CNN

Wolf
I have respect for you and watch your show regularly. I can't understand John McCain when he said he would not surender to the enemy referring to the democrats about withdrawing the troops from Iraq. didn't McCain have to surender before when he became the most famous war prsinor in the American History. Thanks.

WE HAD GEORGE W. BUSH SR FOR 8 YEARS AS VP OF OUR GREAT COUNTRY, AND WE HAD HIM 4 YEARS AS PRESIDENT, WE HAD BILL CLINTON FOR 8 YEARS AS PRESIDENT, WE HAD GEORGE W. BUSH JR FOR 8 YEARS AS PRESIDENT, WE DONT NEED ANOTHER CLINTON FOR 8 MORE YEARS. THAT WOULD BE A LITTLE TOO MUCH. THAT WOULD GIVE US A WOOPING 36 YEARS DEALING WITH THE BUSH/CLINTON GROUP.

To Gideon: Please read Obama's website to get complete details on all his policies (including how the programs are paid for) Did he not say the market would drop the next day based on his analysis of market activities that day? Believe me, he is a smart man with detailed policy statements. I'm afraid you may be believing the Clinton campaign misrepresentations about Obama. Please investigate for yourself his policy proposals, his voting record compared to Clinton's...I think you will be pleasantly surprised. I would highly recommend his book , Audacity of Hope, for undecided voters who have any questions about his values, integrity and hopes for America. Also, Carl Bernstein's biography of Hillary is of interest , A Woman in Charge (no doubt she's capable; but I don't like the dirty tricks tactics or the corporate money behind her campaingn) . Mr. Bernstein also discusses Hillary's difficulty with telling the truth. (and we all know Bill has that problem!) I think it's time for an honest campaingn and a leader who can unite us as a country. To me, Hillary is devisive & polarizing. I don't believe she can unite us or could win in the fall.
Thank you!

Hooray for Bill Clinton!! I was in the middle writing a letter to you when his face came on the TV screen, yelling at Jessica Yellin [ yellin' @ Yellin , hah ] about the media not really caring about what is going on but only in what they want to report.
This is just the point on which I had started writing.
It aggravates me no end, that the media, especially CNN, is giving Obama a free ride when it comes to his charges against the Clintons and giving him free press time when he wants to claim that the Clintons are telling lies about him. Do you give the Clintons equal time to defend themselves? Not, at all! This is a 1 way track and not at all the way a news channel should work.
I am not expecting to vote for Hillary so this is not from an angry supporter of hers.
I was, in fact, thinking of voting for Obama but that all changed when I awoke from a spell put on me by some of Obama's orations. I awoke to realize that there was no subsance, no truth to a lot of what Obama says.
Did you know that Obama had made a tape declaring that Hillary was to blame for Bhutto's death? Did you know that Tim Russert asked Obama about this statement, asking Obama if he believed it to be true? Laughingly, Obama replied, " Of course not!" When Hillary went on Russert's show about a week or two later, Hillary mentioned to Russert that she had never received an apology from Obama.' He did not apologize for other statements made about her, either .
Neither did he apologize for words of his supporters who denegrated the Clintons. Neither has he apologized or made reference to a speech made by his pastor about the Clintons and about Jews, the Zionists, to be exact. I am surprised that you, as a religious man, have ignored this statement which, I as a Jew, find insulting and an absolute lie. Or, do you, as Obama seems to, believe that the Zionists have pushed racism? He made no retraction nor apology.
Do you suppose that if you were to contest this statement that Obama would accuse you of being racist because you are denying his words?
He is a master of playing the victim when, in fact, he baits people into attacking him for those words and then screaming, racist!. Or, as with his comment about Reagan, when put on the carpet for saying something unseemly, he says, } "the words were misunderstood". How many times have you heard that from him? For such an eloquent speaker, why are so many of his statements "misunderstood"?
Have you checked the facts of the Clintons accusations against Obama? I believe that you will find them to be true. Obama has yet to give proof that they are lying. It was Obama who shouted, "racist" as soon as they questioned his voting record in Congress. That is a good word to stop anyone from interfering. I am sure that they , as experienced politicians, are too smart to make false statements.
I have a lot more to say about Obama and his actions but I can leave that for another day.I will end this with a request. If you have Obama on the show, railing against the Clintons, let the Clintons have equal time to give their side, and vice versa. Being one sided does not suit you , nor the station. For years I have watched CNN and I thought that it was above reproach. That is no longer my belief. I am looking for a station to replace you but, so far, I have not found one to my liking. The day may come that I will be happy with a station. I am, however, much more discerning in what I look for in a news station. I hope that by that time, you will have changed your ways and I may continue to sit in your Situation Room.

To Lee and others whose posts get zapped.

Seems that intelligent, well thought out posts get zapped and half-illiterate ones that just whine don't. I don't think CNN wants the competition of smart people. CNN has zapped quite a few of my posts too, to the point that I'm not going to waste my time on these blogs anymore.

Now watch them post this stupid comment.

HUCKABEE AHEAD OF GIULIANI IN FLORIDA!

Wolf,

It bothers me that gloria bolger is so anti-clinton. after iowa, and before new hampshire, she was really laying it on. even now it continues, can you ask her to be fair and balanced. i will vote for which ever democrat that wins the nomination.
bill

"Moderate" ..."make or become less violent or excessive". A moderator is one who makes things become less violent or excessive. There was NO moderator for the recent Democratic debates. Wolf Blitzer knew that the debate was going to get hot and he chose to abandon his job in order to maximize the spin. His interests were clearly commercial.

This is tawdry journalism at its worst. The consequences of this confrontation may dash the hopes and aspirations of generations for decades to come. This is inexcusably irresponsible behavior. In any serious debate, failure to establish and ENFORCE rules of civil discourse will force participants to the lowest level of confrontation. We certainly hope to see some MODERATION in future debates.

' Guess this is fun for the media; who cares if it's a disaster for the country. ' Think we'll stick to NPR and PBS in the future.

Florrie and Allen Bachelder

Isn't it fascinating how everyone here watched the same debate, yet viewed it so differently.

I have been a supporter of Obama from the beginning (because I feel this country needs someone who can work side by side with Dem's and Repub's) and my boyfriend has been a Clinton fan since the 90's. After watching the Myrtle Beach Debates he is considering voting for Obama for President instead of Hillary.

The Clinton's are the one's playing with words and starting the political mudslinging. They started it way before Obama made the "factual statement" that Hillary has been connected to big business for quite some time (Walmart).

It's sad I used to like her before she decided to run for President.

I thought it was useful to see this sort of debate. It provided us with a view to how Clinton and Obama deal with difficult situations, and so I think Wolf was right to let them mainly fight it out.

My impression ever since Obama upset Clinton in Iowa is that both Clintons have been stretching what opposition research they have on Obama to generate some negative press on Obama. They are correct that the media has been somewhat in love with Obama, but I actually think that reflects what is happening in the public as well. He attracts huge crowds. His speeches give you goosebumps.

While I respect Clinton as a politically experienced person, I do not believe she has any more executive-style experience than does Obama. She seems pretty strong and knowledgeable, both good qualities. But she can be so shrill and petty (I found her Rekzo remark truly ugly, as did the audience; Obama landed a punch that spoke to the offshoring issue; she just swung back with mud). She seems so rehearsed and measured to tell us whatever may be politically expedient at the time. Her vote to authorize war with Iraq is the epitome of this need to occupy the popular political space of the moment. Politicians always have to make some compromises; but I, as a lay person at the time, could plainly see we were being railroaded into a war of choice. And I didn't have access to the weak intelligence estimate that Clinton did (and didn't read).

I think Clinton's proximity to a former president would certainly be useful in hitting the ground running, but it also brings with it the baggage we all just want to forget. That doesn't mean the Clinton years were not prosperous, in part due to the Clinton administration and Congress, but they were also years of extreme demoralization in the institution of the president (as have been the Bush 43 years as well). While I agree it is a roll of the dice to bring in some fresh leadership, it's no bigger a risk than to bounce the presidency between two families for three decades. Electing Obama would be a healthy way for this country to press the "reset" button, not only from a domestic politics perspective, but in the eyes of the rest of the world.

If Clinton is the nominee, I will vote for her, because I have been waiting for Democratic leadership since Bush took office. But I do not think Clinton is capable of drawing out independents, reticent Democrats or moderate Republicans, no matter who the Republican nominee is. As the primary turn out shows so far, Obama is the candidate who CAN do and has done that. And for any Democrat to manage addressing looming crises in healthcare and social security, they are going to need a mandate, not a razor thin margin.

More than anything else, Barack Obama makes a great many Americans feel good again about where this country could go. He inspires hope not because he repeats it as his message, but because he embodies it.

Mr. Obama claimed to be a uniter??? Is he? He can not even unite his own party.
- We're color blind. Stop telling us your 'true" color.
-We're color blind but we're not deaf. Stop shouting but if you do, we need to hear real issue, real solution.
-We're color blind but we're not brainless. Stop defend yourself. We need a leader defending us.
After all, you're no different than them (the politics). You're just ONE of them.

Mr. Blitzer:

I don't know if you had anything to do with the format of the debate but personally I didn't think that it was the best format. Each candidate did not get a chance to answer on the same question and when it seemed to get personal between Senators Clinton and Obama I thought you should have put them back on track. As for the questions to Senator Obama about whether Bill Clinton was the first black president–that could have just been left alone -no he was not!

Jones
Sacramento, CA

problem was, Wolf, that they weren't sticking to issues but to the "zingers". that's the problem. we want to hear the issues debated and get some answers, not hear two grown people act like middle-schoolers. Edwards ended up looking a lot more presidential after this one. too bad it looks like he doesn't have a shot.

I am proud of how CNN handled the latest democratic debate.

It's a debate people. That means hearing from the candidates with "format control" from the moderator. I especially liked the fact that as long as each candidate stayed on task with the question, they were not given a timeframe in which to answer.

It was a good debate because it finally let us see the candidates for who they are, and what they are or aren't discussing. Debates are supposed to get viewers thinking and generate good discussion

I look forward to more.

Sad state of affairs when debates, politics in general, have become so frivolous that we find it entertaining for its "action", adolescent behavior, and rumors rather than its policy debates and the exchanging of ideas.

Senator Obama showed when the heats on he has trouble sounding Presidential. He didn't give any clear answers and never got to the point. He really wasn't very good. But CNN spins it like he won the debate. Hillary gave an answer about about immigration a while back in a debate and it played over and over again and again claiming how bad see screwed up. (It really wasn't that bad an answer). Why was Joe Biden ripped apart when he said Obama was clean curt, articulate etc. but the Senator can refer to President Clinton's dancing ability is good enough to be a "Brother" CNN or not Hillary is by far the best Candidate and Edward pretty good too.

Great job Wolf!! You let them debate. Keep up the good work and give the same format to the Republicans. I learned a lot Monday night.

Thank you and your CNN Team. Great Job. CNN is #1 in my book.

Watching Lou Dobbs has helped me to open my eyes and see what is going on in Washington. Let's hold them all accountable.

Keep up the good work !!!

G. Ellis
Ohio

Personally I have seen stealing of slogans, campaign style, proposing what Obama has proposed on policies like economy and using words that Obama has used in his stamp speeches.
What else do you expect me to be believe from Clintons if they can not be original from small things?

Wolf
I have the utmost respect for you and watch your show regularly. I was discussed by the immature and unprofessional behavior of Clinton and Obama. I was also disppointed that Edwards claims that he does not receive equal time was confirmed on the debate. As you said in this article it was a three way debate althought that could be debated.
RAG

Wolf,

You did a great job and a great service to the country–let is see how these candidates handle these issues.

WOW, what a debate. I think that all 3 of these candidates would make a great president and I believe that they are all fairly close with their ideas for change. I think that Democrats are going to have a tough time picking because there are good choices and the Republicans are going to have a tough time picking because there are no good choices.

How come there is no mention of an Obama/Edwards ticket?

Great great great debate..... or at least the back and forth parts were entertaining, I haven't decided.

My chief complaint is this: Everyone knows that the contest is increasingly between Clinton and Obama and all of the debates (on other stations as well) sit them next to each other. It is as if the producers are intentionally doing it so they can't get some back and forth bickering going on for ratings. Edwards should have been in the middle of the candidates. Shame shame shame.....

good job wolf, obama did a good job by defending his positions and try to explain why he voted certain ways in the senate while hillary only says she voted but regreted it. I think obama won.

I REALLY WISH THAT OBAMA COULD HAVE STAYED ON THE ISSUES. HE ATTACKED SHE ATTACKED BACK! DONT WORRY SHE WILL SETTLE THIS AND THE NEXT DEBATE. IM GLAD THAT SHE MADE SOME STRONG POINTS AGAINST HIM HE NEEDED IT! HILLARY 08! THAT CREDIT CARD RAISE WAS FUNNY THOUGH!

Please, people, if you watched the complete debate you know the bickering lasted a very short time. Personally, I hated the bickering, however, the Clintons have continued to malign Obama. He has been forced to response. I agree with Jesse Jackson (which surprises me) that Obama needs a surrogate to address the Clintons' lies and distortions so that he can continue on the road to truth and justice.

This is how the Clintons run their campaigns - go in for the kill and when they are criticized they back off for a little while.

Well Wolf, you tried.

There is no doubt, this was clearly the most intense and entertaining debate in recent memory, let alone in this historical season. Kudos on that.

However, you are simply too nice sometimes and need a little backbone. Just ask Lynne Cheney.

Perhaps a more stringent M.O. would help, along with a co-moderator (like MSNBC utilizes).

I don't doubt your sincere effort, Wolf, but there is a fine line between letting the drama unfold and allowing the inmates to run the asylum.

Perhaps you'll find a happy medium between letting the candidates express themselves and keeping necessary order.

Hillar uses a proxy in the name of Bill Clinton to falsely accuse Obama and when Obama attacks her, all you guys can say is he is showing his true colors... Grow up. Think what you will do when you are in the same situation. It is human nature to defend....

I was a Bill Clinton supporter, but I'd never vote for Hillary is she gets the democratic nomination.... I'd rather vote for a replublican than Hillary. She has 35 years of experience making CHANGE. Give me a break.

The only thing this debate did was more firmly set my down in the middle of the Edwards camp. When will we hear some substanstive information about the plans these people have for the future of America? It was pathetic to see them carry on like grammer school children!

when Obama was trailing behind Hillary, and he was firing shots on her records, nobody was hitting Obama, but now that Hillary is scrutinizing his records, everybody seems to see Hillary as a villain?

Hillary was right when she said to Obama that he should not expect a hands up from her while Obama was firing all the shots against her.

I like Obama but he has not come up with something that is concrete. One does not live and aim high and eventually accomplish it just by blurting out , change, the change we can believe in???????????????

Yeah, now I have a better understanding whether Obama thinks Bill Clinton is black, and whether Hillary thinks Bill Clinton is overshadowing her campaign. That's really gonna help me make an informed decision. Thanks!

Hello,
The Democratic debate was an eye opener for me. I loved Hillary's ability to draw Obama into areas that he did not feel comfortable.

Obama speaks in general terms and Hillary provides the statistics. I hope everyone sees the prepared person is Hillary.

Sincerely,
Pat

Last night's debate was fiery and hot . You let Hillary and Obama duke it out but i don't think it was angry . More like a debate designed for the two , my only complaint is Edwards should have been given an even time to respond and say something about the issues , otherwise I enjoyed it . I recorded the debate and watched it twice and boy that Hillary she was just on top of every issue and Obama tries so hard to be as quick and be on top but just finds himself stuttering and obviously grasping for things to say on a moments time . Hillary is just extraordinarily smart and strong . That is why she is more than capable and ready to hold the highest office in this country . So go Hillary !

The TV media, including CNN, prefers conflict over education. Education is boring and doesn't get viewers. After all, if people really want to know what their policies are they can read their websites. Snappy attacks by the candidates draws eye-balls and that's all that matters.

By the way, most people will not spend more than one minute reviewing a candidate's website, let alone study their largely safe positions. They understand that they really need to judge the character of the candidates to see who can make a great President.

Interestingly though, this time around all the Dems have essentially the same agenda, with a few minor differences. Of course, Hillary is afraid to admit it will take a tax increase to save Social Security but we all know that choice is her preference. At least Barack and Edwards have the guts to admit it.

Given the similarities of their programs though, personalities rise to the fore. Barack is very smart and charismatic, embodies change, is funny, and is inspiring. Hillary is very smart, embodies change, can be funny but often tries too hard and is simply uninspiring.

As a result, Hillary is determined to bring Barack down into the mud where she spends most of her time. He's toooooo inspirational, so Hillary is attacking him at every turn in the hope he will keep responding to her and be unable to hold her accountable for her inaccurate claims and lose his charm.

Hillary is following politics 101. If you can't play at their level, bring them down to yours. What's sad is just how excited new voters were to get involved because of Barack. After Hillary's done, though, neither of them may be able to win back all of their opponent's supporters. That would be devastating.

In any case, we might as get used to this now, the GOP is planning worse.

