whole Clintons is such a unfortunate thing that happened to the Democrat race. The only way we will have a Democrate president is we have to show that we can and will offer something new and different from the Republicans, not the same old agenda. I am still convinced of Obama's message for the unity because it all starts with unifying the country before we can actually make something meaningful happen. I will give him a chance.

CNN's post debate TV coverage is really biased towards Obama. When Larry King asked Wolf where the candidates stand in the national polls, Wolf hedged and stammered and said...it's very close....Hillary with a slight lead. Actually, according to RealClearPolitics, Hillary holds an 8.5 point lead on average. And a new Rassmussen poll conducted YESTERDAY gives her a 9-point lead. I am really tired of CNN's coverage. Even FOX is now less biased and I'd never thought I'd say that.

I've been watching and listening keenly from far away Nigeria and my view is very simple. The goal should be singular... for the democrats to win the presidency. As much as I like Obama's campaign I'm not sure he can stand againgst the republicans... I can still remember vivdly how they slaughtered John Kerry. I was really hoping for a Clinton/Obama Candidacy (which should have easily cllinched the white house) but the recent rivalry makes it look less likely.

I hope the two of them can go back to the time when they discussed issues without attacking each other so much... lets keep the white house in focus... I have noticed the republicans have been very silent... dont take their silence for peace... they are preparing for battle.

I wish them both good luck on super duper Tuesday as you call it!

I am absolutely sick of the Reagan thing. I mean that's about the only thing they have on Obama and it's pathetic. They tried on his voting Present on 100 issues in the senate too.

I guess this time around though people are putting a lot more emphasis on the democratic candidate since there is absolutely no chance of a republican president this time around.

Tom Davie...stop reciting Clinton remarks. Read the entire transcript. When Hillary mis-spoke about MLK role in the Civil Rights Act being less than LBJ, I gave her a chance to explain. But the disconnect for me was that Hillary Rodham supported Barry Goldwater for president and he was opposed to the Civil Rights Act of 1964. How could Hillary be pro-civil rights back in the Civil Rights Era when she supported a presidential candidate who was against Civil Rights?

If you think that you are ever going to get Hillary without Bill, you are kidding yourself. In New York maybe. But in the White House, where they have to live, and where he did his deads? The press will ask daily.
Also, Bill is too skilled a politician to not make comments when the Clinton machine needs it most.

Edwards is OK, far less damaging to the country than Clinton, but I still can't see voting for him. He is part of the reason health insurance for Doctors is so high, and that is part of the problem in our medical system.

Obama has a spirit of hope that I find refreshing. His policies aren't so different from the other two, so the packaging is what makes the difference for me. He can be a uniter, and I think he would be a great face for America.

Vote for Obama!
End the family rule of Bush and Clinton!

Unfortunately, my friend from Canada– Bill Banks–, has lost track of the type of EXPERIENCE the Clintons gave to the democrats and this nation. Why have the Republicans been in power this long?

The SINS and experiences of the Clintons are still being paid for by the Democratic party. By the time these people left office, the Independent votes INCREASED in this nation. To date, tell me how many Independents (or for that matter, any Republicans) are willing to pay for the KIND of EXPERIENCE that you have OBSERVED in the Clintons, my friend? Was this not the woman who was close to tears in NH recently? When the Republicans start to wage their war on her and Bill, will she be able to govern? There are many, and many waiting in the wing for "pay back" day!!! Do not wish this on the Democrats.

I pray and beg of people like you, who have a BRIEF overview of the so-called tauted Clinton experience to "chill it"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Why isn't Hillary pouncing on balancing this irresponsible Bush deficit spending?

Obama won the debate tonight with Edwards second and Clinton third. I think Obama had to come out strong against the Clinton attacks and distortions of his record over the past two weeks to a month. I was hoping Obama would draw a clear distinction between himself and Hillary on working with the poor and underrepresented. Hillary has had a pass with her claim of 35 years experience (which is mostly fighting for women and children from a high level corporate-type job). I was saying that Obama should have been talking about his community organizing experience about a few weeks back. Hillary can talk about helping women and children from high level corporate position, but Obama can walk the walk of having been personally living the community and working with the poor and disenfranchised.

Wow! What a spirited debate!

Hillary really came on strong on outclassed Obama, who showed he can't take a punch well. Yes people, despite all the "hope and vision" rhetoric, the point of this election for Democrats is to run a candidate who can beat the republicans, which means they've got to be mean & tough.

Obama was a disappointment tonight. He strikes me as thin on issues. Yes, his speeches are inspiring but clearly, he is not ready to be president.
He came to the debate tonight to pick a fight with the Clintons. Well Hillary showed him and us she is tough and very smart.
He has as advisers, a few former Clinton adviers and acqaintancies. Is there a possibility that these people's bitterness towards the Clintons is seeping through their candidate.
John Edwards did well. However, he is an angry man.
The democrat's' best choice is Hillary Clinton.

Bill Banks.

They have NOT held the Obama record up to the same scrutiny as the Clinton legacy chiefly because Obama has none.

When a guy has no experience, he runs on CHANGE. Bringing people together.

I am STILL cracking up that he cited Ronald Reagan as a guy who 'had the best ideas' and brought people together .............for issues he was OPPOSED TO.

Nobody admires when someone gets people together for issues that you HATE.

LOL..........

I agree with Bill Schneider that the second half of the debate offered more focus to the issues. However, I do believe the first half of the debate still did manage to offer up some pertinent points on issues.

I see a comment from a Canadian above. Lest we forget, our northern neighbours are our biggest trading partner, have a successful multi-party democracy rather then just two parties as we have, and universal health care (which I am aware has had wait time issues for some critical matters from time to time but that seems to me to be better then no care at all) as well as a fiscal house that has been in order with government surpluses, rather then deficits, for the last 10 years and counting.

When we focus on all these immigration issues and other matters, I think we need to be careful not to sideswipe our biggest partner in almost all economic (and many other areas) matters. Canada has apparently been hurt almost as much as we on free trade and other matters – the problem is not to the north, but rather to the south. A free trade agreement where the third partner Mexico is simply not on the same playing field in any respect as the other participants is one that needs to be redefined in respect of that country.

I have to say I view most of the border obstacles put in place for movement between Canada and the US, are unecessary. There are not millions of Canadians trying to come down here illegally. I would be surprised if it was even in the hundreds!