P.S. The best candidate for Dems is the one who has the best appeal to independents. Who can not only win, but not hurt our Red or Purple state representatives. That man is clearly Barack and the best way to confirm it is to see just how many Red State Democratic office-holders are endorsing Barack. That really tells the tale.

Overall I think Wolf is a good anchorman, but I believe he gave Clinton way too much time for her answers and very little time to Obama and Edwards to actually talk.

He did never told Clinton to wrap it up but he was sure quick to cut off Obama when it was his turn to respond to an attack or allegation. Same for Edwards.

It was very frustrating to watch. He should have just said I am going to give Hillary an open microphone for two hours.

Of course we know where they stand on issues; it's been hammered into us time and time again. All we need to do is look at your section on cnn.com where stances are put in a pretty list. All we need do is glance through their website and try to see how much of it is consistent with their time served.

At this point your debates are purely for theatrical entertainment. Of course the higher-ups don't tell you this, but they love the drama and that's why they keep airing these debates...and although they they don't tell you this of course you know.

At this point the debates are superfluous until there are two nominees.

It's just a chance for soundbites and one-liners....not that any debates are truly substantial, many of our great presidents would've looked like idiots if they needed to debate their opponents. Expceting a candidate to answer questions they possibly (but not very likely) haven't thought of before is ridiculous; if they answer quickly and confidently, they're even more ridiculous than the questioner but will be praised nonetheless. Reflection is a lost political virtue.

Our process makes way for the made-for-tv-polish and the media doesn't even attempt to change this. Such is life, eh?

I couldn't watch too much of the debate, but I wasn't impressed with Obama in the portion I saw. When asked directly whether he would remove the troops by the end of his first year, he kept changing the subject and filled time with utter babble. I thought Clinton's response was far better, and showed insight into potential land mines.

That's all I saw, but CNN's online coverage made Hillary sound like she lost big time. The analysis and editorials seems far to skewed towards Oboma and very hateful towards Hillary. It doesn't seem impartial at all, almost at the level of arrogance of FOX News. I'm not sure why CNN is so pro-Oboma, it seems to go against the spirit of journalism.

Hopefully I can see a recap this weekend, but I'm leaning towards Clinton at the moment.

Mr. Blitzer,

You know very well that it was Obama who started the fight; yet all of your CNN clips later continued showing as though Hillary started it; come on, you guys should rewind the tape and take some time to see the truth.

Edwards came back looking strong. I never listened to him before, but after yesterdays' debate I think I would like clinton/edwards combination

Though I like CNN, I feel that you are very partial to Mr.Obama

All my typing went down the drain. Second time. Why even bother. Guess my opinion doesn't count. Thanks alot, CNN.

You're the best, Mr. Blitzer. You are closer to being perfectly neutral than your peers and most bloggers. Ignore the critics who have already made their minds up.

I wish, however, for you to dwell more on the differences of the candidates on issues rather than on their personal attacks on each other.

You were there Wolfe and how could anyone but you know what to do. Things like that you have to feel out as it happens.You were there to see and feel the moments. Noone could tell you how they would have done...except and thumbs up..you did good.

Blitzer, you did a fantastic job moderating that heated debate. You are great. You never seemed to take sides, you allowed immediate response from either Clinton or Obama once it was necessary. Keep it up.

Where they stand on the issues, what a joke, their identical. All of them
socialist for more government control of business & indivduals.

Hi Roy Halford

I agree with you 120% of your following writing:

You hear it all the time… the media hate Hillery.

I have three televisions On all the time in my Living room. I watch all three news networks … back and forth…over and over….

The media hate Hillery….

I watched the debate… live…. I watched it againn at midnight… watched it again in parts…. on all three news channels…. still watching it….

Then… even you Wolf…..
at about 4:45 pm Central time..
you parsed sections of the debate to make it look like Mrs. Clinton hit Mr. Obama first with the slum-lord swat…. you know Mr. Obama hit first with the Wal-Mart smack…. I love politics. Everybody gets to play….

This stuff is important, Mr Blitzer. Your not the only one doing it, but you were there Mr. Blitzer….. Take Mr. Dodds advice… stay out of it!

I have been waiting to see Obama face the heat, thanks for allowing it. I now know that he melts near the flame. Much needed info going into the general.
Hillary took the flack and came back with well needed information. Maybe the lovefest for Obama is finally over, it is for me

Wolf your job is a win-win. You grab the ratings from the people that like you, as well as those who don't like you yet still watch you. Obviously they are tuning in either way, so congrats!

Let's have a little "truth squad" right here, shall we? The first pot-shots taken last night were by Obama. His new habit of whining about running against Bill Clinton as well as Hillary is ludicrous. This is politics, for heaven's sake! If he had such a powerful supporter, he'd certainly use them! As it is, he had no problem trotting Oprah out to energize the black/female vote. Who's playing the race card again?

Last night he was finally forced to answer substantive questions regarding his record and the issues and came away looking weak, petulant and defensive.

So far he's had a cake-walk from the press and it's time he's tested by more than starry-eyed gushing from a press that can't seem to ask him an in-depth question if their jobs depended on it (and they certainly should).

I watch both Democrat and Republican debates. Now this (Democratic 1/21) was a "Great debate."

However, it is so sad the so many analyst put their own negative spin on valid points that were being made. More discourse is what we need. A candidate is responsible for what they say. They must defend past statement and seek to provide clarification when missunderstood.

It dosen't take a rocket scientist who thw analyst favor.....

Baltimore

I agree
with Obama, I cannot tell if Hillary or Bill is running for office? If its Hillary, I wish Bill would shut up and let his
wife speak for herself. If Hillary wins will she run the country, or will it be Bill behind the scene? I

I didn't watch the debate but read the transcripts, if what I read was accurate, John Edwards won the debate... even though it's a little too late for him now.

Wolf, great job. However, I keep wondering, why has no one asked Hillary a direct question about her years of legislative experience. She keeps talking about 35 years of experince

It is a travesty that Hillary Clinton has dishonestly convinced voters that she has more experience than Obama and she will be more ready to lead on day one .

Technically, this is false: Obama has served more years in elected office than Hillary, specifically, 8 years in the Illinois Senate (which follows nearly identical rules and procedures as the U.S. Senate), and 3 years in the U.S. Senate for a total of 11 years. Clinton, on the other hand has served only one term plus a year in her second term-a total of 7 years in elected office of experince.

I really didn't see much moderating....few questions, fewer follow-ups, little adherence to time limits. I was disappointed in the way it was handled. There are so many big issues to talk about. Maybe the format was not structured enough, but the debate lacked focus. Those who are undecided missed a good opportunity to see how the candidates will approach the many problems in America and the world.

I liked the yesterdays debate because I could see now that Obama talks but doesn't really answer the questions. I think Edwards brought up a good poit that both Obama and Clinton use lobbyist support and will have to pay them back with favors. I think Edwards is the honest and sincere. I was disappointed that when the issue of healthcare came up no one said how this heathcare would be paid for and how does it differ from Canada and UK socilized medicine.

Obama should fight back. He dosen;t have to fight dirty but he needs to answer whatever is thrown at him. Further more he is fighting Hilary and Bill and that is not fair. Wolf, you did a great job. It is hard tryign to get a word in edgewise, but you did your best. Also Obama has stated time and time again that he billed the so call slum landlord for hours that he work in order to strike a deal with a the church. Was he not doing something good by geting whatever property out of the landlord hands? People only seem to look at things one way and they don't listen to the facts.

It seems like the questions you asked cnn.com readers for and the several thousand responses people contributed didn't count for much. It was same old same old questions but a good debate, anyway, because it did help me see some things clearer.

I am now convinced about my gut feeling that Obama is not being straight with the people. If he is the Democrat nominee, I would vote for him anyway, but I will know I'm not voting for the perfect man the media likes to make him out to be. I will also know I am not voting for the person most suited for the job.

He said, "None of us has clean hands," or something to that effect. He is right about that. I now believe, after seeing from the unpleasant but informative combative part of the debate, that his are dirtier than I thought they might be.

You did a good job, Wolf.

Bill and Hillary's spin on Obama's Reagan comments were pitiful. He made a valid point that Reagan created a movement and that the Republican Party was the party of ideas over the last 10 – 15 years. I listened to his comments and he never said he agreed with their ideas or that they were good. Just that the Republican Party challenged the conventional wisdom which is why they won control of the house and senate.

And can someone please teach Hillary about body language. In every debate she turns and stares down whoever says anything negative about her or her ideas. Debate 101 please.....stop!

I'm voting for Obama. He has the much better chance of winning the general election (despite the Edwards and Clinton comment during the debate) as indicated by the 'current polls'.

Hillary and Bill have turned me off greatly.

Does anyone remember that Kerry asked McCain to be his running mate as Vice President? Maybe this is why McCain sounds like a Democrat.

Hillary was first to attack as usual....not Obama Hillary has attacked at almost every debate thus far. Obama is just trapped into defending himself constantly....hillary is using dirty as usual politics, and anyone who can't see through her falseness is a fool

Wolf,
You made the right call in letting the candidates set the pace and the protocol of the debate. I only wish the media would add more value in the process ... why can't you be the "truth referees" keep the candidates honest in the debates?

Regards

I was pleased with the S. C. debate and the fireworks it produced. I do not see anything wrong with the exchanges between the three candidates.
They are all politicians and they certainly have baggages. It is always best to expeect such baggages to be brought to light.

great debate!!!! you did a great job and so did the people asking the questions. I was surprised to hear some of the questions, but they are just what I DID want to be asked. No complanits from me. way to go!!!!!

Last nights "demo destuction debate " was an example of how far some candiates will go to become president.

CNN and wolf Blitzer were like witnesses to a drive by.

The talking heads after were asked repeatedly who landed the most body blows, who ducked the best.

It wasnt a debate about issues, but about personalities.

Clinton won the early rounds, the potted plant John Edwards was there and Obama was staggered, but actually posed a serious question which the voters will ultimately decide.

Should Bill Clinton be as involved in attacking Obama as he is.

Obama who refuses to recite the pledge of allegiance
what's his problem ? Why does he refuse when everyone else follows the
constitution ?

I marvel at the length to which the Clinton's have gone to attack Obama's record, character, and ability to lead change. These are desperate acts by the Clinton campaign are simply a manifestation of their insecurity to the threat that Obama brings to their delusional views. I am a Canadian and have spent countless hours evaluating the messages and reactions of all of the candidates. Hillary & Bill are running scared and an attempted alliance with the Edwards camp is yet another desperate move. I would renounce my Canadian citizenship for the opportunity to vote in and support Mr. Obama – wake up America, he really is your last hope and a much needed breath of fresh air in Washington !!!

I posted a comment at 4:34pm, that's almost 6.5 hrs ago, and it is still "awaiting moderation" before CNN will actually post it for others to see. It was critical of the democratic debate and of CNN's general coverage of the election, but I guess they don't want people to call them out on that sort of thing. Or maybe they just want to wait so long to post it that by the time other people are actually able to read it, no one will because this article will be old news by then.

We can't afford not have Wolf Blitzer as a moderator specially the one we had last night. What a great man with inspiring job.
Go Wolf!

The sad thing is, none of you are going to care what the truth is very soon in this election, because the Clinton's are going to squeeze and mangle every thing that Obama says and does into such a lurid, distorted rumor, that you will all be too busy lapping up the delicious scandal, to realize that you have all been played for fools by the most famous liar and political dirt hurlers in our History.

Time for change in Washington.

Vote for Obama in 2008!!!

Lauren – Hillary stands her ground that the choice she made about the war was based on all the crap Bush and Cheney were spreading. She didn't try to flip-flop like Obama.

Everyone – stop the racist, mysogenistic, disgusting attacks on all of the candidates! We all of enough relatives for that!

Over 100 present votes, wobbling on issues, several hypothetical decision statements (creates confusion on his actual position), one year as Illinois senator, folks what else do you need to know to be convince that Barrack Hussein Obama is not meant to be president of this country. If he waited, I believe he might be the first black president but he screwed up. He's not ready!!

Loved the Jerry-Springer like event, Wolf. Pat yourself on the back for asking some really bizarre and pointless questions ('If Martin Luther King Jr. were here today, who would he want nominated for president?' 'Obama, what do you think about Bill Clinton being called the first American black president?' ) I'm sure those pressing questions were on the minds of the South Carolinians who tuned in or attended the debate and that by peppering the candidates with questions that would result in a proverbial brawl and boost ratings (as you were congratulating yourselves on today), all of their concerns were addressed.

I don't think the debates help me at all... they are just a media circus and do not really help me understand the position of the candidates. I read the candidates statements from their respective websites... listen to them as they make there campaign stops and articulate their vision.

The debates are just showing the worst of the candidates and the moderators and the media are just fat happy showing the worst of a person. I want to see the best of the candidates and let them talk about him or her self, not about the other person.

I think the debates are tiresome and 'entertainment' rather than an education in the political process. The media has become the lowest common denominator in society and they should be ashamed that is what they have become.

I'm voting for Hillary by the way and expect full well that McCain will be the Republican candidate. I believe Hillary can beat Mc Cain – I don't think Obama or Edwards can.... If the Democratic candidate is Obama or Edwards – I'd just as well not vote and stay home... I can't support either of those untested newbies...

wolf, the debate was outstanding - always good to see candidates step way, way outside the "bubble" and away from the scripting & packaging. Personality comes through. Agility is obvious. Last night was revealing on many levels. Kudos to you & CNN.

I also think they did key in and explain many topics and their plans.
And if people were listening, Senator Obama clearly explained his "present" votes in the Illinois Senate.
If you missed it, voting yes means you accept the bill. Voting no means you decline the bill. Voting present means something in the bill needs changed before you will accept it.
It was pretty clear to me.

I think you did an outstanding job. With Obama and Hillary verbally jousting, and Edwards trying to get a word in edgewise you managed to keep things moving, and still let the proverbial "Fur Fly". Keep up the good work. I hope you do more debates in the future.

from what i gather obama should have been a good lil boy and let miss hillary say what ever she wants whether its true or not .no the days of the bowing your head yes a boss days are long long past . obama had every right to jump on her about her lying husband (who we all still do love) . that shows strength to me to stand up for your self and what true . how did hillary show strength she used the female tear job to gain sympathy for getting her butt kicked in iowa ,what if obama had choked up , he would have been mr. girlieman.

Wolf.

You did a great job.

I will always be a big fan of Wolf Blitzer

Business leaders like Mitt Romney are still one of those "business" people who are constantly looking for larger and larger profits. Most bang for a buck employers often don't care how they keep it down for more profits. Some of them Welcome illegal immigrants to maximize profits in labor, not necessarily to survive.

I thought Mr. Blizter's moderating struck an excellent balance between too much and not enough involvement. The horrid part of the debate were the *pointless* questions. Why spend valuable debate time asking if Bill Clinton was the first "black" president? That was completely worthless, pandering, and a waste of everyone's time. Please keep the questions serious and substantiative.

It's good to see Hillary use those hated Republican tactics to pull this campaign into the gutter in order to win the nomination. Thanks Hillary. I can't believe she could win the nomination. Have Democrats learned nothing from Gore and Kerry? I may actually vote McCain.

I have watched every Republican and Democrat debate and recenly CNN APPEARS TO ME TO PLACE OBAMA IN A PREFERRED POSTSURE AND APPEARS TO DENIGRATE SENATOR CLINTON AND ALSO BILL CLINTON
I WILL PRAY FOR YOU
RAY D,

Debates are had for a reason – so the candidates can convince the public of their arguments and there is no doubt that the media plays a role in how these debates are perceived. I think a point worth making is that it is still up to individual voters to do the necessary research on each candidate in order to really grasp their positions on important issues. Didn't your mom tell you that "you can't believe everything you hear?" Debates like this one give way to too much slander and finger pointing. Really, let's all be intelligent and responsible enough find the real "winner" among the candidates, and not just accept who we are told may or may not have been the "winner" in this debate.

Narcissism is what journalists are all about, especially TV journalsts. And Wolf Blitzer's narcissism is no exception. I have never seen Blitzer when he wasn't trying to play the star of the show, with his subject in a supporting role. Of course the criticsare right to say he "interfered" too much in the debate. After all, it wasn't Clinton's or Obama's show, it was Blitzer's! He wasn;t the moderator, he was the ringmaster. Wolf Blitzer is a major contributor to the cheapening of politics.

I think it was time for Senator Obama to confront the tactics of the Clinton campaign, get it out in the open, discuss it, and now move on.
Everyone says they don't want to hear about the petty bickering between the top two candidates. Yet, whenever you read a blog, that is all anyone talks about.
Senator Obama, go back to pushing your message of change and unity.
Senator Clinton, go back to talking about your 35 years of doing whatever you did for 35 years.
John Edwards, instead of constantly bringing up the 200,000 veterans sleeping under a bridge every night, take time off the campaign (since your not going to win) and take a chunk of your millions, and give them a place to sleep tonight!

Wolf, your minimal interference was wonderfully refreshing.
however, many of the questions selected and asked were total waste of precious time and great diservice to the nation. drop the sensationalism and get on with the substance!!!