I agree with my fellow Canadian about Hillary. A few weeks ago there was a poll conducted up here and she came out as Canadian's top choice for President. Obama was in second. Overall, Canadians preferred Democrats 4:1 over the Republicans, including the majority of supporters of the governing Conservative Party.

As for this debate, I would say John Edwards was the winner, with Hillary in second. Obama does seem to take too long to explain himself, kind of like Kerry in 2004. There was clearly a partisan crowd behind Obama so at least he had that going for him. But I've seen better debate performances from him.

It's interesting that Hillary brought up the Rezko issue and I think it's a good thing because voters should be aware of a possive looming controversy. Whatever the extent of Obama's involvement, his ties with Rezko definitely go beyond 5 billable hours. I still can't believe that was Obama's best defense against the accusation.

This mud-tossing debate tonight was a great example of combat politics. Several times I thought it more closely resembled the Three Stooges having a pie fight than a Presidential debate. Combat politics has polarized things so much that government no longer works for the people.

I am really starting to come across to Hillary. I was stuck for who to vote for on Super Tuesday, but she is really showing her toughness, think she can be a true statesperson.

As for the tone and "pleasantness" of the second half of the debate...

I'm still an undecided independent in this race. I'm certain I'm not voting Republican; I don't see a stitch of positive people-focused, democratic-spirited, or environmentally friendly respect coming from the GOP candidates. The Dems aren't making it easy to come to a decision yet either. The three front-runners each have things I want in a candidate, no single one has them all. And there are things I like very much in Kucinich too. However, there are things that are starting to help me come to terms with these three, less political/policy based though they may be, that I find very important.

The more casual form of the second half of the debate, sitting comfortably in chairs on the stage, was I think a good change in the concept of the debates thus far (admittedly, it would have been unwieldy at best with eight chairs). Standing on stage behind the lectern can make anyone look uncomfortable, but sitting should help put them more at ease, and I think it did. And I think it helped highlight some of the personable, real-personality aspects of the three candidates.

For instance, comparing Edwards behind the lectern to in his chair, he appeared the most personable (No, not the "I could have a beer with him" type. Rather, he seemed comfortable and at ease with what he had to say, and was prepared to speak _to me_ as opposed to _at me_. He was however slightly side-lined for most of the second half so we did not get additional details on his politics/policy initiatives unfortunately.

The meat of the second half for me came in the on-going "conflict" between Obama and Clinton. They hold very close views on very many items. If you Clinton's word on it the difference between them is that Clinton has experience and actually does what she says she does while Obama speaks a good speech but just shows up to vote present, not putting his actions where his mouth is. If you take Obama's word on it the difference between them is that Clinton has her husband do her dirty work for her (or was that her doing it, he can't tell them apart?!) and vociferously distorts his credentials, his experience and his intent on the actions he takes. In other words, the first half of the debate with bickering between them. It made good television but I don't think it won any new supporters to either candidate.

In the second half however, seated and being more relaxed and composed, what stood out for me was their "conflict" and how each is handling it. What I saw, over and over again in the long shots, was their reactions/disposition to each other as the other spoke. Clinton gave me the impression of being fully engaged in the process, not quite hanging on every word Obama was saying but clearly intently listening to him and watching him and evaluating what he said. On the other hand, Obama nearly never looked at Clinton when she spoke, as a two year old would to show they don't care about what you're saying. And when by chance he did acknowledge her speaking it was from behind a raised hand, as if suggesting "talk to the hand" or "simmer down little lady". I found Obama coming off as very disrespectful to Clinton, and to a lesser degree to Edwards. His one-off comment in the previous debate where he said she was "likable enough" came back to me, and I'm beginning to see a pattern in his remarks.

Clinton is aggressive and attacking of Obama and his politics and policies, for sure. She is however respectful of him as a person I believe at all times. Obama though seems to be attempting to demean Clinton as a person, someone not worthy of consideration or of spending his attention on. I find this very disrespectful and actually somewhat disgusting coming from someone who is purporting to be a healer and a candidate of unification. It's disappointing to say the least...just one more reason I'm still undecided I guess.

How about this....
I thought it was real nice when she pulled "frederick Douglass" out of the her bag of "negro" mentors. I wonder does she even know anything about him. As a history teacher, if Douglass was still alive he would not at all be behind her. I want to ask her some real questions about why she felt she "shares the same ideas".
She is so random, such a polished politician who pulls the sheets over our eyes....didn't that happen back in 2000 and then again 2004! When is our nation going to wake up and give someone a chance to change our nation! A new face, a new time!
No matter what people are saying....as a president, you have a host of advisors to make sure that legislation is checked and balanced, so the experience button need not be pushed..after all, look what Bush experience got us!
Let's start over! I want a candidate who will bring people together, after all, you can't run the country one sided. The republican conversion vote is needed, point blank and period. With hillary, it is a love-hate relationship. She won't stand a chance againts mccain. Why? Who votes more?
poor minorities or rich republicans.
Get real....Vote Barack! Vote Hope and change, anyone can talk....I want someone who can inspire

Once again Obama refuses to pledge allegience to the flag of the United States of America. There are pictures of this with others on stage and he has his back to the flag ,both hands by his side as the others pledge allegience. Think about this............Is this really who you want to lead the greatest nation in the world. Not me. I fought for that flag and Obama denies it. He wont ever get my vote.

John Edwards is the working mans president. Make it official and elect the man who works for the working man.

t was evident to me that Hillary Clinton is tough, smart, well-informed, and can stand up to whatever comes her way.

He dropped the ball again. The guy also needs to be prepped on his stuttering when he gets nervous. Clinton rocks and she rocks big time. What a great speaker.

What a great ticket it would be of Clinton as President with Obama as VP. Thats the strongest, most effective way to enjoy the power of the Democratic wave.

I think the debate was good for Barack. He addressed a lot of the misleading statements the Clintons keep putting out about him. I am glad he let everyone know he is a CHRISTIAN. I know the CLINTONS are putting out the information that he isn't. Hillary is so fake.

I watched the debate tonight and was just amazed at what I witnessed. I was really turned off when Obama and Clinton took a lot of shots at each other. They spent really valuable time sparring and trying to one-up each other. So much so, that if they had behaved better, we the voters of America (and not just South Carolinians) could have gotten so much more information as to who really is going to be the best leader in our country.

Whereas Clinton displayed remarkable ability to stay focused under fire, and to stick to the facts, I can’t really say that I would vote for her. Obama may well be the most gifted orator of a generation, but where the hell does he really stand on important issues. My vote would go to Edwards. He seemed the only one tonight to keep in mind that this debate is about America, not about the candidates.

Once again, the media love affair with the ones labeled front-runners by the polls, has managed to marginalize the one candidate who has actually framed so much of the stances and issues in the national conversation. If the debate had really been balanced and truthful, equal time would have been given over to all three of the candidates. And to hear that the CNN focus group thought that he was the best tonight, but wouldn’t cast their votes for him because he isn’t ‘electable’ is bull! John Edwards has what it takes to lead our country and the world.

Iwas glad to see Sen Obama confront the Clintons on their misrepresenting his words and record. I was especially impressed with Sen Obama's explain regarding race issue. The media acts like a school yard full of jeering peers instigating and pushing two peers to fight. The media, in my opinion has problem trying to understand the issue of race. Even the questions in my opinion appeared skewed to giive Senator Clinton and upper hand. I feel so bad that in2008 that this country is still stuck on the race. Other than being economically deprived,we are all the same and want the same for our famlies. I seems the more things change the more they stay the same. I'm happy to see Dr King's dream in the makings.We haven't gotten there yet, we are trying.To the media give Hope a chance regardless of who you think should be the winner.Let the people make up their own minds. Stop trying to shove your choice on the people. The voters are intelligent.

Right on, Marianne and Dennis – now when will the media give John Edwards equal billing with the celebs? It's a sad commentary that the majority of the media – CNN included – devote so many words and video to the WOMAN candidate and the BLACK candidate and ignore another very viable candidate – is it PC to say because he's a white male. Come on CNN, Washington Post, NY Times, et al., give John a break. He's an electable person with a message that needs to be heard and not ignored because he's not the media favorite! He's the only one of this crew that strikes me as honest, compassionate and caring. The other two certainly do not.

whether or not I agree with Obama on certain issues or not I will never vote for him because he is irrogant and condescending. Clnton/Edwards 08!!!!!!

Obama has frequently used Clinton's statement and voting records especially on Iraq even questioned her judgement,he simply has to defend his positions as well.Less and less impressed with him.

Obama can not answer a question without taking 5 minutes then you don't know what he said.

If Obama can survive everything the Clintons can throw at him and get the nomination, whoever the Republicans nominate should be a walk in the park.

Barack Obama has continued to show me that he wants to transform politics in this country. Hillary's comment that she can play the GOP game just tells me she'd be happy to get 50.5% of the vote and then use partisanship to get re-elected, just like Bush did. Jonathon Alter of Newsweek thinks Obama is the only candidate who has the potential to win a landslide, picking up independents and disgruntled GOP'ers. Imagine what he could do with a real mandate.

Bill has every right to be a part of helping his wife in her Presidential bid, and especially when most of the attacks from Obama have been attacking Hillary when was first lady and attacking her record when it comes to issues with poor people and black people and minorities, or issues with the WTO, or NAFTA those are attackes leveled directly at Bill and so you bet he has every right.
I know the Clintons not personally but from growing up in Little Rock, AR while Bill was the Governor from the time I was in the first grade until I would graduate Bill Clinton was Governor and Hillary then worked so hard for Children and Minorites spending alot of time in schools, with youngsters even in my 3rd Grade class she came and read to us. So I know she is the right person to lead our country and I am not at all saying Obama is not but we need expierence to lead our country back within reach of being saved from the abuse of the Republican Congress and Mr, Bush.
People give her a break and lets stop the bitter divide going on within our own party.

To us up in Canada, we want a president of the U.S. who will be able to govern, in most areas-Ms. Clinton appears to us to have the overall experience, and chutzpa
to be that person. Mr. Obama, despite many attributes, lacks the experience in the larger arena, but we don't think he would be willing to stand for vice-president. The debate to-night was great if one is a democrat, with three good candidates. But I don't know if any of them know anything about Canada-which happens to be your best friend, and oh yes, your biggest trading partner-lest you fine folks forget
And despite some spirited rhetoric, I would wager a couple of good Canadian dollars that nothing substantive will happen in the realm of Health Care, until there are large majorities in bothe house and Senate, there is a democratic congress AND president, and the lawmakers finally agree on the typr of
healthcare We still believe that there has not been enough examination of Mr. Obama's past record. The press is still giving him a free pass, yet holding Ms. Clinton to a higher standard, quite unfairly.
Obama would be massacred by Mcain, Democrats should be very careful about nominating a rock star. Especially after these out of control cowboy years.the world is a very dangersous place-Clinton is the obvious choice

I concur Bill Clinton should stay out of Hillary's campaign as he said enough and damaging. I really want to hear from Hillary alone. Not Bill. Bill's loud words just clogged up what I think of her. Was it what Bill said came from Hillary, or did Hillary say it? Can't tell. I am voting Obama

Michael Ebury

Lost Obama tonight.What a low blow against Hillary.Totally agree on a completely partisan crowd ,moderators should not allow audience responses.

I am so sorry but when Obama was asked if he thought Bill Clinton was the first true black president Obama shot himslf in the foot!
"Well...I don't know how well he dances???????????"
Talk about a black stereotype.
AND this from the first black man running to be President of the United States.

This is a first for me ... emailing a station, but I am upset about the Democratic debate.
If a candidate can make stereotypical comments about minorities and not get called on the carpet by the other candidates or the press then some one is not doing their job. Obama has continuously made stereotypical remarks about African Americans. If Clinton made jokes or remarks about women being barefoot and in the kitchen
she would be pounced on. Likewise if Edwards made remarks about Yankees,
he would never hear the end of it. I would support this because no candidate should make such harmful statements. So, why does Obama get a free pass to stereotype African Americans?

Please consider this
Thank you
josh and stacey

It's hard to say but Obama made the best performance. Clinton had the best body language and really, killed Edwards on the "lobby" issue. Edwards had great comments about bringing the best out of the situation. But Obama, really made his point about the true, dishonest, Clinton campaign. He is not competing against Hillary. He compete against Bill that isn't there to address his positions.

Yes, I agree- I did like the second half more. We tuned in to listen to what they will bring as President and during the second half we got to hear some of that.

I think this debate showed, one more time, the difference between the two main candidates; I like John Edwards a lot but I don't think he can win.

Hillary and Bill Clinton – because Bill is probably more involved than her – are running a "restoration" campaign. Let's go back to the 90's when things were good i.e the economy was doing great but NOTHING happened at the political level. Hillary, like Bill, is not ideological. All she cares is to become President and all he cares is to be President again. And they will do whatever is necessary to do it.