Normally I can't stand listening to you and your repetitive commentary. Last night was good. The candidates talked and you shut up. The long campaign time is allowing people to see how superficial and vacuous Obama really is. If a speech is not prepared, as a sermon, he can't talk. In fact, he really can't discuss issues, he only distracts to hype an audience. When he gets audience feedback, he goes into one of his prepared mini-sermons. I won't vote for hope or a preacher of hope and hype. I vote for possibility, prospects, preparedness. Obama is arrogant and unqualified. He's of the opinion that he is the new MLK. It may be time for a Black president; it is not time for Obama.

Overall, I have to say CNN is as 'fair and balanced' or more than any news service in how they approach these issues politically. I hear Republicans and Democrats complaining that CNN's coverage is slanted the other way.

Just before this debate, Lou Dobbs commented that the media doesn't ask the tough questions during the debates. The big issue he brought up to Mr. Blitzer was how should IMMIGRATION be handled (especially illegal). This is not discussed in especially Democrat debates.

Wolf, this was your chance!

It would be nice to hear if Lou Dobb's was also dissappointed this was not brought up. Lou and Wolf, I believe CNN has another chance coming up in the near future. I like Wolf as a moderator, but it might be nice to see Lou go after the candidates in a debate.

The second half of the debate was more civil and more constructive than the first, to be honest. Maybe the candidates were just tired of bickering, or maybe the casual setting brought some more civility to the discussion. In either case, the second half was more interesting than the first. I don't know who I would pick as the winner of the debate, but it did not sway me from my increasingly solid choice.

I think it's sad that the news channels make a bigger deal out of childish bickering than discussion of the core issues that are supposed to be the real focus of the presidential debates. Maybe I'm wrong but wasn't John Edwards the only one who really stuck to those issues and hasn't he received the least amount of press coverage (except 4 Dennis Kucinich who has been excluded)? I would hope that the press is not trying to force a choice by giving impartial coverage.

Sorry, I forgot to say I like Nash's line "Watch the actions compared to words!", which I guess should be the topic Media is focusing on, that will help America and will bless America, not race or gender. Please!

This was a great debate. Instead of hearing or listening or reading about the campaigns acquisitions against each other, this forum allowed candidates to explain the issues for themselves...and allowed the American public to make a decision for themselves.

We can consider some of the debate content "bickering" but since these issues are constantly on the news/media, hopefully the debate put these issues to rest once and for all since the response came directly from the candidates.

It believe that the debate showed Obamas inconsistency on his stance on key issues and showed his inexperience on key issues that are important to the American public.

Mr. Blitzer has been the major instigator in the anti-Clinton movement. He, like Chris Matthews is obsesessed with them. Just look at Media Matters and get the truth about Mr. Blitzer and the reasons behind his support of Obama.

When a debate gets that out of hand, one can only blame the moderator.
That is what a moderator does....MODERATE.

Finally a real debate. The dems are no different than the other guys... Jeffry Tubin said it best... ' this is politics! By August everyone will kiss and make up...'

I'm from Singapore but have somehow been drawn into the excitement of your elections. I watched parts of the debate over the internet and I must say that it was really very exciting and interesting. Out of the three Democratic candidates, I would say that definitely Hillary Clinton was the winner in the debate as she was clearly the most experienced, the most knowledgeable and the most convincing in her arguments. Barack Obama looked too young and punctuated a lot of his responses with "err's" and "umm's" which seem to betray either a lack of confidence or lack of experience in whatever he was talking about. As for John Edwards, he is likeable but somehow lacks the charisma and personality to be the next US President.

So If I were from South Carolina, my vote would definitely be for Hillary Clinton. And I think a Clinton-Obama team will definitely be triumphant in November 2008 ! I will look forward to that.

Personal back and forth is a political tradition and can reveak the character of the candidates in unexpected ways. What struck me last night is the way Obama turned his back on HIllary Clinton and intentionally snubbed her in front of the entire world. Is this type of self-centered, bad-sport behavior what we want in a leader? If Obama doesn't get his way with a world leader will he behave badly? Even little league teams shake hands after a battle. Clearly, Obama is not ready for a national role. For someone who talks up diplomacy, he obviously knows little about what that word means.

Wolf:

We also disagree with your implying that Hilary started it.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

Obama started it by making cryptic referecne to Hillar's Wal-mart job.

The media hate the Clintons, it's a fact. And that was very evident leading to the New Hampshire primary where everyone was so eager to report the fall of the Clintons even before the people casted their votes. It's very evident that the media are fueling the fire between the candidates, which is very unfortunate as it is not helping the people make their decision. Let's get back to discussing the ECONOMY and how these candidates can solve our problems ahead.

Wolf,

That was an excellent debate, and I was happy to see the three candidates hammer home many of their points. However, I am curious why the debates over the last few months have consistently eliminated Dennis Kucinich from speaking. Candidates can hardly have their voices heard and be visible, if the press keeps locking them out. He might have done better in Nevada, for example, if MSNBC had let him voice his views. He might have performed better in New Hampshire and Iowa.

I suspect his stand on issues such as impeaching Vice President Cheney, the Iraq war, and gay marriage had a lot to do with him not being put in the debates. How do you respond, Wolf? If Representative Kucinich had been given a larger forum and equal time, could he have reached more voters?

The question, Was Bill Clinton the first black president? is so stupid and sad that I wish you would be disqualified from future debates. War and peace on Martin Luther King day or why minorities got four times as many predatory mortgages as whites, not Bill. And if you were going to ask something about Bill, ask - What were you doing when he signed the pardons?

I thought Sen. Clinton was allowed more time to speak and level charges at Sen. Obama, some of which he never got a chance to defend himself on. Then you spin the whole thing like it's Clinton and Obama taking cheap shots at each other. At least Sen. Obama always spoke the truth.

Sen. Obama wasn't a senator at the time the Iraq war started, but he strongly advised against invading Iraq. He voted to fund the war later, because he believes we should support the troops regardless of who's dumb decision it was to go to war in the first place . . . certainly not his! He believes that our young men and women in combat, true heroes, should have what they need to survive and not get killed. Clinton and her husband (and certainly many in the media) spin this as "Sen. Obama flip flops on the war, he's a phony".

Hillary Clinton voted to go to war, and her husband vocally supported it. Now that the war has been such a disaster, Pres. Clinton claims he was against it from the start and Sen. Clinton claims she believed George Bush's obvious lies.

Wolf, you were at your best last night. You don't have to defend yourself from these idiots. Just because their candidate came out a WIMP and appeared unprepared, they would vent their ire on you.

Hillary, you have my vote!

And the sad part Lorie is those people that are still confused could be instrumental in picking the next President...on the basis of a few debates and no research of their own.

Even if Hillary wins the Democratic nomination, she can't unify this country. She is part of the partisan politic that has gone back and forth for years. Please, it's time for a change.

I think it would be a good idea to list the amount of time used by each candidates. Mr. Obamas domination of time left to many moments unsaid by the others. Unfair to those on the panel, and very unfair for us who are looking for as much from each to help make up our minds.

Wolf,

Obama won hands down and can make that change. Hillary's (Bill) tactics or tears do not move me.

Once again, following the debate last night, the media has focused on the two candidates you have chosen to be newsworthy (flash trash), rather than the one candidate who deserves to be heard. You moan and groan about the state of our economy yet fail to listen to the plans of John Edwards, the very best person to lead our country out of the wilderness. May I suggest you take the time to go to john edwards.com website and read his 80 PAGE document regarding how he would turn this country around for ALL people. Sensible, well thought out ideas to make America what we all want it to be in the future.

You are doing the voters of this country a disservice with this continued attitude; seems like you all talk to hear your teeth rattle, without substance or truthfulness. John Edwards has been warning us for years of the deteriorating state of our nation and has been casually dismissed by the media pundits. The other candidates haven't been talking about it but John Edwards has and you have blocked his voice from the public view as much as possible. People are catching on to your tactics and don't like it one bit!! You have no right to decide who we vote for; it doesn't necessarily have to be the Best Election MONEY CAN BUY!

My husband (a Korean War Veteran and lifelong Republican) and I are both supporting John Edwards and will caucus for him here in MN on February 5. Friends and family throughout the US are also planning to vote Edwards, several in CA have already cast absentee ballots and their votes deserve to be counted too.

Yesterday was Obama's best debate. He was strong and presidential! CLEAR on all of his positions!

Yes, take no money from the cooperations Edwards!!! But, can Edwards refund most of the funds he took from the cases he won on the back of "poor people?" We are talking here about millions and millions of dollars!!!

I guess, the strong advocate here is for "lawyers" who are good at fighting to line up their pockets with the spoils of the poor. It often reminds me of presidents who send other people's kids to war but send their kids to institutions of higher education or "charity work" only to claim that they are …..

Do not get me wrong, I have always been a supporter of Edwards. He should wait until Hillary loses to the Republicans and he can then sue the Republicans to help the dumb democrats who put Hillary out there as a nominee– got the picture?

I came away from this debate as I have all of the others. John Edwards is the only Democratic candidate talking about solutions to the problems that face this country. It is a shame that the media continues to glorify Hillary and Obama's shameful political antics.

Too bad people thought Obama was the one that started the arguments... It was the Clinton Machine, the Hillary Express, that had been taking punch shots @ Obama for weeks & months. In every other debate, Hillary would always start her comments with a reference to Obama, trying to showing her superiority, as if she's God's gift to Americas Political Problems. It's about time Obama started fighting back. It proves he has feelings, respect for himself, and a "BackBone"....
The Hillary Express has made this personal from "DAY ONE"

Wolf,

As a suggestion for the next debate: Perhaps you give each candidate 5 minutes for 'opening remarks'... then they can use that as they want to, speak about whatever they think is important... then the debate will go more smoothly since they will have had a chance to air whatever they thought was more important.

that way Americans will know what is most important for each candidate– America or winning the nomination...

Last night debate helped me decide to vote for Hillary Clinton.

Obama...I don't know about him...I heard his comments about Republicans and their ideas...He probably was living in Indonesia when things were a lot better in 1992 to 2000 – is why he does not remember or he has short memory or he is a republican or he just would say anything to get votes.

Bottom line – I am not for him. Thank god I could watch this debate.

Good job Wolf,It was Obama who came there to air his grips and off to the races.Senator Clinton as always was steady,professional had in depth answers and solutions to health care,economy,the war situation which is tricky.
There is only one strong leader after last night and she will make a great First Woman President .
I thank you for allowing them time to be seen by the American public.Especially what all words and no action Obama really is. A real empty suit.
Edwards says the same thing over and over without explaining any dimension.This is not for a one note Johnny type of postion you need to say more and do more than the poverty issue.Which is very important to this country but he is not getting the votes because he tells his life story over and over.It's a good story but being President is so much more (to Limited)
Great job to you and staff.

good job Wolf, very good one. Thanks.

I thought Wolf did a good job in letting the candidates speak and defend themselves when needed.

To the debate moderators...what was the relevance in asking Barak Obama if he thought Bill Clinton was the first black president? Talk about a racially loaded non-issue!. That was a huge one.

Let's see.... Hillary accused Obama of being soft on porno shops being near schools, being inconsistently against the war, and I thought the remark about the Chicago slumlord was really sleazy. All I saw Obama doing was poking holes in her allegations, I don't understand how people thought of this as tit-for-tat. I saw Hillary making outrageous personal attacks that were shown to be untrue.

Overall this debate has been the one that allowed the public to not only hear each candidate's policies on some issues, but it allowed us to see the character as well. My biggest criticism is that Senator Clinton was allowed much longer time blocks to answer both direct questions and rebuttals. Senator Obama and Senator Edwards were not given equal time. This seemed as if CNN was deferential to the "Clintons". I think at a minimum, candidates should have all been cut off at two minutes. I think cutting off their mike at that time would send a clear message and allow all candidates to have the same amount of time.
If anyone would ever go back to Lincoln Douglas debate formats, this would be a great help. None of the questions addressed education, illigal immigration, nuclear proliferation all of which are issues that many would like addressed.

Given the post debate focus on the debate, Wolf did OK. The moderator moderates, not participate, as MSNBC dabates end up being. Charles Gibson(ABC) and Wolf have brought out aspects of the candidates policy positions and personalities as no other. And that is what voters need to welcome, and use in eventually making their decisions.

Oh please... let the people debate – nobody is desperate! Just stating facts and defending the all out media war and attacks on his character, religion, race, beliefs...shall I continue?

wolf, you did a good job.

but it was frustrating to watch obama and clinton fight that way. i think it was all started by obama by mentioning the name of bill clinton which i thought was unnecessary while debtaing key issues. .
i get a feeling he is desperate. but other thing we can make out i twill be difficult for these two to get together and work again. becoz it is becoming too much.

Last night debate reminded me of my students. I'm a teacher and it is common for a student to bother another student, mock them, poke at them, verbally try to engage them. What I notice is that if this is done long enough and the receiver of this tries to ignore for awhile then ask them to stop, then joke about it but the antagonizing continues, there is a point where the receiver draws a line in the sand and basically says 'stop messin" with me. Suddenly the receiver becomes the bad guy and 'started it'. The Clintons started this rhetoric a long time ago...they pushed and pushed, made comment after comment that were clearly antagonistic...Obama ignored, responded calmly, sometimes found humor, but in general responded in a respectful manner until the charges escalated and tinged with misrepresentation. When Obama drew a line in the sand and used an opportunity at the debate (which had a HIGH viewership) to respond vocally, firmly and in a no- nonsense manner, Senator Clinton started crying 'unfair'. She sounded like a first grader last night. It appears she likes to push and bully, but doesn't like being pushed back...infact has a tattle tale demeanor about her. Now I understnad why many find her unpresidential. I don't like first grade behavior in adults. It isn't cute and it doesn't smack of dynamic leadership. We need a DYNAMIC leader.

Let me tell you I am not suprised on Bill and Hilary's tactics played against Obama. They are dirty fighters that are trying to bring Obama down. But let me tell you the truth will preveils all evil.

I have to say from my perspective....Hillary started to attack and Obama replied.
Now if Obama didn't reply there would of been a problem....If he does reply there's a problem.

The bottom line is whoever you are going to vote for. You are going to vote for.
If you put Hilary in the white house. She wont stay in there long.

wolf, you should never be allowed to moderate another debate...you were absolutely horrible...You had no control....

stick to your crummy show and stay out of the way

After calling the upcoming debate a War you wnat Moderation?

Obama was responding from attacks from both Clinton's and there surrogates, make no mistake when you Have Hillary playing nice and Bill attacking and vice a versa there is no mistake on message, they are all well placed and planned, this dirty politics is what we can expect and it's time for change.

I stand with Obama without doubt, he can bring together America and lead us into a new day.

Anyone who has kept up with this campaign, knows that Billary Clinton has been a real problem with lies and half truths. You may be confused, if you only tuned into the debate. Yes, Obama threw the first jab, of the debate. I think after a month of trying to take the high road, and the Clintons just being awful, he deserved a shot. There are so many people who have been publicly calling for Bill to stop the mud slinging and 1/2 truths. Now everyone is jumping on Obama, for trying to defend himself. Billary is dirty politics at its worst. I don't know which Clinton Obama is running against.

Wolf, I liked how you handled things last night. It showed some of the true character of the two front-runners, and really solidified my support for the former senator John Edwards. While I wouldn't neccesarily mind the other two as the Democratic nominee, I hope a lot of people who watched the debates were turned off by their petty squabbling and gave Edwards a chance.

Wolf, you did a great job, thanks. Now as for the who dunnit first. We all know who got scared and started this fued becaused the were too comfortable. We all know that (in the Legal Arena) if you don't respond, then it's accepted as true. Hence the "Knife Fight". Too bad she was in a phone booth. Any way let's pray that she ... and Bill go home.

Eureka!!!! There are people actually hearing John Edwards and approving of the message he is TRYING to get across to the nation. He did not get enough time during this debate, but then I did not expect it. Now, if you, Lou, Larry and the other journalists at CNN would give him as much FREE air time as you give the two bickering brats, he will start getting the votes that is being cyphened off to those two. Those that are trying to get him to throw in the towel are just trying to clear the field for either Hillary or Barack. I will tell them, "Forget it!" He is in it for the long haul and will be there when the convention convenes in Denver.

Go Johnny Go!!!!!!

The debate was very informative, Hillary's seething face said it all. Her attacks on Obama are getting uglier. What the Clintons and some of the other Democrats DON'T GET, is that WE WANT CHANGE. Get it?!

Sen. Obama needs to rise above the fray and not allow himself to be dragged into the mud.

I do agree that the media has been fanning the fire between Obama and Clinton. Stick to the issues, we are all sick and tired of negative, brutal and dishonest campaigns!

Bill & Hillary's attacks have and will continue to backfire.