Barak Obama has the virtue of being a lot more honest with the obvious liability that he will say things that will open him to attack from the Clintons – mostly Bill. But, he may be the one person that will put an end to 16 years of political bickering in the US. History tells us that Nero was fiddling while Rome was burning; our current political leaders bicker while the country is floundering.

So, if you want or hope to cahnge things Barak is the answer. If you want more bickering then vote for Hillary. Although she may not be the next President anyway; the only thing that will truly unite the Republicans is Hillary

Giorgio Sorani

The clintons back in the white house would be this countrys worst nightmare come true.They are the most divisive and polarizing couple in America,plus it would in affect be Bill clinton;s third term,and hillary's third also,she believes she was ,as much president as Bill was during his terms in office. How can she bring the country together when 50% of the people despise her,while of course an equal amount worship her.Barack Obama would be much better for the country,in the general election,if Hillary wins the primary,this nation will be forced to live thru the clinton scandals all over again and Bill being Bill,will no doubt bring more scandal and disgrace to the country.The main reason I could never vote for Hillary,she sold her soul for political gain,if she never married Bill clinton,would anyone know or care who she is?? I think not.

The second half was boring.....

Mr. John Edwards has my vote. I will write him in if thats the way it has to be. I am tired of the gradeschool bickering about nothing. I see a president in John Edwards that will not be matched by any of the others. As far as helping the quietest voice "The Poor, aka. the middle class". He has a plan i believe that will be better for the enviroment that is in dire straits. Both have been neglected far to long. I believe this will be my last vote. Because if the american people ignore the facts about the future of not only the enviroment, but also the poor, We are indeed headed the way of the dodo.

I have invested a lot of time checking out Obama. You cannot believe his answers on the Chicago Slumlord argument. He was involved with his client Tony Rezko and he's named in a federal corruption case. This Rezko corruption case is set to go to trial Feb. 25, 2008. This is after the primary, so if he's chosen candidate in our primary, we won't know how much he was involved. THIS SHOULD BE A REAL PROBLEM FOR ALL VOTERS. He needs to explain this in further detail with documents.

Also, he never did answer the charge on why he voted present 130 times while in Illinois. Why don't you news people bring this up and get to the bottom of this. We have had a president for 7 years now, and you never ask questions of him and get correct answers, so why are you doing it again.

Wake up and work for the people that watch your shows.

Senator Obama has proven this evening that he is more than able to stand up to the Clinton machine. The only way to fight against the misinformation of the Clintons is to stand up and speak the truth which Senator Obama did very graciously during the debate. Now if Bill Clinton will just go home and stop causing conflicts then the candidates can stay on point and discuss the issues at hand.

Ms. Clinton needs to remember that when she shows her claws and is catty she is not setting a good example for all of us women out here in America.

Bravo --- Goooo Oooobama!

Can anyone tell me who Barack Obama is running against? Bill or Hillary Clinton?
I think it is getting more difficult to identify who the candidates are? may be we should include him in the debates next time.

it seems to be coming out now...that the Clintons don't care for each other personally but need each other to pull off a win...Bill will be the power and his wife the face on this duo..........and they would bring along the old gang...of lobbyists,and "secret" players.
It is very important to clean out the jaded politicians and start with an intelligent president....................

The clintns back in the white house would be this countrys worst nightmare come true.They are the most divisive and polarizing couple in America,plus it would in affect be Bill clinton;s third term,and hillary's third also,she believes she was ,as much prsident as Bill was during his terms in office. WHow can she bring the country together when 50% of the people despise her,while of course an equal amount worship her.Barack Obama would be much better for the country,in the general election,if Hillary wins the primary,this nation wil be forced to ive thru the clinton scandals all over again and Bill being Bill,will no doubt bring more scandal and disgrace to the country.The main reason I could never vote forhilary,she sold her soul for political gain,if she was never married Bill clinton,would anyone know or care who she is?? I think not.

Matthew

I respect where you are coming from but I am sorry I do not agree. Clinton looked more prepared and that is a good thing. Barack was like the cool kid who did not studied but can use his humor to distract. Edwards looked good tonight although it might be too little too late.

It is not false to be prepared and ready. No one calls Obama false when he gives these prepared speechs that people are so touch by. The facts is Hillary is ready because much of this is old hat for her. Obama is still learning the ropes and it shows.

I will complement Barack on admitting that everyone's hands are dirty including his own. I only hope his supporters do not cry themselves to sleep over that.

I complement Hillary on staying focused and looking very much like a woman who is ready to take charge.

I disagree with you on your views on Edwards, I believe Edwards has passion. His message of change is much more specific than Obama's and offers more hope for honest and plausible change than his fellow candidates. For example, look at the managment of their campaign finances. Edwards vows not to take money from corporate interests while the other two have taken money from big money-ed corporate interests. Clinton and Obama are running their campaign finances in a deficit, while Edwards is solvent. These are indications of how they may manage if they were to make it to the White House. I don't see how the big corporations will be concede any of the power they have gained under the current adminstation without the fight Edwards is committing to by sincerely vowing to help working families. The only plausible hope here is Edwards. I will vote for the hope I see.

Obama won this debate on the South Carolina level. The audience support of Obama was obvious. Hillary clearly debated to a National audience, and won on that level.

The second half of the debate was a much better experience for me. Whether because of the format, or because they were weary of it, Clinton and Obama finally stopped backbiting at each other. However, Clinton still couldn't demonstrate how she would beat the Republicans. The Democratic nominee is hardly a guaranteed president. In fact, since 1968, Democrats have only won the presidency three times. The Democrats need a nominee who can beat the Republican nominee. That is how to achieve a Democratic presidency.

I'm a Republican that will vote Democratic this year. Of the 3, Obama strongly appears to be the best candidate that can lead without dividing the country without all the trappings of the status quo. It is a breath of fresh air to see a candidate running on a platform of hope rather than barages of political attacks.

Edwards is starting to look like a suck-up for the #2 spot...

2 for one is good.

I agree with Matthew above. Though Obama's strength is in speeches instead of debates, there is no doubting his sincerity and honesty. He has integrity. He is for real. You feel like he's speaking to you.

AMEN to Mattthew.... I want a president who opens their hand to lead not one with the waving fist...hiding God knows what!

The last ten minutes seemed to erupt a bit in at least enough fire of a Roman Candle, don't you think? Yes I agree it was much calmer and focused on the issues. I wondered about the last question that was asked...as to whom Dr. King endorse if he had lived.