Dear "debate watcher"

In case you missed it, Obama's comment about not being able to keep straight whether Hillary or her husband said something was a moment of SARCASM. It wasn't that he couldn't actually keep track of what Hillary said; Obama was pointing out that Bill is continually talking for her and for her campaign. Not surprisingly, the majority of what Bill Clinton says on Hillary's behalf seems to be done so in an effort to defame Obama. THAT, my friend, is the "IMPORTANT POINT" here. All along, Hillary's campaign has been slanderous toward Obama because she knows he is her biggest competition. In a campaign where a candidate's personality seems to be taking the forefront among the issues, I'm surprised to see that someone with your keen perception has fallen for Hillary.

" Well lets do step back and " take a reality check". Hilliary Clinton's claim to fame is that she is the only one that can take on the Republicans on "DAY ONE" and do the difficult things etc. Well I for one have a problem with that . namely, She is not just disliked in the Replubican Party but among her own party people who she would be getting all these things done. Unless this good ole country is going to turn into a dictatorship when she is voted into office, I see that she would have more problems than any other candidate in the race. So I would like to ask her how does she feel she is going to bully her way into a position of the " GREAT Saving Face " of us all? If they are talking change from what we now have going on within our leaders , seems to me that ( and I am sure many others) that Hilliary Clinton is already putting on the gloves to fight with the legislators she would have to work with. This isnt change in my way of thinking, it would be the same ole things only with a different person in the White House.. " GIVE ME A BREAK" Roy , Mo

I think John Edwards should have been the moderator. I like how he clarified the issues and the similarities and differences between the candidates.

Wolf, I thought you and your team did a fine job. In sports, fans often wish that the referees would step back and let the teams play. I felt that that's what you did in this debate, and it made for a better event. The candidates themselves have to judge how far they can push it, and they did - they actually policed themselves. Most of all, by getting out the way, I was able to learn more about the candidates' policy positions, self-composure and style, and that will help me as I decide whom to support.
Thanks again.

The problem is that there is only 1 Clinton in this race, but there is always 2 attacking. Hilary needs to stand up and fight her own battle. Also Clinton made this a color issue not Obama. Regardless of what they say no one should look at this race in color. The ones who do have issues themselves. We the people need a much greater change today and need to really think about who is fit for the job.

Wolf, you did a good job. You are far better than Dobbs or Cafferty, any time, any day.
I think HIllary was presidential. She talked sense about the economy. Obama showed inexperience and was not clear on his answers. Of course he praised Reagan in that interview.. He should have apologized to true blue democrats who took it that way. Didn't he know how Black Americans suffered under the Reagan era?
P.S. Edwards would be a great VP for Hill.

Wolf you did a good job of this debate for a free for all but I felt you need to be a lot stronger with the candidates and don't just keep grunting, but dam well cut them off when you need to!

Clinton herself spoke glowingly of Reagan in Tom Brokaw's new book, "Boom!," in which she is quoted as saying, "When he had those big tax cuts and they went too far, he oversaw the largest tax increase. He could call the Soviet Union the Evil Empire and then negotiate arms-control agreements. He played the balance and the music beautifully."

If she wins the Democratic nomination, Republicans may want to produce an ad from this exchange on Iraq:

Question: ... Are you looking to end this war or win it?

CLINTON: I'm looking to bring our troops home ... .

Sorry kids, but here is a hit at Obama. What was with the "Talk to the hand” stance he kept doing with Hillary? He kept putting his hand out and up where her face was in looking at him as they debated. Check it out. I hope CNN replays the Debate. Man, this is fun! I feel like all the comments are helping them in some weird way.

CNN- all the controversies in this campain have been a small flames but CNN is fanning them into a bonfire. You are ,either by omission or commission, changing the political agenda. Your reports are more biased than any candidate ever thought of being. There isn't a doubt in anyone's mind who CNN is supporting and who CNN is against. Shame on you. I honestly think that you are not only doing it to have something to talk now about now but you are afraid if you do not help Obama into the Whitehouse, the other candidates won't give you enough to criticize. You would have a field day with Obama if he is elected so you are doing what you can to discredit and mock the only viable opponent. Again, shame on you. There are enough problems in the world without CNN creating them where they do not exist. Fortunately, for the U.S., I think most people are smart enough to see through your "yellow journalism".

I think Clinton and Edwards performed very well. Obama is incredibly charismatic and can give an absolutely amazing speech, but debates just aren't a flattering venue for him. Hillary is almost the opposite. Obama went into the debate aggressively, hoping to discredit the Clintons and put Hillary on the defensive. I think this backfired on some occasions and it was pretty clear that he spent most of the debate playing defense.

Hillary's goal was to use the issues to keep Obama on the defensive, take him away from his message of change, hope, and inspiration, and force him into mud-slinging and throwing out accusations. I think she accomplished this (though she does sometimes come off as angry). I don't know if this debate will change any outcomes in South Carolina or lure any of the state's black vote back into the Clinton camp, but I think it will benefit her on Super Tuesday since it was the most-watched Primary debate in cable news history.

And I actually didn't mind the fighting. I think it's important that the candidates call eachother out, challenge records, and fight amongst themselves during the primary. It's a good way of testing who can and cannot survive a general election, because we all know that the Republican candidate and the RNC aren't going to shy away from doing all of that and more. It might be divisive, but I think it's important that the candidates are vetted before they get the nomination.

None of them performed perfectly, but I'd give Edwards an A, Clinton an A-, and Obama a B.

Wolf I've watched every debate and this was definitely one of the best.

Please take questions for the Los Angeles debate as well. If there is no forum to post such questions here is mine:

The South Carolina debate presented a unique opportunity to carry a theme of addressing issues of racial inequality, yet no candidate mentioned the very similar racial inequalities facing Latinos in the United States. Why did you not seize the opportunity to unite the struggles of African-Americans and Latinos in your dialogue focusing on race? And, what do you uniquely provide as a presidential candidate that will help to mobilize Latinos in November to feel as an included part of the democratic base, particularly if against John McCain, who has a more progressive stance on immigration reform than his party?

Thanks.

What debate?

Negative campaign is why the american people lacks interest in politics.

Maybe this is the reason why both parties do this. Without a third choice, the public cannot really voice their concerns...

Maybe we can put on the November ballot "None of the Above"....

Like the line in Mr. Smith Goes To Washington, "I don't care who gets licked in a fair fight," but it's time for Hillary to be Hillary not Bill's wife. She's been canned and vague throughout the whole process and theatrical when she was falling behind. Now she's pumping up the volume with Bill who has a responsibility as a former President to not use his sure starting to rev up that "machine" as much as Mr. Smith's Jim Taylor ever did. Hillary's a smart woman. She can throw her own punches if she needs to.

As for Barack Obama, I think he simply needs to respond – in a quiet manner – that he needs to correct misconceptions made by Hillary, Bill or both since there is, at this time, no distinction. I can't tell which Clinton is running at this point either and that wasn't the case pre-Iowa.

John Edwards has some intriguing ideas, but I wouldn't vote for him for President of the United States. I don't believe he can't translate his ideas into solutions.

I thought the Clintons stood for noble causes such as righting the wrongs against the poor, the disadvantaged, people of color and the like. One would think they would both applaud and lend their support and aid to a person who has managed to rise above certain societal barriers to run for the highest post in our country. Instead they are doing everything they can to discredit and destroy a good, decent soul who is calling for an end to partisanship in governance of our nation. It is clear they have been hypocrites all along. Sigh. Where is the honor any more? Not that I am naive, but surely some news media and political analysts should have asked this question already – why haven't they?

FIRST AND FOREMOST:

THERE ARE NOT ONLY THREE CANDIDATES LEFT. THERE ARE ONLY THREE CANDIDATES CNN WANTS TO HEAR FROM. THIS IS NOT DEMOCRACY AND WOLF, YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF YOURSELF FOR PERPETRATING THE LIE THAT THERE ARE "ONLY THREE" CANDIDATES ON BALLOTS ACROSS THE USA. I WANT TO HEAR FROM ALL OF THEM SO I CAN MAKE MY CHOICE.

Wolf...

I think you did a great job! What I don't like to see at a debate is the moderator intentionally trying to trip up a candidate or being disrespectful of them. Just look at the FOX debates – how rude were they? You spoke clear, showed intelligence and confidence and most importantly respect. It was your job to try to keep them on track. Again – GREAT job!! And that's coming from the vantage point of not liking how most of the media has tried to control the outcome of the election and marginalizing other candidates to the point that they had no chance at all and had to drop out. Stand proud of being a decent and honest man – Congratulations!! This is the type of responsible and professional journalism that America wants!!!!!!

obama started a war he could not win, people in the media like chris matthewesand good morning joe are in love with him and blame hillary for every thing.hillary stood up for herself,way to go hillary.i will not vote for obama .bill is doing what the media will not do ,ask obama what he stands for.

I watched the Decocratic Debate last nite. IN all honety i enjoyed the headed debate. However i was extremely disappointed ath Wolf Blitzer. I dont feel he handled the job fairily. It seemed it ws a debate for Clinton and Obama. Edwards didnt get a fair shake. Whats whats up Wolf. I was shocked at your way of handeling thing. One good thing came ut of this mess. It gave EDWARDS the little time he had, a time to shine and be the most specific of all three candidates. It made me think "is a clinton-Edwards ticket" possible. I liek all three BUT I dont think Obama is experienced to handing all our country's problems. I think Obama coudl be a good future president after he learns more and gets more experience. We cannot vote in a president now wh ois in training. We must elect a president yo can on day ONE go in a do a150%

Terrific job, Wolf.

I have watched a lot of debates; this is go to be one of the best. Participants should be able to challenge each other directly, and they did.

I saw the true Obama last night, he is a light weight. Edwards deserves to be nominated.

I have no idea what people expect. If someone makes false statements consistently about you are you going to just sit back and let the accusations fly? Hell no. You call them on the carpet about it. I am so excited that Obama finally decided to confront "Billary" and expose her and her husband's dirty campaign tactics.

Then you have African American calling Bill the first Black President! Give me a break. What did he ever do for African Americans other than go to their churches, court their votes and open an office in Harlem because the rent is cheaper? They are being used and still don't get it. It's still a sad day for African Americans.

Hillary touts her 35 years of experience but now speaks of change. Hell, she's been part of the problem for 35 years so why didn't she make changes while she was getting experience? We really do need change now! The only new and fresh democrat is Barak Obama. He's got my vote and anybody else's I can influence.

Hillary Clinton, per ususal did an outstanding job in the South Carolina debate. It amazes me that people are so blinded by Obama's weak record and even weaker responses that they feel he is the victim. He started slinging the mud and appeared to drown in it throughout the night. Even John Edwards, who has his nose up his behind looking for another VP ride, was appaled by the 130+ Present Votes and not offering Universal Healthcare. Did anyone catch the comment that "In Illinois we can vote present, it's not like congress". Maybe he should spend a little more time in Congress and learn from the Pro's. Since he is "not a very good Chief Operating Officer". Amazing! I'm a huge Clinton supporter and will follow her to Denver and then the White House...

Did you guys even notice that when edwards confronted Hillary about having lobbiest and special interest people work in the white house if she is elected, that she didnt give a straight answer?

Come on America I know you guys are smarter than that.

Obama 08'

Wolf, you were smart to stay out of the way.
Hillary continues to spar with her long talons and Obama skillfully deflects each blow.
Hillary supporters all talk about action. Anyone can take steps. Hillary talks about good management. We have lots of managers, dime a dozen.
But, few people can make the right choices. Few people can lead with vision.
Visionaries can hire managers to get things done. But managers seldom hire visionaries.
If America does not want to spend another four years working themselves into pointless frenzy, they should elect Barack Obama.

response to: AL in Mesa Az

It's unfortunate that the only reason why you are voting for Hillary Clinton is because you have superiority complex. Just because Latino's are the largest minority group doesn't mean that the black influence isn't vital to the national campaign. To be honest, Latino's and African Americans have very similar struggles in our society. If we could find a way to stick together instead of defaming one another then we will see unbelieveable changes in our communities.

This message comes from an African American woman who lives in a predominately Latino neighborhood, who's best friend of 13 years is Latin and who has all the respect in the world for racial/social equality.

Vote for the right reasons. Because you believe in the message of the candidate and because the candidate is capable of carrying out their promises. Not because of the color of their skin and not because you have disdain for a certain racial group.

Last night's debate, despite the nitpicking, insult-flinging, and rhetoric between Senators Obama and Clinton, illustrated a few things that I have thought for a long time now:

1. I would still choose any of them over any of the Republicans, and I could find something nice (and something not-so-nice) to say about each of them.
2. That said, with all due respect to all of them, John Edwards appeared to be the candidate who, in the little time allotted to him to speak, elevated the discourse and attempted to steer the discussion back to the issues at hand.
3. However, I feel that John Edwards, in the typical fashion of late, was not given an equal amount of time or attention. This is the first election in which I am eligible to vote, and I am really excited to see a lot of young people getting "involved" in the election, but I would really, really like to see more of them (actually, this applies to people of all ages) do their homework when it comes to choosing a candidate to support. The media shouldn't do it for them, but the reality is, CNN and other mainstream media networks ARE one of the primary sources of "information" for most Americans, and as one of the more objective (at least compared with Fox etc.) stations available with election coverage, I feel that it is your responsibility as good journalists to give all of the candidates an equal opportunity to tell the world what they have to say. Interestingly, despite being alloted less time last night, I feel that Edwards said more of substance than the other two combined.

Good job, Wolf! Thanks for allowing Obama & Clinton to battle it out. I'm especially glad that Obama addressed all the lies and half-truths eminating from the "Billiary" twosome who are BOTH running for president. Last night's debate brought out the nagging shrew in Hilliary and evidence that she feels that she's ENTITLED to the Presidency. There was a time when I had admiration for the Clintons, but their sneaky tactics in this race against Obama in the recent weeks have revealed their true characteristics. Obama definitely has my vote!!

I think the American people saw the real candidates and where the stand on the issues. It was great Obama was made to answer some tough questions. Voters the decision is yours to seperate the Women/men from the girls/boys.

Wolf, great job keep it up, so that candidates will not be hiding under stump speeches that reveal nothing of them....

Yes, Wolf, yes. I agree with you 100 percent. All good. Yep.

Last nights Democratic debate was, to say the least, a lively interaction among people who.......................knew each other. It was nice to see a little life in the candidates who want the most important job in this country (if not the world). After watching some of the Republican debates, it was nice to see something moving rather than just lips. It would have been nice to hear a little more from Sen. Edwards, but when he did finally get the opportunity to speak, he took full advantage of it. Considering the economy issue, at least the candidates seemed to be aware of the fact that there was a problem. I listened to the Republicans today, and each candidate that I heard talking today were talking about abortion and tax breaks to the wealthy. Didn't we do that in 2000 and 2004? And where did that get us? I was for Edwards before the debate, and nothing changed that at the end of the debate.
And Wolf, or who really bothers to read these things, please tell Lou Dobbs that being an Independent sounds great, but in Florida, because it is a closed priimary, and there are no Independent candidates, Independents can't vote in the primary. Until that changes, the best we can do is be of independent thought.

The system need to stop given Obama and Edward free ride. Every time I turn on the TV someone is blasting the Clinton's. During the debate last nite Obama was the first one to blast Bill Clinton.

All these comments that are negative reactions to Sen. Obama's performance last night convince me that the Clinton attack strategy is working. He had to defend himself against the charges that he endorsed Ronald Reagan, that he is a "secret" Muslim, that he hasn't held a consistent position on the war. He had to dispel these mis-representations many of which are directly attributable to Hillary and Bill. If he doesn't defend himself, he will go the same way McCain did against the dirty tricks from the Bush Campaign. The Clinton's have forced Obama into a defensive position instead of focusing on his promising message of reaching across party lines. I'm afraid we are in for at least 4 years of the hateful partisanship led by a bitter Hillary Clinton. For her, a majority is 50 + 1, for Obama it is a plurality.

I thought the Democratic debate last night was great! At last we got to hear ALL three candidates challenge each other 's records, get to some unanswered questions, and John Edwards finally stood on his own hill and tooted his own horn. I like the John Edwards I saw last night. I liked that real stuff finally came out, and that there were serious discussions among them. I really like it when John Edwards said it’s O.K. for us to argue about an issue that needed details brought out for the voters to be able to see exactly what their stances are. I like it that we got to see who has the stamina to keep standing when the issues are tough. During this time in our nation we are going to need someone that can with stand the pressure, keep on working toward the goals that are important to the well being of Americans and the world. We are going to have to lead the way back to unity on this planet, lead in energy independence with renewal energy sources like sun and wind, create a more equal balance for all people, not just white, not just black, not just brown, but for human kind. That’s a dream that is worth my hope, and my vote. I WANT TO KNOW WHAT THEY’VE DONE, WHAT THEY HAVEN’T DONE, NOT ALL IS AS TRANSPARENT AS ONE MIGHT SAY. WOLF, KEEP UP THE DEBATES.

The facilitator should bear some of the blame for the fireworks set off during the South Carolina debate. I would like for you to show us the question that was asked just before the first attack. I think one of the candidates was ask to respond to an allegation that was made by another candidate. That question had nothing to do with the issues. The questions asked during a debate should be related to issues. Please, don't throw flames on the fire. We deserve more from you.

As I watch this debate from north of the border I can see one thing developing. That would be the possability of another Republican administration. Both of these candidates (Obama vs. Clinton) have their faults but here is how I generally see it. Clinton is too polarizing to win a general election, people either love or hate her as with most things Clinton, she will push moderates away from the democrats and Obama is an unknown commodity. In the end a strong Republican candidate might be able to skewer both with their "stomp my feet until I get what I want" debating. I am afraid for Americans and the fact they might have to endure another Reblican administration.

Even though Obama tried to not make this campaign about race, it has become about race. Blame Bill Clinton for that. By the time Hillary wins the nomination, she will have angered many African Americans. There will then be a White backlash. Thanks Democratic party for doing so much to bring the country together.

I think CNN knew the questions to ask in order to get the fight started. Listening today to Wolf I see he was disappointed that we didn't fall for it. I hope at the debate on the 31st they ask questions on the issuss and not try to start another fight.

There was a time when we watched CNN for fair news reporting. That has changed during this campaign season. Wof Blitzer coulld qualify as Obama's
campaign manager and Cafferty's hate for the Clinton Family is reflected in almost every word that comes out of his mouth on the political subject. So much for fair reporting. We still watch Tony Harris who may be the only professional left on CNN but for the most part, we have gone back to ABC and Charles Gibson to watch the news the way it should be reported.

I absolutely hate seeing all this bickering. It makes me feel like I can't dicuss politics with anyone because it has become so divisive. I know the candidates are looking for differences, etc. to illustrate their points but this is ridiculas. However, I think the media has started a lot of this by provoking the candidates, starting rumors, putting words in their mouths and definately showing bias against Hillary and giving Barack a free ride. I guess it's not doing him any favors if he does get the nomination because he will be in shock when the Republicans get started.

I think it's clear from the debate that none of those mini-brained super egos sees gaining the presidency as anything other than a means to greater fame, fortune and power for themselves..

Wolf Blitzer does not qualify to narrate a Junior High Debate. CNN should be ashamed of their selves for giving Blitzer the microphone. He is a complete disgrace to CNN. GET HIM OFF TV.

Edwards was the clear winner. I am a lifelong Democrat but will have to take a look at McCain if either Obama or Clinton are nominated. How foolish the demos are if the throw away this oportunity by running either Obama or Clinton.

I'm stunned! You agree with no criticism on any strategy you have employed during any debate. It must be nice to be so complacent in your utter mediocrity.

Hey BLITZER. How many times are you going to say "the best political team on tv"??????? Your driving us nuts. Please STOP!!

Hillary did just fine last night. Obama was clearly the bully looking for a fight. Clinton answered the first question, and Barack started whining about everything he said was settled in the last debate. He would have been great as a colonist enumerating a list og grievances to King George. I think she got inside his head and he went nuclear. It takes thick skin to politick at this level. We need a leader that's not going to blink when staring down the next threat to our nation. A leader who is ready on Day One in the WH. A leader who can grasp the mind-boggling scope of so many difficult problems we have. And, yes, that person must have some measure of organization and organizational skills.Y ou just can't forget where you put the key to "the suitcase." I would feel comfortable with Hillary...and yes, with Bill being there ,too.

If voters do not know where these canidates stand on issues by now... You have not been paying attention. Go to the websites, compare the policies, reserch the things you have questions on or the things you do not understand.

These canidates have been repeating themselves for a year now. How could you really not know where they stand? These canidates are spending obsence amounts of money to get you to vote for them. Money that would solve major issues with homelessness and hunger in this country and you are saying you are still confused. PLEASE....

Edwards so clearly rose above the other two that to deny it is to simply admit that the media do not want him rattling their cages. He was articulate, well-studied, thoughtful, and clearly able to lead.

HE was the only one debating. The other two were politicking. Please stop trying to tell us who our candidate is going to be. We saw the debate and can judge for ourselves. Edwards was the only president on that stage.

I think there are some issues that are worth mentioning . I have watched CNN's reporting especially Wolf's subtle messagess meant to sabotage Barrack's chances. Cases in point, Barrack raised the issue of the falling stock markets and Wolf retorted "no one knows what will happen tomorrow" The whole day today on the situation room, Wolf clearly was so crafty on how he presented issues as if to say the heated debated between the three senators was somehow Barrack and Hillary sniping at each other when in fact before the debate he suggested fireworks. When you get fireworks, you then present it as if it were not childish. For a month now Barrack's record has been embellished by the Clinton campaign.

Wolf-

Hillary's Rezko shot was in RESPONSE to Obama's below the belt Wal-mart jab. Not the other way around. Come on, you were there, you can do better than that.

Wolf, I used to like the Clintons and didnt understand why Reps hated them... now seeing the Clinton's true colors, Ive decided to vote for the Rep nominee if Hill/Bill win the nomination. Thats right... Bill and Hill will say/do anything to get back to the Whitehouse.

If Clintons win, we will see partisan politics and games at their best.

Hopefully, both Clinton and Obama learned a lesson on how to stay out of the elementary school yard. That turned a lot of folks off both of them.

I know that the economy is big at the moment, but I would like to see some discussion of energy, climate change and the candidates plans to reduce our carbon footprint in the world. Same questions to the republicans candidates.

The economy goes up and down, but the future of the planet is at stake with our trashing the environment.

After being on the fence about Edwards or Obama, after last night's debate, and I had to vote right now, Edwards would get my vote. I went to Elko and listened to Obama and I was deeply moved. That is not what I saw last night. I understand you need to defend yourself, but to give those snipey comments was disappointing. I still believe that Obama and or Edwards would make excellent Presidents & Vice Presidents.

Obama speaks of uniting America. But on yesterdays debate he revealed his plan for unifying the country. He is betting the Democrats are going to win many more seats on both Houses, and then all these Democrats are just going to line up behind him and do what he think is good for the country. I do believe his intentions are really good, but a bit naive. Even if the Democrats won all the seats on both Houses, they will never agree on much. We need someone more centered. To handle both sides of the aisle.

as a matter of fact obama didn't start the feud, the clinton campaign did – in the days before the debate, understood. I understand that obama had to respond to those "inaccurate" (obama) accusations, and therefore if you want to blame someone for the fight blame hillary/Bill

Has any moderator asked a question....how do you feel you can help retirees make ends meet with the cost of living going higher each year? Retirees DO pay income taxes...salaries are higher than 20 years ago,,,please make that clear if you have another debate. If was a joke to see Hillary try to compose herself. The minute her back gets against the wall, the TEARS will flow again,,,people will give her sympathy and vote for her,,,husband, (slick Willie who cheated how many times? (too many to count!) her mother and Chelsea are in the act now like she 'deserves' to be president. The whole campaign is a fiasco and we don't need comments from Canada...keep your politics north of the border. We don't interfere with you-stay out of ours. Obama had every right to ask–which Clinton am I running with? She snapped "I'm here". Edwards was sitting like a clam waiting to express his views....no fairness in equal time among the candidates was displayed. However, Obama finally got his message out--he's ready for DAY ONE behind the oval desk..am sure Michelle won't be advising him!!

Excellent job Wolf - However, I have a few suggestions:

Pose questions to the candidates about legislation they have supported and VOTED FOR - check them for their records and actions. And furthermore, the serious issues we are facing today - the plummeting economy, the flailing job market, and health care.

Obama clearly VOTED PRESENT for some of these serious issues - I would have loved to have seen him explain why he DID NOT VOTE for increased funding for Farm Bill programs, or why he DID NOT VOTE for funding of OB/GYN health care in rural areas.

I thought we weren't supposed to see color or gender. It's about the issues and where the candidate stand on these issues, so why would Clinton looses some of the black votes if Obama didn't get the nomination. The idea of if a black doesn't get the nomination I won't vote seems a little racest to me.

Wolfe,

Also, I agree with Tina, she states that the spouse's of Obama and Edwards are allowed to attack presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, and the media double standards this issue because Bill Clinton is a male. It make no difference, he has the same rights as Mrs. Obama and Mrs. Edwards. Cut the unfairness, I have started watching Fox News Channel more often now than CNN, becuase of CNN's bias against the Clintons and the favortism for Obama. Fox is much better at reporting the news fairly and honestly and letting us decide. (the viewers-Customers).

Please, I ask that your news people report the news, and quit making personal wise cracks about their personal perceptions.

Hope CNN can get with the program!

Hillary Clinton, for President 2008!

To Wolf Blitzer: You are okay in my book as long as you don't favor either side in this campaign. I thought you favored Ms. Clinton at first.

I think you did a good job last night. Thank you very much.

First let me say – GO Hillary! Though I think Edwards may have come out on top in last night's debate, I thoroughly enjoyed the entire 2 hours. Thanks for doing such a great job Wolf and for making the choice to let them spar a little. It was very telling and didn't bode too well for Obama. Just my .02.

Present yourself in an appealing manner, of course; however, be ready to defend everything that you stand for or are; and don't let them get away with the argument, all of this is great training. Look, I do support Hillary. Nevertheless; I also support Democrats far, far more than Republicans. Yes, I know there are good, kind hearted Republicans, but they still have their own interest. They have a certain philosophy on their approach to governing. That is why they are Republicans and others are Democrats, or Green party, etc. Sorry, don't get on my case here. I want our philosophy, the Democratic philosophy defended. In my opinion, being a Democrat is taking a stand on what you believe as a group. What do we believe as Democrats? Why are you Obama people Democrats? Why are you Hillary people Democrats? Why are you for Senator Edwards? What have they done that impresses you? Give me something real that we would find easily. Don't tell people to go to a site. Just tell them. You believe something, tell us. Why do you support who you support? Also ask yourself; what will most people think is important. I want Republicans to do the same thing. Let's have that kind of conversation. Also, what’s with all the cuss words in the various comments? Aren't there enough words in the acceptable language that you can use people? Let’s all make our arguments look good. Oh yeah and Barack started it!

I cannot see the Clinton appeal, this country isn't supposed to be run by a dynasty.
Hillary may be smart ,but, legislatively Obama has more experience and I would trust Edwards more that the Clinton's. I am over 50, a social studies teacher and I have at least four other professional women friends who feel as I do. Yes, to a woman in the white house but not because she was first lady or wife of a governor. Obama can take the heat and he proved it last night. It was a great debate and I thought Mr. Blitzer did a fine job of letting the candidates speak out. I would say it was the best debate I have watched, ever. Thank you, CNN. I am ready for either Edwards or Obama to unite the country and get the country back on track.

I have always said being a Democrat I would vote for the nominee. But, after watching how Hillary and Bill try to divide and conquer and become mean spirited, I am now committed NOT to vote for Hillary under any circumstances. I hope Obama wins, but Hillary has put that foul taste back in my mouth with that less than sincere smile and Wicked Witch of the West demeanor. We know what you're up to Hillary, how about being human for once and energize the party and work together instead of using pit bull bill and then hiding behind him acting as if you are innocent? This has the potential to wreck the party. As a SC voter, I'll vote for Obama or Edwards if they are the nominee, otherwise, I'll vote Republican for the first time ever.

On a more serious note, I think Wolf did the best job he could have done. I think that the candidates were each trying to promote themselves and demote their fellow candidates, including Edwards. Many people have said that Edwards was mature, but that isn't exactly true. Edwards also made comments about the other two candidates, maybe not as many as Senator Barak Obama and Senator Hillary Clinton but he did make a few jabs.

Personally, I think that Hillary's comments have been manipulative and she has been distorting comments by Obama and deliberately misrepresenting his voting record since day one, and I am sick of it. However, Obama isn't innocent because he recently decided to take part in the 'mud slinging'. Whether or not that is Obama's fault though is a separate issue because if he is constantly being attacked he needs to respond, which I think we saw a lot of last night.

Unfortunately we have come to expect this negativity. It is depressing that our politics has stooped to this low level and commands such little respect. The political game played today is a disgrace to our founding fathers and the system which they worked so hard to establish. Politics today should be less about politicking and more about their plans to improve the country.

I also think that what we saw last night was your typical political clash. Every election, presidential, senate, governor, etc., we see these dirty nasty politics. Quite frankly I'm sick of them because there are ways to promote yourself without degrading your opponents. The presidential election shouldn't be about power, and the candidates shouldn't be as concerned about their personal gain in the election, they and the election should be about who is going to help the United States prosper, gain respect, and do the most justice for the country. I think that that is the most important thing that the media, candidates, and American people should focus on.

Everybody knows Obama started it with the ridiculous WalMart comment. The only reason Obama survived yesterday was because the audience was on his side: otherwise, he was pretty much getting hammered by Hillary and Edwards. And I noticed also noticed that Obama continuously avoided questions posed to him by both Hillary and Edwards and tried to use his skills with words to meander out of answering these questions. This is why I don't think he is ready to be president.

I don't blame CNN or the media in general for the lack of substance in the debate or in election coverage. If there was no audience for glorified, star-struck, trivial news, they would not be running or printing it. Last night was good, entertaining tv, like an episode of Survivor or American Idol. The value we might have seen in John Edwards' positions and policy plans were muted by the others. Unfortunately, Senator Edwards is not a rock star in comparison to his components.

I thought the so-called "squabbling" between Hilary and Obama was great! This is what DEBATES are about…real engagement, back and forth, and excitement. But I don't call that squabbling; it is the fine art of debating. Seriously, the debates in America are so boring; but last night's debate kept me listening and kept my family, who was watching it with me, reacting to it throughout the debate. I want to see more debates like that! I think you did a fine job Wolf!

I appreciated the format of the debate and the opportunity for the candidates to let loose. One thing really bothered me, however. The fact that the arrangement of the candidates was the same for both parts of the debate. Both Hilary Clinton and John Edwards had an open side throughout the debate. Barack Obama was trapped in the middle the whole time and the appearance was that he was being attacked from both sides.

Could that not have been predicted? Why not a round table with all equal at least for the second session?

CNN definitely helped plant the seeds that started those outbursts with their questions to the candidates. You knew exactly what you were doing. CNN is showing partiality, and that is ugly. Shame on you.

Can anyone imagine Joe Biden, Chris Dodd or Bill Richardson acting as childish, disconnected, selfish and foolish as both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton did last night? Thanks to Iowa and New Hampshire for choosing the celebrity candidates who are either too vacuous (Obama) or too narcissistic (Clinton) to care about genuine issues and address them in a way that exudes confidence, understanding and expertise.

The debates have been wak in getting at the canidates position on important issues.

The Mdia has fanned – perhaps unintentionally – the back-biting.

I'm watching your program right now & why don't you come out and just say to the viewers that you endorse Obama. CNN has become so biased that its not even funny. Edwards & Clinton have not got a chance with you, Cafferty, Malveau, or most of the other reporters on CNN. What did they ever do to you?? I've been home sick today so have watched CNN almost all day and this is disgusting.
I thought the news was supposed to be fair and not opinionated. Talk about Bill O....you guys are getting just like him.

WOLF, GREAT JOB....BUT CAN YOU TELL ME WHY THE MEDIA (ESPECIALLY CNN ANCHORS) REALLY AND TRULY SEEM TO BE ALMOST ENDORSING BARACK OBAMA AND ARE SO HYPERCRITICAL OF THE CLINTONS?!

CONCERNED IN PA.

Hillary showed herself just exactly as she is–mean spirited and power hungry and getting desperate. How intelligent is a woman that time after time for years refuses to see that her husband is cheating on her and publicly lies about it? Last night, it seemed as if she was TRYING to take credit for anything/everything that Bill Clinton did. How can she take credit for anything? The main job she was given while her husband was president was to find a solution for health care and she MISERABLY FAILED while spending tremendous amounts of money holding dinners to discuss health care.
I must admit that I am now considering voting for Obama. Time will tell.

The winner last night? I think it was a tie - Edwards and Clinton.

Edwards, for what little time he was allowed to interject in the Obama Hour Show, was concise and actually directly answered the questions on the floor.

Clinton – for being able to withstand the temper tantrum antics of Obama last night and hammer home her points. What I find ironic –Hilary has taken hits for the last 16 years quietly. Last night she finally really spoke up and people were turned off.

Clinton and Edwards both directly asked Obama about his voting record and his response? It's a state practice for Illinois. I am a resident of IL and yes, unfortunately, it is a BAD HABIT of Illinois representatives to vote PRESENT. It's a COP OUT. For an individual running a campaign theme of TIME FOR CHANGE - he'd better learn to vote like an adult.

I will wholeheartedly agree that the focus of the debate should NOT have been the spar between Obama and Hilary. I'm sensing Obama is starting to feel the slide. He was directly asked the question by two individuals about his voting record and still couldn't answer the question - not presidential material in my opinion!

Wow...amazing. After more than two weeks of the Clinton slime machine constantly trying to ruin Obama, he finally defends himself and everyone here thinks Hillary was the better of the two?

Yeah, continue to convince yourself Hillary is the better of the two...that's exactly what the Republicans want.

Edwards was the clear winner last night. No more squabbling, and more media coverage for edwards would be nice.

CNN clearly favours Hillary Clinton. She gets a lot of air time, while Obama gets "quoted" most of the time. His records and statements are questioned as though CNN is on the Clinton Campaign. When will she be put on the defensive?