I think Dr. King would have been greatly disappointed in the bickering going on in the first half, I think he would have been very much ashamed and appalled...and would have endorsed no one, on that stage. I think he would have looked elsewhere to the likes of Bill Richardson (had he remained in the race, the most positive candidate I have seen in a while, who never hit anyone below the belt).

Why was so little and obsquer attention given to the issue of illegal immegration?
On the subject of black unemployment and poverty,why wasn't their a question to the candidates as to wether they felt illegal low skilled, low paid labor had contributed to holding down low skilled Black employment and their chances for livable wages?

Why was there no questions about how they see global warming and how they would approach the challenge?

As Obama said keep attacking that means he is ahead.To all of the Hillary supporters. What are you scared of if Obama can't win. You should attack Edwards.If Obama can't win why do you guys keep attacking him. Guess you are scared. HA HA HA!!!!!!!!

Oh I get it now. I remember CNN the political Dem partisan newcaster. Silly me thinking you would consider any comment not pointed in the direction you see fit.
OK You cinched my vote; I'm going for the REPUBLICAN candidate....

Dang, that girl can debate! I liked when she stated that she would take all voices to the White House.

Best line of the night.... Clinton... We're Just Getting Warmed Up.

Worst line of the night.. Obama.... I can't figure out who I'm running against. Uh?

Seriously, Obama stresses/worries/comments about running against both Hillary and Bill which is poopooed in the press yet your commentators consistantly state something or the other about Obama and where the ClintonS differ. You can NOT have it both ways. Either he is running agains Hillary and Bill stays out of it or you have to admit he is running against both!!

In watching tonight's debate, it was evident to me that Hillary Clinton is tough, smart, well-informed, and can stand up to whatever comes her way. Those who asked the questions were extremely even-handed, but the audience was visibly biased in favor of Senator Obama. It took real aplomb and strength of character for Hillary Clinton to continue presenting her views over the boos against her and applause for Obama. Also having the text of what Obama said about President Reagan right before me, I am disheartened to see how Obama tried to weasel out of what he did in fact say. I am afraid that this Obama candidacy would be in for some real trouble if he were to be the nominee. He is not ready for the Republican slaughter that is sure to come. Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, is now an open book–it's all out there– and she can handle anything that would come her way. Personally, I want a Democrat in the White House. I believe she has shown her medal and can win in a general election.

Matthew... Well stated and I support you for VP...

I think that the Hillary \ Obama squabbles only hurt both in the long run. Edwards came across as caring more about issues than sniping at one another like Obama and Clinton did. I think he will benefit in the long run across the nation, with his showing tonight! he may not win SC but he needs to hang in, hes got a lot to give our country!

Is it, Hillary, Bill, or memorex. Who is running. Whose politics will be represented, the peoples, Bills, or Hillarys.

It seems that Hillary agrees when she needs to and retreats when she can when Bill either screws up or positives her campaign. Weird stuff.

The second half was very toned down. Maybe they did not feel as comfortable with the podiums removed. Those heated exchanges of the first half may not have been so entertaining if they were seating closer together.

If Wolf Blitzer was supposed to keep the debate on track, why did he allow Obama and Clinton all that squabble time? Also, why didn't he ensure Edwards got equal time? Edwards was the Southern gentleman and Clinton and Obama were two kids fighting in a playground. Is it just my perception, or were most of the questions first directed to Clinton or Obama? Come on, play fair everyone!

maybe i missed it but where the debate on illegal immigration thats what 80% of americans care about ..

My take on the debates is thus...

Clinton has always felt more than a little false to me. Her answers are all too carefully considered and vetted. It's clear that she has the most experience answering difficult questions in a non-committal manner but I don't feel that she has given me anything to be excited about as a candidate. McCain may have completely different stances on the "issues" but he seems more Democratic than she does. I don't want someone who knows how to answer questions in a way that angers the least number of people. I want someone who answers honestly and in a forthright manner. I wish someone would ask Senator Clinton if she believes that the many writers of the Constitution, many far younger and with less considered political experience than she, were too young or too inexperienced to have forged the framework of the country.

Edwards, for all that he seems an honest fellow, is rather lackluster and lacks the force of personality I would expect from a leader. He will always be just a VP in my eyes no matter how favorable I may find his positions. Beyond that, he's just a politician.

Obama, whatever weaknesses he may have shown this evening during the first half of the debate is still my candidate of choice as I feel he has both, the strongest most genuine convictions and is also entirely candid in what he says. He may not speak as fluidly as his opponents but my feeling is that he is attempting to give an honest answer rather than pander to the politically safe middle ground. He has the character, integrity and honestly that I would want in my President and he has shown the most intelligence and class in his campaign.

Something to remember is that a President's power comes from the people. All of the people. Voting in someone who is clearly partisan may satisfy the political agenda but it staunches the chance of any change when you replace one demagogue with another, no matter their views. I will be voting for a candidate that I feel appeals to Americans as a people, not just as a partisan. That is something that neither Senator Clinton or Edwards can claim. They offer a clenched fist and the continuing politics of veteran Washington politicos. I will be voting for change. Even the mere hope of change is a better choice than the desolation of the current status quo. President Obama offers truth and ideals that embody the spirit and passion that this nation was founded upon. I will vote for hope.

Wow! Three Democratic fantastic candidates. John Edwards for Attorney General. Hillary Clinton is another Margaret Thatcher, but a liberal one. Barack Obama is another John Kennedy. Tough and practical versus inspiring and rational. Ellen Goodman of the Boston Globe dreamed about a Clinton-Obama ticket. Wish it could be so. The young folks are going for Barack. Old folks like me are betting on Hillary.

Yes Bill! the second half was much more quieter but it was the first that helped us public see through who was speaking the truth. I am specifically referring to the back and forth debating between Hillary and Obama. Plus, the heated phase only had the complete attention of the audiences based on the applauses as a measure.

The only difference I perceived was that both Edwards and Clinton were much clearer in their responses. It was easy to follow their logic and note the key premise of their arguments. Obama was lost most of the second half. It seemed he spent all of his time attempting to defend himself and his positions. Hilliary emerged as the winner for the evening!