This was the best debate yet!!!!

Hillary has not missed a beat. She is a political star who is READY TO LEAD.

We don't need another President who will learn on the job. Experience speaks louder than inspirational speeches. Hope our citizens get to see this. I also want to make a point, being a Michigan resident that Hillary was the only one out of the top 3 Democratic candidates on the ballot during our primaries. Even though MI Democratic primaries didn't allocate delegates to the candidates Hillary made sure that her supporters had their voices heard. Obama and Edwards keep talking about every single voice counting, how about fighting for the people of Michigan?

Wolf did a great job yesterday! We need to know who can hold it together under pressure and who stumbles.

Hillary will say anything to get elected. Her attacks on Obama continue to turn off people, and if she wins the nomination several democrats will go ahead and vote for McCain.

I couldn't agree more with the fellow's comments from Conway, SC, Wolf seems to look for questions that stir the pot, invitations for candidate comparisons versus invitations for discuss platform and issue differences. abcnews held the best debate in New Hamshire, I don't believe that had anything to do with the number of debators, but the intent and purpose to fill out candidate answers on the issues. Wolf, watch a tape of that debate, watch it two or three times and try to emulate.

Hey I think it was good you decide to keep quiet on the debate, sometimes you interfere too much. You a great anchor but I think its time for you to come forward and say you supporting Obama, you are making it to obvios...look at the tapes of the situation room how you introduce the topics , sometimes its too much budddy. Just a thought....dont forget you a moderator.

Wolf I expected you to step in and I'm glad you didn't. Obama showed everyone he is not good under pressure He hem and hawed and IF IF IFed himself into a corner. He started something he could not finish....He is a good speaker with a prepared speech. No time for rewrites when the mike is on.

I can only echo that which has already been said, and add, please, more of the same! Healthy conflict delineates, and all three candidates did a fine job of showing us their strong sides.

Hillary, honed by years of vicious opposition attacks, remained centered, unwavering, in terrific command of substantive facts, and able to take it all in stride, with laughs and smiles. Who else could I want -in negotiation, diplomacy, and defense – representing the American people? (That's a rhetorical question, Obama fans.)

Wolf,

Why did you not ask the question why all three Dem candidates voted not to have English as our primary language????????????????

On Obama I have seen pics where he is on stage with Hillary and Bill Richardson and they both have there hands over their hearts during the national anthem while Obama would not. Have him address this.

What about gun control, abortion and gay rights?????????????????

These are important issues although not Dem stong points still issues that are important.

Thanks

I think the Clinton camp has got it backwards. Hillary and Bill are the ones who are frustrated Because they can't get rid of Obama. He may not win the nomination but i hope he gives them Hell all the way to the end. I thought the Clintons were the Champions of the Blacks. Its a little different when a black person runs against them. All of the sudden they turn white again.

I'm glad the candidates had the opportunity to speak, and speak freely. I've grown tired of distorted facts and those who have long continued to use them as a tool to divide us. Wolf did a great job, thank you. As a result, I was so clear on who to vote for that I did so today – I cast my ballot by taking advantage of early voting in my state. And I cast that ballot in hopes we can begin to rid our government of folks who purposely distort facts, who have been in Washington way too long. No repeats please. Thank you.

Wolf,
Your job is not to restrain interaction among candidates. That interaction is the essence of debates. The conduct of the candidates is their own responsibility. If they cannot maintain a civil tone with each other, that is not your fault.

I think it's terrible how the media gets away with not allowing all candidates to speak on every issue and given the same amount of time. There were several instances in last night's debate where J Edwards had to insist on his time and/or a response and you still catered to Hillary and Obama before recognizing Edwards. There are alot of us that would truly like to hear what Edwards has to say whether the media wants us to or not. There are alot of us that are tired of only hearing about Hillary and Obama. Some of us would like the opportunity to see if we have other options. We all know that the more media a candidate gets, the more popular they become. I think it's a sin that in the end, because of the media's bias attention to their favorites, it leaves the nation with only the media's picks to vote for. The only reason Hillary and Obama are the front runners is because there is no media attention for anyone else. This should not be the year for a popularity contest !! I would love to see history be made but only if it's being made due to honest and fair coverage, giving the people the right to hear all candidates views.

A debate with smoke screen and blame shuffling politics from Clinton and Obama. It would seem that maybe the American voter is tired of this type of in fighting. Is this the type of bipartisanship that the American people are looking for from their President? Candiates that can’t get along amoung themselves, do they truly expect to address the important issues facing this country?

Barack seems a lot less tainted and cynical by his shorter time in politics, that's actually a strength, not a weakness. He will be able to make better decisions because of this.

while wolf asked obama to respond to the charge of having lawyered for a slum-lord, he did not ask hillary to speak to the issue of her serving on the board of wal-mart. i think all panel members should state the fact as soon as the candidate says something contrary to the fact. e.g. hillary said obama supported reagan policies. that is factually a lie. we would hope that a person with 35 years experience expecting to become president would after listening to the tape of obama's comments would be be able to understand the english language. is she a bill in group three ( slow students). prpbably not – just plain lies. the situation room personnel knew it, but chose not to challenge. while edwards gets the adult title in the debate but no got no questions on his record as a senator. quite a contrast to his current "its personal with me" check it out!

I think that Wolf did a horrible job of moderating, more so than any other debate so far. He had no control over the candidates.

Hey Wolf, you did a great job, still would have liked to hear more about what the candidates thought on more issues, but next time. It was very entertaining and educational. I believe obama won the debate especially after being double teamed by Hillary , Bill and John. Also wolf, did you pay attention to when Hillary continued to cut obama off when he was speaking but when Hillary was talking, Obama gave her time to express herself. Obama actually started raising his hand like he was in school. He is polite, courteous and exactly what we need in the Whitehouse. He listens and responds to the questions. The other candidates give more rethoric. And by the way, obama didn't start the mudslinging, he was forced into the war. But at least voters can see that he has heart to go for the juggler when forced into a corner. But I guess if attacked we shouldn't respond.

Keep up the good work Wolf, also this will be the first year I vote and I'm 34, and Obama gets it

It seems to me, in reading all of the comments, that we have more than a few females commenting negatively (hatefully, really) on Hillary Clinton. There is one type of women who – no make that three types – who are down on Clinton: those who admire her but fear she canpt win, Republican's and the never-got-anywhere-in-life types who are eaten up with jealousy for a woman who did.

The debate didn't change my mind on Obama – his easily shaken 'cool', his anger and lashing out were so apparent that my gut reaction to him was reinforced. My up-to-now favorite, Clinton, showed her amazing control and lighting fast intellect. It's why I am a regular contributer to her campaign. What was a wonderful surprise was my resurgence of admiration for John Edwards – a feeling that I had lost over the last months. In fact, I sat down and made another contribution to John Edwards last night.

The African-Americans appear to be joining forces for Obama, which is as incomprehensible as the support they gave O.J. Simpson. And, as capable as Clinton is-and this is heartbreaking to a feminist like me to admit-there's still too much opposition to a liberal woman holding the highest office in the world...of the three, that leaves us John Edwards.

I just watch Obama respond about the attacks on his record from the Clinton campaign and what bothers me is that CNN allows him to make statements and not fact check him.

He stated that the Clinton campaign wants to go negative etc etc. If my memory serves me Hilliary remained on point throughout the campaigning UNTIL the Obama campaign kept calling in to question her judgement and her record on the issues.

His campaign went negative way before hers did

Thank you Wolf for the great debate (Democratic–Jan 21 2008). It was a bit contentious at times but like the pro that you are you kept it on track. I liked your smooth delivery and control of the program when it could have easily gotten out of hand.
Thanks
Al Dyer
Houston, Tx

I have been watching your segment that gave Obama time to air his position on inaccuracies and misrepresentations from last night's debate. I was looking forward to hearing the response from Clinton, but to no avail. You never allowed her time to state her views. I have found over your coverage and the media at large how you keep attempting to prop Obama up continually. Long ago I saw why. You would like to see him as the democratic candidate, not because of his wonderful attrributes, but because you along with Schneider are neocons who would rather McCain run against Obama then anyone else. Who you give air time to and how you slant their positions are fodder for people who do not have time to do their own research. How Obama rose to the front of the race with his little experience is thanks to people and media as yourself. Sadly, people such as Biden, Richardson and Dodd were not given the same opportunity. Our country is not one of democracy, but one of fascism.

I don't agree with everyone's glowing review of Wolf Blitzer. The chosen questions were largely vapid, meaningless ways of getting a foodfight started. Particularly offensive were his toadying questions like "The surge is working. So are you now going to try to end the war or win it?

Huh? The surge is working? Winning? Is that Karl Rove in a rubber Blitzer mask?

Further, he did everything he could to get the candidates to sink as low into the rhetorical mudbog as possible. He did everything short of saying "are you gonna let him get away with that?" And what was with the Fox-sitcom like audience? What kind of imbeciles shout "Whooooo" at political debates as if it were an episode of "Married With Children"?

Asking Obama if Bill Clinton was the first black president?

Asking why Martin Luther King would endorse you as a candidate?

It was as if Bill Kristol had engineered the whole event. Sorry. Wolfie's just Tucker Carlson with a beard. You can't see his knee pads through the baggy suit pants.

Hillary won. No doubt

This is in response to the person who thought that Obama was right on the dollar for predicting that the stock market would be down today. I'm sorry but this was not hard to predict. It made national news yesterday on every t. v. station that this would happen. I'm so surprised that this person didn't realize this before the debate. I could have predicted this and I'm not running for president. So, let's not give Obama so much credit. Go Hillary. You have my vote.

The problem with the debate was the issues were not debated. Why can't any moderator ask tough questions and require detailed answers. Instead, the ratings game was played out watching two candidates yap with one another on things not germain to the election.....

Come on CNN–do better.

If the media didn't stir up all these misinterpretations, then the candidates wouldn't feel they had to defend themselves or point out contradictions in their opponents when they have the camera to themselves.

Also, as a society we want to be entertained, not informed. Remember, Hollywood rules. That's why an actor makes millions a year, but a teacher, whose job is infinitely much more important makes only $35000 a year. And that's why someone as dumb as Reagan got to be president – who cared if he had a thought in his head? He was a handsome actor (some people's opinions...) and therefore he should be president on his looks and charm...

People claim it is childish to start slinging mud when it comes to a debate, but I beg to differ. If Kerry would have got his hands dirty a few times last election, we wouldn't be having a dem primary. Just a few draft dodging, balance busting comments from Kerry would have gone a long way to uneducated country- I'm not even a Kerry supporter by any means.
The debate was entertaining, and also it also let me know what kind of people are up for election.
Childish? Look at the imbacile in charge of our country now-even a child is an improvement...

I think all the moderators did a great job. I just don't understand why people think Obama started this. Remember New Hampshire people? Remember Bill Clinton playing fast and loose with the facts up there regarding Obama. I'm not even decided yet, I may even vote Republican this year. But you don't have to think back too far to remember Bill and Hillary started all this with half-truths and lies about Senator Obama. If he hadn't started in on her early, then he would have shown he couldn't stand up for himself. Bill and Hillary gave him no choice. They started it in NH, have kept it up since. Meanwhile, the most presidential of all was Edwards.

AS A BLACK REPLUBLICAN THAT WAS THE BEST DEBATE IN AMERICAN HISTORY. IT HAD EVERYTHING INCLUDEING THE KICTHEN SINK.IT DOES'NT GET ANY BETTER THAN THAT.WOW IT WAS PURE FIRE. SEMPER FI BARACK

The debate went ugly just as everyone expected. CNN asked questions that were sure to heat up the situation from a simmering boil. Obama had the right to address the negative comments said about him by Bill Clinton. CNN and other news outlets have pointed out that Bill's statements about Obama's prior votes and his comments on Regan were twisted from the actual facts. Hillary has Bill doing her dirty work and then she seems appalled that Obama is fighting back. Make no mistake about it, Hillary is going negative about Obama and Obama is fighting back. Neither camp is above the mess and if any voter makes their decision on voting based soley on this situation, then negative tactics have won out again. Let's not have another "Switf Boat" situation. Let's all demand clear representation of the issues. CNN should not have asked Obama about how he felt about Hillary's negative attacks on him as it doesn't foster an answer that helps people decide who will be the best President, only who can scrap in the school yard.

I did not care for the tenor of last night's debates because there was no real substance coming out of either Senator Clinton or Senator Obama.
I do not like Pres. Cl;inton's entering into the campaign in the manner that he has been. I think quite frankly, it's tacky. He is treating Senator Obama like one of his "old right wing adversaries" instead of a respected competior from the same party.
My suggestion to you is as follows; I have a little dog who sometimes goes crazy and starts barking at nothing I then get out the spray bottle, fill it with water and give her a splash. You might consider this technique at the next debate?

I think these canidates missed their opportunity to impress us. I feel short changed quie frankly.

You lost the bubble at the start by letting Billary ramble on and you Wolf tired to limit the 2 men. If was fun to watch knowing they are scared of John McCain and not worried about the Unites States and National Defense makes me more to vote republican like the rest of us educated folk.

Wolf,

The debates last night were very entertaining. Maybe the studios should hire those writers.

This was the best debate ever, Hilliary and Bill can no longer attack and lie on Obama and Edwards and not expect to be answered back. She started it and Obama finished. Clearly Obama won the debate and appeared more intelligent.

Tuesday, Jan. 22

Dear Wolf,

I have always had the highest respect for you, but hearing you speaking to John Johnson, on today's "Situation Room," you misrepresented the time frame. It was Hillary defending herself from Obama's attack. I believe that Obama orchestrated this to time with his recent TV ad.

Obama attacked Hillary first –about working for Walmart–she responded after his attack.

Play your tape if you don't belive me. I hope you can set the record straight.

Frank

PS. By the way, I'm a Republican.

it is quite unfurtunate that people in america have no idea of their tanished image in the outside world. not even britain is ready to play along the american tune like it did before. that makes obama the definate front-runner who has the image and ability to put america into the the limelight of favour from must countries in the world. clinton may brag about having 35years of experience. i would very much want to know exactly want field of experience she she seems to brag so much about. if it is 35years of experience as the bill's wife, then it is unquestionably true, but if she speaks about good governance then she lies to the people of the world at large and america specifically. one other field she may have experience is being a great actoress. she explixitly showed this to all who would watch during her new hamshire campaign. this is not a contest of who has the must socially accepted friends or who bought what house. it is about the best choice of president and it is OBAMA.

It was obvious from the beginning that CNN set up the questions to create the "fireworks" they are now touting. What bothered me most was that Edwards was treated as a third wheel. I'm not going to watch another debate, no matter who hosts it. I have better things to do with my time.

Last night's debate was flawless! Wolf was as magnificent as ever. Suzanne Malveaux and Joe Johns had amazing questions for all candidates. Great job to everyone at CNN. I feel enriched by what I was able to learn last night. Thank you.

I vote Republican and am not a fan of CNN’s coverage in general, but the last night’s debate was exciting and memorable. It was a political wrestling match.

Mr. Blitzer should have required the candidates to be more respectful of the debate’s rules of engagement. The debate seemed to be on the edge of getting out of hand, but maybe that added to its appeal.

Sad to see the Clinton campaign stoop to the level of Karl Rove in their power grab. Independent voters and forward-thinking Democrats are drawn to Obama because he builds consensus around progressive issues. Hillary seems to be rehearsing the old tactics which have netted Democrats exactly how many presidencies in the past two elections?

This was not a debate, Wolf. This was a news entertainment show at best. If the trash entertainment news outlets would sponsor a true debate, voters might actually learn something about the candidates adn the usses.
You say you were surprised by the heated exchanges but omitted how delighted CNN surely must have been for such a good show.
In he end, shame on the canddiates for agreeing to patricipate in any of these Jerry Spinger-eques disaster.
This is the last debate I'll be watching this year.

Wolf, You really earned every penny of your salary with last night's debate. Congrats. To have a sensitive use of timing–when to intervene and when to let the candidates weaken each other to smithereens! I do know that I am a democrat, but that's as far as it goes. I have been undecided so far and now I am really undecided. My 14-yr-old daughter watched the debate and until then really looked up to Hillary for a variety of respectful reasons. Now, she questions Hillary because of her outbursts and was shattered to see that she was not capable of addressing the questions head on, without blasting her opponents instead. I am sad to see that my daughter, one sampling of our country's future voters, is already witnessing this sort of negativity from the core of America's leaders.

If Wolf is getting criticized from both sides, that means he's doing his job.
It's difficult to moderate when you have few rules. The candidates are going to constantly ask for more air time to respond, so you can't win.

Great journalism Blitzer, way to mention John Edwards- everyone saw him win the debate, apparently you forgot to mention he showed up.

WB and CNN (Clinton News Network) are too pro-hillary to keep things neutral. For god's sake they have Hillary's biographer part of their "best" political team. Give me a break.

I'm a democract, but if Hillary get's in, then I'm hoping Bloomberg get's in. Barack Obama will win. Make no mistake. Are you listening to the people, media people?

I think Wolf did a great job. I just have one question what did Sen. Edwards do for the lady who he meet with no heating? It was a very touching story. I want to know if he helped her in her time of need?

I became more apparent – (not that any futher proof was required) – upon every word that came out of her mouth that lifelong Dems like me will never vote for Hillary. Add that to independents and the salivating Republican party and that equals 100% unelectable!

Why isn't the MSM reporting this underestimated fact!

The questions from the female panel member to Ms. Clinton were embarrassingly soft ball give-away nature, whereas her questions to Senator Obama were pointed and seemed to be designed to put him on the defensive.

Wolf,

As an ex-Hillary to an Obama supporter in the past 3 weeks, I have to admit that Edwards stood out among them all.

Hillary is a joke and a polarizing figure around the country; people are tired of the Clintons and their sad act. Who wants four more years of sexual scandal, false promises, and partisan politics because the Clintons can't win support from anyone accross the aisles of Congress?

Edwards just isn't believable or viable as a President albeit he would be a great running mate–his avocation.

Obama showed he was not seasoned in the world of political battle, especially on par with Hillary, which is not a slight on his make-up but a plus to the freshness he brings to the job. He can unite both DEMs, INDs, and REPs, get America refocused on its own issues, and possibly deconstruct the notion of American Empire around the globe.

It took Federal Attorneys, the RNC, and myriad conservative "think-tanks" and strategists to devise, uncover, and attack the Clintons for the past 16 years and the latter still come out a bit unscathed. If Obama topples them, he should be Emperor not President.

Thomas
Pasadena

In response to Sarah, posted 1/22/08 @ 4:53 PM ET.
It is my opinion that the Media limits the time given to the candidate in relation to the amount of funds that they receive in contributions from Corporations buying influence.
These same Corporations support the media through the purchase of adverting. If you complain about the fact that John Edwards was shortchanged, you should consider what they did to Dennis Kucinich, Joe Biden , etal.
These so called debates are anything but.
They are opportunies for the preferred Candidates to push their agendas.
If the public believes that we have a Democratic system for the election of our President, I think they should take another look.
We have to take a look at public Financing and make it illegal for any pubic official to accept any gratuity .

You did an outstanding job Wolf. The country needed to see what Obama And Hillary is Made of.. I was Impressed with both of them.. However, I will be voting for Hillary.. I am African American and it became clear to me last nite that Hillary his the issues on her side.. Hope is good, but we need Substance.. Obama in 2012...Hillary 08

I think that the debate was very good, and I am glad that someone is bringing out the issues concerning Obama. It has seemed like the media is afraid to bring out the tough questions that a presidential candidate should have to divulge.

Records are important, I dont want someone running the country that does not vote on 100 plus bills when he is present in the house. What are we paying him for. If an average person had that position and responsibility and decided no to do their job on 100 projects, he or she would be terminated from employment. How arrogant can he continue being!

Honesty is also important, I have researched who he is, upbringing, faith, slum lord supporter, and due to these issues I have decided to support Hillary Clinton for president.

Hillary Clinton for President!

I think that Obama should be chafe from sitting on the fence with some many issues. Clinton and Edwards made a valid point that he never takes a major stance. I am black and a woman and this time I would vote for Clinton all the way!

nd interests, what has she accomplished to help those same people who are without jobs, homes, credit.

Miss Hillary sits on her ivory tower blasting Sen Obama. I would rather have someone not vote on an issue if it is wrong and take a stand, than vote on an issue and cause so much hardship and pain toward a society simply because she wants to be accepted as on of the boys.

I thought Wolf Blitzer did a horrible job. Once again fuel the flames instead of pushing to talk about the issues.

The media and political classes forget that the world is full of people who will at the end of the day notice little difference to their lives whoever is in charge. Even of their own country. Therefore it makes not a lot of difference who wins. Except that (as a Times columnist argued very well a while back) Hillary presents the most acceptable face of America and their ideology. Shame I can't vote, fingers crossed.

Thanks for hosting the fight, Wolf. It was clearly the big night with the pair of Political Pugalists in the ring, while the only "presidential" candidate kept his hands clean on the sidelines – John Edwards.

While we watch Obama and Clinton self-destruct, it will be only a matter of time before Edwards rises to the top of the ticket. Go John, go!!!

Wolf,

You did the best you could do. After reading these posts and listening to the pundits, the only thing you can conclude regarding your role in all this is, you can't please everyone. Quite frankly, I'm glad Sen. Obama made the choice he did and became the aggressor last night. Sen. Clinton had it coming, one of Sen. Clinton's claims of being tough and can take on " the big boys", there is no question, Sen. Obama can be just as tough. Everyone cried about how he was trying to stay above the fray and the Clinton camp needed to figure out a way to drag him in the mud with the rest of the "experienced" candidates. Well, they succeeded. Over the last couple of weeks they've (Clinton camp) been trying to bloody him (Sen. Obama) up and take him off message, again they succeeded. After watching last night's debate, I wasn't 100% sure who I was voting for but I know I'm definitely not voting for Hillary Clinton because I really don't want to see her husband back in the White House for a third term, let's keep it real. Don't beat yourself up Wolf not everyone's going to be happy because everyone doesn't want to be.

Hi Wolf, I am a fan of yours, at times I make believe I am you when you serve as a debate moderator. At times I say at the tv screen " Wolf ask them this, or follow up with this"

At your next republican debate in L.A. please ask the candidates the following and don't let them get away with their usual platitudes.

Specifically request their plan to identify and deport 12 million people. Who would do the detecting, how will they round up families and will everyone not illegal would have to carry proper ID so as not to get snared.

Some scenarios from the future enforcement as proposed by the republicans:

The "authorities" given this task (also ask them who are they going to give this task to) will man public places such as post offices, gas stations, train stations, street corners, ball parks and challenge anybody to prove that they are "legal".

Upon the discovery of an "illegal" what do they do with that person, do they have to be questioned and incarcerated ? What about the rest of the family and other illegal friends? If that person has children, are they also sought after? What courts will hear these cases and where will these people be incarcerated ? Will they be given bail ? and so on and so on, keep digging !

Once the republicans have identified x numbers of illegals and have interned them in camps do they propose to sort them by countries of origin and then fly them back to their prospective country of birth ? What about their children who were born in the US, do they become wards of the state and placed in foster homes ?

Mind you can you imagine a foreign airport refusing an American plane fully loaded with their natives. Those countries might want to do their own triage.

In plain words these republicans have no idea what they are proposing. They just want to get nominated.

This stinks, they know it, it's not doable and quite frankly it reminds me of faschism. You might want to ask Lou Dobbs to speak to his plan

Let's deport the criminals if we can and have a sensible moral plan for the rest.

I did 27 years in the NYPD I arrested several illegals and interacted with thousands of good illegals that came to this great country to make a better life for themselves and their families. They are here, let's try a humane approach not a forced exodus.

You might want ask the candidates if they are familiar with US immigration law and the process to get into this country.

Thanks Wolf, you and Russert are among the few reporters that are keeping evryone honest.

Wolf: why are you so biased you run, and give obama 10 times more air time on your show than you do anyone else, you are a very political Biased person as well as cnn, you do know its a federal violation to do this dont you, you are supposed to give equal time to all polititions not just Barack Obama.Now lets go by federal law from now on wolf.

I thought the debate was great and I think Wolf did a wonderful job. I didn't think there was a lot of bickering between Sen. Clinton and Sen. Obama. I thought it was a good discussion, a little heated at times, but, that's understandable.
About Sen. Clinton being on the board of Walmart at one tiome. Walmart originated in Arkansas, so, of course she would have been on the board there. I wish the two senators would run together as a team and I hope that's the way it will become finally. They could save a lot of money and energy. Best wishes.. Elizabeth Keeshan

I don't like CNN...don't like Wolf...too liberal but he did a great job with the debate last night. Let's see who these guys and gals really are. Thanks Wolf.

This is just another illustration of why the process to choose a nominee is deeply flawed. After the primaries are over and a candidate is chosen he or she will be battered and bruised and will be lucky to win in the general election. We need a better system to chose candidates for each political party.

Nash- I hate to disagree with u being that u are a self described objective commentator and all, but i dont believe hillary has admitted that she made a mistake in voting for the war. Edwards has , but I think hillary's still sticking with the if i knew now what i know then defense. also, i dont know if obama denied that his complimentary comments concerning reagan are considered "crossing the line in the Democratic Dictionery." First im not sure what exactly that means but i think ur inferring that his unwillingness to at all times pander to people in the democratic base who are complete partisans by complimenting someone with a different point of view or party affiliation about anything is a mistaken point of view. Maybe im crazy but i think willingness to say something that is true when its against ur political interest is actually a good thing and that continually saying and doing anything whether right or wrong, true or false to get elected is a bad thing.

Wolf–you are great at moderating debates. You are my favorite anchor by far. I admire you very much. Great work last night! The debate was hot and interesting.

Last night's Democratic Presidential debate was a huge disappointment. It appeared to me that at the outset, the CNN staff was very disaorganized. Prior to the inception of the candidates even beginning, it seemed to me that CNN personnel didn't have their act together.

Senator John Edwards certainly was NOT given equal time.

I watched the entire debate and the commentary following. What a discraceful, unprofessional program. From the people asking the questions, to the Moderator , to Senators Clinton and Obama; the rest of the world must be laughing at America'sTV programing, and the conduct of two people who want to become President of the United States!.

There is nothing new in yesterday debate; Hillary Clinton doesn't say much but distort her opponent records. As an astute Observer who has been following the whole campaign, Senator Clinton is all talk without substance. She talks too much and you hardly remember anything she said.

Obama was right to call both Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton out. As far as i am concern, Bill has lost the last credibility he has going for him. He is not presidential at all. I surely respected George H. Bush and Jim Carter to Billary Clinton.

Obama was mad because Hillary and Bill Clinton keeps distorting and twisting his statement. As an independent i found Obama refreshing and he's gotten my vote.

Actually, Nash, Senator Clinton refuses to admit she was mistaken on voting for the war. She says "If I knew then what I know now, I would not have voted for the war" and yet she didn't know enough then because she didn't read the NIE report. Edwards has admitted he made a mistake in voting to authorize the war, Clinton has not. And she has given Reagan considerably more praise than Obama, if you did some research you might know this.

You are not an objective commentator, how could you possibly claim to be? Do you think it makes you sound more credible? No American is or should be "objective" when it comes to who our next President is. We all have an interest in this, and it is impossible for anyone to be completely objective.

Great job Wolf, I think if they wish to drown themselves in the routine political hogwash, let them, they are grown ups. I thought that Edwards came out spotless but not too interesting though.

I hope all of you Obama supporters saw just what it is you are supporting. he starts the attact then when it is turned on him he just stutters and stumbles. he tries to defend a record that he does not have. he started the dirty politics when he said he would run a clean campaign. he is as about an empty a suit as you will find. he has one thing on his mind to be president and does not care how he achives it. he calls himself black. but is half white. he lies about his voting record . both Edwards and Hillary are years ahead of him. he even praises the republicans. is he a closet republican? wake up america.

Let us suppose that Obama Muslim or any other unfamiliar religion to us, though we are looking to what he is promising to deliver and not what his background of religion is? He is proming unity, we, indeed, lack unity. Lack of unity is more futhering danger for our future as a great nation? We see it every day, now it is not as usual decade ago, many people with many different background are complaining of of some of us white irrogance and nonaffordable supremacy over the rest of America's factions? Let us make some change this time? In fact, we are sick and tired of those traditional politicians, who brought us to the brink of devided America?? Let us get out of Bush-Clinton-Bush yokes and set America free of their monotonous very narrow realism and their profound racism .
We can afford a president for one term if he doesn't filfull his promises, in which I beleive he will, or two terms if he does to bring America together than continuing the devided America to widen the gap?

Prior to the debate, anyone watching the clips during the King memorials, when Obama approached Hillary and John Edwards, he totally ignored Hillary, touched John Edwards, and moved on. This shows how arrogrant he is and mean spirited. Hillary had a smile for him and would acknowledge him. Is this how he will treat others opposed to his political philosophy? We do not need that kind of person in the White House. He began the argument with Hillary at the debate, he wanted her to engage him during the debate. Does he think we are stupid and cannot see through his pettiness. Hillary is a mother, a mother takes care of her children, we in america are her children. She will take care of us!

It was great Wolf. You're still one of the best. One thing I learned last night, Clinton is the most determined candidate in the whole race.

I think the argument that Obama "started it" is a joke. The inaccurate statements the Clintons made against him prior to the debate "started it." No matter, is it not obvious that this is a strategy by the Clintons to engage Obama in negative dialogue? He is in a "catch 22," because many media commentators prior to the debate were saying he needs to show strength and the ability to stand up for his position. Then he addresses the false statements made about him, and now he is accused of "squabbling" and not focusing on the issues. The joke is, Clinton pulls out "dirt" on him (the slum lord comment), and I have read almost nothing about her taking the "low road." The reason for this is she is "old politics" so everyone expects it from her. At what point are we going to grow tired of this type of politics? We finally have a candidate in Obama who desired to take the "high road," and for the sake of protecting his integrity, has no choice but to address slandering statements made about him.

Mark my words...if she wins the candidacy, we (Democrats) will struggle to win the election, because I know of NO independents or Republicans that would vote for her, and we know we need more than just Democratic support to win the general election.

You sure did sit back and remain quite, but you are excellent at doing that. Remember when you had to debate Mr. Norman Finkelstein re Mid East Policy? You sat there silent and watched the world go by too! Once again you show your viewers how ineffective you really are!

Last nights clear winner was Sen. Edwards.He was the only one who spoke about what the core Democratic values are. Fighting poverty,healthcare,and socio-economic justice. Sorry Hill , sorry Barak. You both lost me.

I thought Wolf Blitzer, Suzanne Malveaux and Joe Johns did a terrific job.
I thought the candidates, especially Senators Clinton and Obama got unnecessarily mean spirited with their gotcha type barbs and accusations. These things diminish them and undermine the goals of these forums; which should be to enlighten us and map out a better way. We desperately need to be led out of the horrible, tragic depths this administration has pushed us into. I hope these otherwise wise and intelligent adults will decide to end the pettiness and and deliberate distortions and stay on the message of hope and change.

I'm just glad that the candidates had more than 30 seconds to talk at times. Please continue this trend of letting the candidates talk for minutes instead of seconds. Obviously, it's up to the candidates if they want to use that time to attack other candidates, but at least they'll have the chance to address the issues facing this nation with more grace than raising one's hand allows.

I thought Sen. Clinton was mature than this but after last night debate I just feel she is after getting elected. She was asked about her plan on social security and she doesn't have any. If she think she will get my vote out of her being the first lady, think again hillary...
To me Obama came out victories after too much piling on.

wolf did a good job!!

You did a good job Wolf.

The problem I'm having with Clinton, Obama and Edwards is that during the debate I did got hear anyone come out in support of the American Veteran and veteran's programs and benifits. I am very disappointed.

After last night I think that John Edwards needs to call it quits. There is no way he has the backbone to be the president. He could not stand up for himself. This proves to me that he can not lead our country. Let's just see Clinton and Obama battle it out.

By the way I am a disabled veteran and I live in South Carolina.

I enjoy these debates but I'd prefer there was no audience disrupting the flow or cheering and booing

Excellant job last night Wolf. You showed respect to all and let them finish their points. I thought Barack was was wonderful.

This is the first debate that I've watched since the early race to the White House began, and it was entertaining to say the least. There's a long road until the elections, so I imagine that there will be a number of disastrous events that will entertain us with stories that couldn't have been written better by the writers sitting out on strike.

I got alot out of thr first haf of the debate. The candiates discussed the issues. Of course the was bickering which I'm sure the media enjoyed.
The scond half was devoted to the media's desires by asking questions in an attempt to turn the tide to a racial debate. This was uncalled for. You people critsize candidates when they call fault the media for bad publisity.
I believe that the people that chose the questions for the 2nd half should go to work for the National Enquier and leave serious reporters to do the reporting that is meaninful to the American public.
MSNBC tried the same thimg during the last debate However. the candidates didn't buy into it.

Great theater ; we learned nothing! Debates should be modeled after the debates like we have in our law schools. Strict time limits, quotes exact, arguments following rules of logic all in a framework designed to ferret out the facts, the truth. It lifts your ratings and lowers the possibility of an informed electorate. Thanks Wolf.

Wolf,

As an objective commentator on yesterday's Democratic Debate, Sen.Clinton was right about Sen. Obama's escaping to take responsibility for what his opinions are! He refuses to admit if he is mistaken on issues! While Sen.Clinton was couragous enough to admit she was mistaken on voting for the war then, Sen. Obama even denies his admiration of R.Regan is considered crossing the line in the Democratic Dictionery.
He much reminds me of President Bush denial. The Stock exchange is crashing around the world due to the USA failing economy and Mr. Bush says everything is fine.

Sen.Hilary Clinton is absolutly correct. Watch the actions compared to words!