The national security and foreign policy question sealed the debate. Obama offers up the same kind of ethereal emptiness of his campaign slogans about change and unity. It is the same kind of simple mindedness Bush offered when he ran in 2000. As we have learned during the last eight years it is far more complicated than can't we all just get along. Obama has his foreign policy slogan based on talking with your friends and your enemies to match is equally hollow domestic slogan of "change you can believe in". We all know what happened with "peace in our time". Foreign nations are going to eat him alive.

Similarly, he keeps relying on his position against the war in Iraq as his one claim to fame. In reality, first he was against the war before he was for the war and then he was willing to pay for the war. Republicans label Kerry a flip flopper and for sure they will label Obama a waffler. zb

Bill Schneider you're the smartest political analyst in the world, I actually enjoyed your political ticker than watching these candidate going after each other. It was a good debate but a little nasty, but Obama did a good job not representing himself as a black candidate.

I am a Democrat, who has been undecided throughout this whole process, but tonight I have made up my mind. After watching this debate, I now support Barack Obama. He has an authenticity about him that is unmatched by the other candidates. I believe that Hillary is sincere in her comments, but I believe Barack more. Obama's remark that Democrats can have a majority and that we can really pass legislation in this country that benefits the middle class hit home for me. I am tired of the division in America, and tonight Hillary only spoke of more division. I now see that Barack sees the big picture, and he now has my support. I have never liked Edward's sarcastic and condemning demeanor, and I believe he has no place in this race.

I too enjoyed the second half of the debate more than the first. The first half I found myself changing the channel out of frustration at the old school dirty politics handed down by Clinton. She showed me why I will NOT vote for her. She is an old school traditional politician that will plan everything and do only what makes her more powerful.

I found myself only changing the channel once or twice during the latter half of the debate. It had more to do about policy differences and less about personal attacks. I am a registered independent and I am that way because I am tired of the politics of today and yesterday. Both the republicans and democrats sicken me at times and I am still waiting for that man or woman who is truely a leader that will lead and change our country for the better. The first part of the debate only flourished my frustration with the democrats and especially old school politicians like Hillary. Sad state of affairs.

The fireworks are a societal norm and necessity. If I had to sit through another Bush/Kerry like scripted debate I'd turn the TV off and check my stocks (during a holiday). It showed the candidates as people with emotions and I applaud the "realness" of this debate. I hope the future debates force the candidates to give concrete measures of planning just as they want timelines to gauge the war in Iraq.

WITH REFERENCE TO YOUR COMMENT ABOUT PREFERRING THE 2ND HALF BETTER, THAT IS EXACTLY THE PROBLEM WITH OUR MEDIA TODAY. YOU ARE CONTENT WITH THE POLITICAL PAT STATEMENT, WHICH PREVENTS THE PUBLIC FROM SEEING THE UNPLANNED, SPONTANEOUS THINKING PROCESS OF THE CANDIDATES. WE NEED TO SEE THE INSIDE AND NOT JUST THE PACKAGING.

I really believe that Obama's intimidating, "Let me finish," when he has tripled the time alloted to him should not be condoned. I considered it highly unprofessional and disrespectful to the other candidates. i think he is not a very nice person at all. His record is his record and instead of moving on from that, he is adding lies to lie and selling himself. I felt like I was listening to a sales person, not a presidential candidate.

go obama

What a joke of debate without Joe Biden or Chris Dodd.

In all honesty, it was wrong for the moderators to not tell the audience to remain silent until the end of the debate.

The constant clapping, and even booing when HIllary made a point about Obama's very bad voting history was one of the more unclassy showings i have seen from a crowd that is in the room with a potential next president.

It is one thing to boo if you favor one person, but to boo because you favor someone and your person just got accused of a true happening is wrong

I think, of the three, Edwards spoke with most depth and managed to stay above the fray when Clinton and Edwards attacked each other's records. They each have their strong-points issues, and weak-point issues. The first half of the debate took a nasty tone, which I think, irritates voters or seems less impressive to them. As much as I want to root for Hillary Clinton (looked strong on visionary thinking and the economy), I think Edwards beat out Obama on health care and brought the correct tone.

OK. Whatsup with the anti Obama reporting on CNN? Anyway, I am trying to see if anyone noticed that Hillary was mesmerized by Obama's response to the last question of the debate (which she totally failed to respond to). Well, can't wait for MSNBC commentary tomorrow. Wolfe was not good moderator either, this debate was out of control and I am concerned it will divide the democratic party (so I am bracing myself for more of the same in 2008!).

I enjoyed this debate – HOWEVER......

1. WHERE WAS DENNIS KUCINICH? WHY DOES THE AMERICAN MEDIA HAVE ALL THE POWER TO CHOOSE THE THREE DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATES? THIS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY....... WHY DO YOU CHERRY PICK CANDIDATES AND ISSUES?
If the corporate American media MANIPULATORS (CNN included) could just get past the race and gender issues – and concentrate on the most important issues facing Americans today........instead of cherry picking issues and candidates........we might actually be able to choose a candidate that best suits the needs of all Americans – and, ultimately the global community.

2. WHERE WERE THE QUESTIONS ABOUT GLOBAL WARMING? WHY IS THE NUMBER ONE ISSUE FACING OUR PLANET NOT A PRIORITY ON YOUR NETWORK OR IN YOUR DEBATES?

Yes it was calmer but it was also a time where they just sat there and played kissy face with each other. Hmmmm Lets see who can be the most politically correct? I wanted more substance. It was a little repetative as far as comments by each. John seemed to win debate he is logical and good facts stayed above it all with no BS

To be brutally honest this was one of the better debates. Please stopp spinning this as "nasty' or personal. It was real, raw and stong. I like that. Only conflict-avoidant,
'let's play nice americans" are having a difficult time. This is the same debate that is going on in households workplaces, unions, churches and it is important. I saw nothing inappropriate or even controversial about what Obama or Clinton did, not unlike how siblings settle differences..stong, passionate, raw. The media should stop being "reductionistic" about it. Donna

I don't care what CNN tells me to believe. Hillary Clinton won this debate. She talked about issues that matter. John Edwards is trying to act like and angel and Obama avoided serious questions, not answering many important issues that I as a South Carolina voter need to know. Hillary is the strongest canidate that we have and she will be a great President.

The debate was a big dissapointment Wolf talked and talked about race,gender,race,gender-– what about issues like Hillarys push for H1B visas for people from India to come here to take American techs jobs at one third the pay? What about the immagration problem in this country? MSNBCs debate wasn"t about substance either. When is a reporter going to ask these type of questions at a televised debate? LOU DOBBS WOULD mabey this is why he wasn" the moderator. CNN you did a great disservice to this country tonight. If you care to respond you have my e- mail address.

I feel that am your average conservative voter facing an interesting delima this year. I am strongly motivated, and intent, on voting the Democratic agenda this year. I am tired of the Bush years, and I am equally adverse to returning to the Clinton years. As a result, I now see myself as someone who now represents 2 votes this year. If Clinton is the Democrative nominee, I vote Republican regardless of the candidate. If Clinton is not the nominee, I vote Democratic, regardless of who is the candidate. As I see it, that means I represent 2 votes against Clinton.

Am I alone?

I disagree with the assertion that Clinton and Obama 'clearly don't like each other'. The 2nd half showed some mutual respect. Hillary made the point, which Obama & Edwards echoed, that they are each passionate about their candidacies and that the open disagreements between them help to clarify their views.

Also, I think Obama was dead on in his comments about the Democrats 'not showing up' on issues of faith. That's got to change, and I'm hopeful it is.

Yes, I would agree most Americans prefer a more calmer debate, in opposed to back-and-forth petty attacks on each other. Most people might favor the candidate who doesn't engage in this heated exchange.

Barack has claimed that several of her comments where simply "untrue", can you tell me if they were true or where they false.

Thanks

Mr. Schneider, I agree, even if I am not an American. I just can't imagine how voters must feel, if they see that their candidates are going after each other in such a personal way discrediting each other up to a degree, that probably will hurt them in a rally for the Nov. 4th election process. One thing they should not forget is, that they might be teaming up as Obama/Clinton, Clinton/Obama or with Edwards.

I liked all candidate keeping it on the issues and playing nice once the issues Bill Clinton or race was raised. I think all candidates handled those issues nicely.

Best wishes from a early Tuesday morning in Cologne, Germany!

I'm one of those people who, at the beginning, wanted Hillary in because we would "get Bill" along with her. In spite of the unfortunate bickering, she still stands out to me as the most competent leader and I have begun to have great respect for her commitment, her ability and her strength. I agree with the gentleman who stated, "I want Barack to be president, but in 2016." In spite of his intelligence and 'holistic' politics, I question his true strength in the areas necessary to become president, as Hillary says, on Day One. Edwards is a very honorable man, and I hope that he will have a strong position in the government, if God Willing, we can reclaim the White House. They all have strengths and I wish they would consider the statement that ' the higher form of competition is cooperation'.

I was a little disappointed by the question posed by Malvo spotlighting Senator Clinton's husband's support of her. I understand Bill Clinton has been outspoken recently, but the spotlight is on HIM because he was President of the US. His remarks are naturally going to garner more interest and media coverage than the spouses of the male candidates. I would be willing to bet the cameras are in his face to capture every utterance he has at least 50% more of the time than the spouses of Edwards or Obama. However, I am sure if we were to dig there would be some rather biting comments by Michelle Obama and perhaps Elizabeth Edwards, who certainly is a spitfire if you all recall her banter with the anti-Christ...oops...I mean Ann Coulter.

Malvo's question just personally offended me as a woman, and especially since the same vein of questioning wasn't directed at the other candidates.

What's her husband supposed to do?

I agree.

In the end, I think Obama wins this debate. He answered the questions smoothly and honestly. He gave the impression that you can believe what he is saying. He also demonstrated that he doesn't distort his platform just to give a popular answer (ie. his universal health care response). As a black Republican, I may disagree with some of his ideas on a few issues; however, he appears to be more likely to win the general election than Hillary or John.

Write-in Ron Paul for '08

The Race & Poverty question in the second half was brought up becasue Edwards kept pushing the issue, I was very happy the question was asked. I have always herd Edwards speak about poverty and race in front of every audiance he speaks to, but I must be honest that Obama and Clinton turned me off because I simply don't here them speaking on a consitance basice like Edwards dose. That leaves me to beleive that Obama and Clinton are only talking about it because there in South Carliona. It fells a little unreal to me.

Edwards flubbed that last bit. It was a trick question. You don't say that the Rev MLK would endorse me! That's trying to appropriate his legacy without his permission! It's trying to control a black man and what he would say.

Obama demonstrated a much better understanding of who the Rev. MLK was, and what he was fighting for.

Also appreciated that he came right out and said that he was pro-Jesus. Don't hear that from Democrats that much these days.

If only all 3 of them could work together what a positive force for change the people of this country could have. They each have strong suits and tremendous passion...squabbling only undermines what any of them have to offer.

In order to defeat whomever the Republicans select, (I think it will likely be McCain) these Democrats need to take the high road and STAY focused on the hard issues.

As a still undecided Democrat, I felt this debate provided more indepth and useful insights into each candidate. Still not 100% decided for Jan 29th– but leaning towards HIllary.

Hillary is the winner. Obama does nothing but make everything racial.

They all did well, but given Obam'as perceived frontrunner status in SC, I think that Clinton and Edwards won the debates.

It was interesting how the contentiousness of the first half gave way to some moments of genuine lightheartedness in the second half. After Obama's "a black man, a woman... and John" comment, I thought months of exhausting campaigning was about to give way to a stoner-grade laughing fit all around! But seriously, it was as if the first half of the debate was dedicated to attacking each other and the second half of the debate was dedicated to joining hands to sing praise for the Democratic party. Interesting. It was a revealing debate I think, all around. Obama can redraw the political lines and present a new image of America at home and abroad, Hillary knows the issues in greater detail than either of the others but will bring the wrath of the Republican political machine, and Edwards would love to be a serious contender, but probably can't get there.

Edwards strong showing ultimately benefits Hillary>

Calmer, thanks to sitting down.
Obama #1
Edwards #2
Clintons #3 (plural intended)

Barack Obama won this debate. The second half, he handled himself very well. even though Edwards did very well, I think Barack just spoke with passion, power, and conviction. Sen. Clinton is way too divisive to ever unite the country. Obama is the one to unite us.

They all did well, but given Obam's perceived frontrunner stats in SC, I hink that Clinton and Edards won the debaes.

I agree... more civil... I gave Hilary the win ....John Edwards 2nd and

Obama was nasty tonight!

The Rezko issue is a lot more than Obama working for five hours at a law firm that defended Rezko but the fact that Obama had a special land deal with Rezko which he himself stated was a mistake. This is what should be investigated.

Cream always rises to the top and tha's what John Edwards did tonight.

Barack Obama presents the best choice for the future. He is thoughtful, has good judgment and the kind of broadbased experience to be an effective leader that can unite our nation. His experience as a Constitution law professor who loves and respects the Constitution is particular impressive.

I am particularly insulted by the inaccurate and personal charges made by former President Clinton against Senator Obama. It brings back all the negatives of the Clinton administration, and the distrust so many people have of them.

Although the second half was more civil I think we found out more in the first hour about Obama's character. He side steps the issues. He won't specifically address questions with a "yes' or "no". He is obviously doesn't like the fact that President Clinton "celebrity" overshadows Oprah's support of him.

Hillary is Nurse Ratched

But could you please run a good journalism? I have checked all your news and analysis on Obama and Clinton, but I come to believe that you are running a segregated journalism in this campaign. , I truelly enjoy Abc news.They are wonderful people representing wonderful politicians.

Cnn should learn how to accomodate the minorities.

The second half was much better. But given the fact the TVs will show the heat part more often, I would say that Obama missed his debate.

i think that the first half of the debate was much better than the second. The first half, though it was littered with the in-fighting that no one needs, was much more focused on the issues with a much clearer line on where the candidates stand on the issues. The second half of the debate, to me, was more about making nice with everyone on the panel and trying not to create any waves. The second half, to me felt fake.

In this second part, again, Sen. Obama showed he is strong with words, but very thin with policies and preparedness to be president. I believe John Edwards came up on top big time.

I like the format, too. However... regarless of the significance of today's MLK holiday – why are questins regarding Dr. King, race, and poverty only asked of the Democrat candidates? Why wasn't that question asked of the Republicans last week?

I can't agree with you more. While it is important to understand each candidates record, I can read and decide that for myself. I am more interested in them delving into their policies and initiatives.

I was pleased to finally have the opportunity to hear more of John Edwards. This is not yet a 2 person race and he should not be excluded by the media. Edawrds has very concise plans for our future, he has been thinking about our problems and formulating solutions for a long time. America desrves to hear him even if he does not have the financial backing to buy the ad time.

It certainly was calmer. Obama was better at stating his position. His piece on responding to Dr King with greater involvement from the bottom up rang of Kennedy (ask not what your country can do...). Is it odd that Clinton didnt respond to that? I thought she and Bill were inspired by JFK?

They are all in the Senate, therefore why haven't they already gotten the changes they want to make already accomplished? Their records show they can't get it accomplished. What will change? They can veto the House and Senate? Why is the $3.00+ gas prices still happening? That alone is rippling through and hurting the economy big time!

They are part of the problem of this country and I want to get rid of the problem!

I disagree. It's a debate, not a conversation. The second half was boring compared to the first because all it was stump speech speak.

Great debate! The dems actually have three wonderful candidates! Why don't the republicans talk about things that matter. They still weild the politics of fear. America isn't afraid, we are up for the tasks that face us. Let's start tackling them.
Well done CNN!

Indeed, this was the better half of the debate because it was about the issues that matter and Hillary was best equipped. Period!

Go Hillary!

Hillary Wins Hands Down! She is ready to lead this Country and we should be proud to have such a great person running for President of this country in a time that we can't take chances on Obama who has no proven viable record. If our economy was strong and we weren't in debt then perhaps we could take the risk on Obama. We know Clinton has the know how and understands the political challenges and how to overcome them so we need to be careful to elect a President who can get in there and clean up all the messes we are in. Perhaps after 8 years of Senator Clinton then we can take a chance on someone who wants to lead by inspiration. Obama looks good on paper but I'm very afraid if he is elected that he can't clean up what has happened and will miserably fail. Not a chance I'm ready to take.

I think this debate as a whole left us weaker as a party than the previous debate 'roundtable' style did.

What I wish all the candidates would is this: they are not supposed to be running AGAINST each other, they are supposed to be running FOR the Democratic nomination.

Once they have the nomination, then they run against the Republican candidate and maybe the Independent candidate.

I'm sure the Republicans appreciated the 'he said/she said' portion of this debate, but I did not and I think it was a great disservice to the Black Caucus, the Democratic party and the American people.

I think it is absolutely DISGUSTING and IGNORANT of both Edwards and Obama to refuse to shake hands with Clinton after the debate. They should be ashamed of themselves.

Clinton, Obama phooey. Edwards ok.

Second half was smoother. Edwards won the second half as well, even though it was kinda we, the Democrats, are better theen the Republicans discussion.

I concur. This was a far more civil exchange of information that will serve the party far better than any individual. I've also noticed that the less the former president is injected in this campaign/debate the more civil the exchange. It helped to deliniate the differences between the candidates, and also let Edwards become more active in the discussion.

Did I miss a question about the Dow futures down 500?

Barack was so wrong about Hillary bringing up Reagan in the debate. She clearly did not.

Role that tape back like Obama wanted.

I disagree. The second half of the debate lacked substance and was all about playing nice and marking the differences with Republicans. As Democrats, we KNOW the differences between us and the Republicans. The purpose of the debate is to learn the differences between these candidates.

I agree with you.

In regards to the first half, I doubt the heat will backfire on Clinton. She may or may not win South Carolina, but she can win delegates in larger states.

Obama really stumbled and fumbled when being confronted about his hypocrisies and contradictions. He was taken by surprise by Edwards double-teaming w/ Hillary.

I think what was most entertaining, yet not surprising, is Hillary maintaining herself, her class, and remaining sophisticated while Obama seemingly was desperate to create a defense for his image...which was almost unnecessary.

GO HILLARY!

Jordan
Chicago, IL
17 Years Old

The debate was muddling.

There is no doubt that the only Democratic candidate who can flat out beat the Republican is Obama!I don't know why Democrats are still thinking about who to nominate, if they want to win!

Amen. Get rid of the Barak vs. Hillary petty bickering and focus on mainstream issues.

I think during the break, the senators called a cease-fire, because no one was going to gain anything from continued bickering, and lack of focus on the issues.

I like the combination. It is important that the candidates fight for this nomination. I don't mind the fireworks. It shows they want it passionately and that they are tough. The 2nd half they played nice. It was a lot like bad cop good cop.

I agree, it was definitely more congenial. A little bit of 'making up' all around, which I think we in the audience appreciated. Clinton was right on when she stated that these are certainly not topics that we'll hear being addressed in the Republican debates.

I believe Edwards clearly won the debate. He is the only candidate with answers that made sense. He truly is the only one that has a shot in November.

it was def. a much better format. less barbs and attacks on each other.