Nash
Toronto, Canada

Wolf, I am a long time viewer and very devoted to CNN But last night was not a moderated debate!! You offered no leadership, it is your job to guide the debate and set the civil tone. Sorry but you gave into the entertainment and sensational rather than the professional. Sorry. Not a good day for journalisn.

I think obama said "no one’s hands are clean”

Clinton believe that her hands are clean and neat...That is a problem for America..

Obama talked about unity..Clinton talked about defeating republicans...That is a problem for America

I feel Wolf did a great job. The "attacks" last night are nothing compared to the attacks the Republicians will bring on the democrat candidate. At least we are showing some backbone and send a message that the days of saying anything they want and getting away with it are over. As for Bill Clinton, I hope all three candidates are smart enough to use him when elected. We are blessed to have 3 great people, who are smart, hardworking and care about this country. I can live with either of them.

With the backing of his "brothers," Barack threw the first punch. Hillary had no choice but to respond forcefully by fighting fire with fire.

It was a VERY GOOD debate. Despite Barack's homefield advantage, Hillary and John were the winners in this debate.

I think the moderator failed miserably in controlling the crowd. Perhaps a lesson learn here for CNN: There should be NO APPLAUDINGS FROM ALL SIDES.

Why do you fail to even MENTION John Edwards by name? You are causing this to become a two person race, and your coverage is pathetic.

Best one so far. Let the sparks fly.

Until last night, I was square in the Obama camp because I thought that he could hammer out a majority of the House and Senate that could put partisan politics aside and get something positive done. I do not believe Hillary can make it happen becasue of the baggage she carries over from the 90's. And, last night she showed that her viciousness will not win the hearts and mind of congress when the chips are down. But, sadly, so did Obama. Now where do I turn??
Too Bad, I was hoping to see something great happen this year - not more of the same!!!

Wolf, I am somewhat concerned about the ol'boy strategist you are speaking with regarding politics. I find his comments about Hilary Clinton somewhat sexist. I guess you have thrown "politically correct" out the window, is that right? At any rate get this replusive strategist off the air. He is obviously prejudice against women holding office and his comments add nothing of any significance.

Wolf,

You did a good job in the debate last night. It was right to let them have some time to talk.

If Hillary is experienced enough, why pick fights?

All the fight was well calculated. why did the moderator allow all to happen? I will never get over the thought that Hillary is consulted before the debates and being told what would happen. All what I am proud of is the far Obama has come.
Thank you Obama!

Great debate. Very exciting. If you can't stand the heat, change the channel. I want to see how my candidate holds up under fire. And she did. All the beatings inflicted on Hillary by the republicans and their attack dogs since the early 1990s have molded her into an efficient, effective fighting machine. I was so inspired that I contributed to Hillary's campaign. Also for the critics of the Clinton's I recommend you read Bill's latest book on giving. Maybe you can learn to be more charitable instead of spewing venom. The Clintons have done a lot of work for the greater good.

I think during the entire debate, Hillary and Obama were at each others throats for the most part, while Edwards got to play the "good guy' role.

I think the personal attacks truly started when Obama leveled the personal accusation against Clinton of being on the board of Walmart etc., implying in an underhanded way that she was associated with a super big box retailer who stomps on the little guy. Sure, prominent people are on the boards of a lot of firms. So what ? Even Michelle Obama was on the board of a major supplier of Walmart, till fairly recently. So what ?

So Clinton obviously hit back at Obama, with the working in cahoots with a slumlord comment. I think she came across a bit angry when she made that comment, which in my opinion she should have tempered.

Hillary's attack dog made some comments that were patently false about Sen. Obama's record, was he not supposed to set the record straight. The fact that Hillary spent so much time over talking him only shows that she is not used to someone coming back after her and challenging her version of the truth.

And Al in La Mesa, you claim you want a bi-racial election yet you can't wait for the elections to move to your area where you can place your votes based on what....a large hispanic population. Sen. Obama won in Iowa which I thought proved his appeal across the board so don't hide behind a psuedo argument when at the end of the day you and many others on this site know in your heart you would never vote for him under any circumstances. Which is why we always end up with the government we deserve.

Why does CNN keep deleting my comments that are in favor of Senator Clinton?! This is not the first time they have kept me in "Awaiting Moderation" hell for a long time and eventually delete my comments.

Here it goes again:

I was a big supporter of Senator Clinton before the debate. However, after watching the entire debate last time I must say that I have changed. I am now a BIGGER and more of a solid supporter of the Senator from New York. She handled her own after Obama started the criticism. I agree with Hillary, it is clear that Obama was rehearsed and scripted because he said he didn't agree with Reagan and so on and Hillary corrected him by saying she did not say Reagan…hahah. Folks, look at that part of the debate again.

If Obama doesn't have his rehearsed speeches and scripted then he is without his luster and coherence. Hillary has proven to have substance and strength! She is what the country needs. Senator Clinton is experienced and can challenge the republicans and win!

I am an African-American male in my 20's and I support Sen.Clinton! Not every Black will vote for Obama!

New Jersey for Hillary

Wolf Blitzer:

I would like to compliment you on the way the debate last night was handled. I thought you were right to ease up on all the rules/regulations. It seemed much more substantive to me than the recent MSNBC debate w/Brian Williams. I particularly loved the question about whether Bill Clinton was the first black president.

It was disgraceful that John Edwards was so often cheated out of time to speak. With the expectation that a candidate will have a "chance to respond" every time he or she is attacked, it's potentially a never-ending volley as long as there's a new charge leveled in each response. Blitzer should have drawn the line after Clinton's and Obama's second or third retailiatory response. Of course neither Clinton nor Obama would voluntarily stop the exchange - air time is air time, even if the context is unflattering. It was Blitzer's job to allow equal time to each candidate, and he did an astonishingly poor job at this.

If CNN is going to take on the responsibility of hosting a debate, inevitably influencing hundreds of thousands of voters, it is CNN's responsibility to us to allow each candidate equal time. Not doing so is, in effect, an abuse of power.

CNN may have decided that it's a two-person race (despite the results of the Iowa caucuses), but the third serious candidate has a right to be heard, and we have a right to hear him. If you want to focus on Clinton and Obama to the exclusion of Edwards, do it in a talk show or a news segment. Don't mislead us by cloaking it in the pretense of a debate. Better yet, just find a competent moderator for the next debate.

I thought last nights debate was a real eye-opener. It made me switch from 'undecided'. I have just given my support and contribution to John Edwards. We need a mature President for a change, and he was able to stay above all the 'who lies the most' baloney!

The sparring was largely off topic and petty, demonstrating that the candidates involved lack discipline and cannot be trusted with the office they are seeking.

Obama started it? Give me a break. It's unfortunate that things ended up where they did but let's be clear on one thing: the Clinton machine started throwing the first punches long ago, and unfortunately Obama needed to start swinging back in order to set the record straight. His Walmart comment was way out of line, but how long do your expect anyone to tolerate this ridiculously engineered good cop-bad cop routine? It's nice and convenient that Bill has the good will capital to spend by constantly bashing and distorting Obama's record while Hillary just smiles warmly, but I for one have lost complete respect for them and will cross party lines and vote for McCain (if he is fortunate enough to win the Republican nomination) in the event that Obama does not come out on top.

I am just so disgusted by how the Clintons have turned this important election into a big game more suitable for the American Idol crowd than a responsible electorate. But I guess that's how elections will always be won, regardless of how promising or optimistic the candidate. Senator Obama, please stay above the fray. I would rather you lose with the integrity to which we all were drawn when we started this process than stoop to the smirking, arrogant and smug tactics to which a family I formerly held in high regard has descended.

I watched Senator Clinton today lashing out at Obama for what he said to her last night. He was looking for a fight, so was she. Obama is clearly desperate, so is she.

And yeah, I haven't seen Ms. Clinton campaigning at anytime without Bill by her side. Obama doesn't look to his wife to make himself or his polls better. Ms. Clinton has guaranteed that THIS woman won't be voting for her. If Ms. Clinton truly wants to be president she should show the cajones necessary to stand alone, without hubby, and win the job in her own right.

Wolf Blitzer, as usual, handled the debate with dignity, professionalism and order.
I commend him for moderating such an intense and passionate discussion with an impartial and unbiased stance.
Keep up the great work Wolf!

Wolf, in my opinion, last evening's debate was a total success. I was riveted! The first ones were painful to watch and little was learned about each candidate. I realize having only 3 is a large factor but the format was great and allowed each to reveal parts of their character I had not seen before.

The debate was how it should be last night, less interaction by the media. Only problem is that like CNN and other regular news broadcast channels, Edwards was not given fair time even close to that of Obama and Clinton. He did do his best to stand up for himself to fight for time and not wait for it from you.

I am a long time Edwards supporter, for I am born and raised in NC and thought he did a great job in his time spent here as Senator. But seeing him last night just made me more angry at the lack of media coverage he has been given. I would really like to know why. I hope its not because he is a white male..... CNN is certainly exploiting Obama and the black candidate and Clinton as the women, so now white men dont exist. Why not just let everyone be heard equally so the public, the people, can make a fair decisions for themselves.

The back and forth between Clinton and Obama solidified for me for whom I will cast my vote in the forthcoming Democratic primary in my state: John Edwards.

As for Mr. Blitzer's anchoring of the debate, I thought he struck a fine balance between letting the candidates have their say and interrupting when it came time to interject another question. Good job, and thank you.

Ivanhoe

I felt last night's debate should have been called: "Let Obama Talk as Long as He Wants." I'm sorry that Mr. Blitzer continually favors Obama and Clinton in the televised debates. I think John Edwards is my favorite even though I feel any of the Democratic candidates would be a great improvement over what we have now. Thank you.

Hillary was the best and accurate and precise. it was Obama who started the brawl and he got good punches what he needed. People need to know this guy. He tries to show as if he is so clean in politics. He has no substance but just rhetoric. He is playing a racial card ....I donot think anybody else doing that. He looked pretty immature to me yesterday.GO for HILLARY..she will defeat the old rotten Republican machine. HILLAAAARY 2008.

Wolf , you were great.

CNN did a better job than the other networks with their gotcha questions. But then, the bar was set pretty low.

Wolf,

I don't usually have reason to give kudos, but your moderation of last night's debate was quite good. I think you were right to let Hillary and Obama go at it. I didn't like it and thought they both came off looking rather petty, but the simple fact is that they were going to do one way or another. No matter what question you asked, they had their little talking points ready. This has been building for quite some time now and the only thing you can do is to let them have at it.

In between all of the bickering and charges and countercharges, occasionally we got some real information about the different healthcare plans, the strategy to exit Iraq and foreign policy. Some of it was a good, spirited back and forth about ideas. It did get ugly at times. I don't think it will serve either Hillary or Obama to get nasty, but it doesn't appear that they are going to quit any time soon.

At one point I found myself yelling at you to just let 'em go at it. And you did. Good decision. There were times when you stayed in the background and times when you tried to regain control. I don't think you can have a blueprint for a debate. Sometimes you just have to go with your gut and make decisions in the moment. That's what you did and I commend you for it. It's not easy to try to control three determined egos all trying to get the most time to talk.

I do think that Barack Obama is getting a free ride from the media and I don't like it. He proved that he can be just as mean-spirited as both of the Clintons. So he doesn't get any brownie points from me. He doesn't seem to like having his record or positions questioned and that's not a good trait in a presidential candidate. It's fair game to make him accountable. Unfortunately, it descended into name calling and petulant rants. But I think Hillary and Bill are fed up with Obama not getting called out by the news media. Joe Johns did try to put Obama to the test, but it wasn't enough.

If you want to do the voters a favor, hold ALL the candidates to the fire and make them answer the really difficult questions. That's the only way we will be able to make the right decision.

I thought that Wolf and CNN did a horrible job last night. Wolf (and the others) kept trying to make the debate about race and gender. Leave it alone! We get it: one candidate is a woman and one is an african-american. Fine. Now what do the candidates stand for.

Last night's Democratic debate in South Carolina was the first political debate I've seen that was a true debate. The tactics by the candidates were appropriate and civilized. I learned a lot about the Democrats' stand and didn't have to hear about the Republicans' stand (that's what the Republicans' debates are for although they don't seem to know this).
Thanks. Now I have to go to the Public library and then drive on a Public road to pick up my child at Public school where they had the Public nurse in to give the kids Public vaccinations then go to the Public park for soccer practice and then we will go home to listen to Public broadcasting. But I don't want Public Health Care-that would be SOCIALISM !!

Great job last night, i just wante to say that Obama needs to stop living in this dream that world peace and togetherness will come one we all hold hands and read Chicken Soup for the Soul or one of Oprah's book club books. Russia dose not hold hands. He aslo needs to stop with this Southern accent he has just decided to aquire recently. He is from Hawaii, not Alabama. Obama needs to stop attacking Clinton on her record because his record show a whole lot of nothing, because he has done nothing but talk about change but do nothing to act on it. He is not JFK or MLK, and never will be. And should he become President, which im sure he will, because Americans dont have the greates track record for electing "winners," i.e. Bush JR, "Oh Canada" i will sing.

Congratulations on your job last night. However I do feel very sad that the Democratics on H Clinton side still have race issues. They need to mature and get over with the race issue. This just showns how affraid they are.....the damage was done and will be very dificult to vote for someone with "womens and race problems". Obahama is doing a great job and deserves more credit. As we can see is being very polite when awnsering back to Clinton.....we cannot say the same about H Clinton.

I was keenly disappointed in the lopsided time allocation provided to Barack Obama. John Edwards in particular was given an exceptionally limited amount of time; and, Hillary Clinton did not receive parity with Senator Obama.

I have been an avid viewer of CNN for over 10 years, yet recently I find myself viewing MSNBC more because of the Obama spin on CNN. I believe that CNN should be forced to end most of their political segments with, "My name is Barack Obama and I approve this message."

Our nation is confronted with so many deep ills in part due to the irresponsible and subjective media coverage of virtually every aspect of news.

Deeply Saddened,

Golfer Gary

"Obama also betrayed a very controlling and arrogant attitude. No unity candidate in Obama."

right on the money.

First off, Clinton is a snake and I wouldn't trust her or her husband with a dollar bill. As for the debate, it had no substance no one, especially Wolf called Hillary to the carpet regarding her, I will do this and I will do that speach. Anyone can stand up and make promises without having to spell out how they are going to achieve them. Personally, i don't want to live in a socialistic society or have the government control anything I have. Hillary, get your hands off.........How is she expectecing to pay for all that she promises and what has she ever done on her own......This question needs to be asked.........Nothing.

Wolf let Hillary ramble on the most, then Obama. He tried to cut off Edwards after a minute. Talk about unfair. It was sad to watch. The only one who was a grown-up last night was Edwards.

I definelty enjoyed the debate last night. It was interesting to see the way that Hillary can stand her ground with the 'guys'. I so enjoy the CNN network coverage of this election process. All of your commentators try to be bi-partisan or so it seems to me. You do not take sound bites and spin them the way MSNBC does. I feel that I get a true picture of each candidate with no bias spin or outright lies. I have great respect for all of your newspeople! Thank you so much!

Did anyone notice that TIME gave Obama an A-?

His campaign and message have been positive UNTIL the Clintons start attacking him on petty issues. He has a right to defend himself against the Clinton machine.

Look for a landslide in SC

Hi Wolf! I actually attended last night's debate and I think you, and the entire CNN crew, did a great job. The back and forth was interesting and I thought the audience enjoyed the intensity of the exchanges.
I hope you enjoyed your stay in South Carolina and we look forward to having you here again soon!

The debate format encouraged the type of unproductive exchanges we saw among the candidates. Allowing audience applause fosters a feeling of mob mentality and encourages candidates to spew out tired one-liners in an effort to get the mob on their side. The lack of time limits and moderator control also has a negative effect in that it favors the person who will shout over the others loudest and interrupt them. Also, how many times have we heard the race/gender issue be brought up in this debate as well as previous debates? Every single time you hear Obama and Clinton both agree that they have no doubt that all the Democratic candidates supports civil rights and equality. Every time you hear them agree that they don't want people to elect them based on their gender/race, but rather on their policy stances. So why are we still hearing these kinds of questions being asked at the debates?

This debate is a small example of the larger problem of media coverage of this election. The media is turning the election into a reality TV show. The media is reporting not on the issues and policy positions, but rather on the bickering that occurs, and on the potential drama among the candidates. I was reading CNN's political ticker during the debate and was amazed to find substantially more posts from Bill Schneider about the dynamics of the debate – the interactions among the candidates and the aggressive emotions in the room etc – than I could find about the actual policy positions that the candidates were trying to get across.

CNN, the president should be elected based on his/her positions on the issues, but the way you (and other major media companies) cover this election, the majority of the public is going to end up choosing a candidate based on how they make them "feel", or how "likable" they are. Since you love reporting on polls so much, how about you conduct a poll to see how much voters actually know about the candidates' policy positions. Ask them which of the 3 democratic candidates does not support a mandatory universal healthcare program. Then ask them which of the 3 candidates got a little emotional and teary-eyed at a campaign stop in NH. I'd bet you more people know that Clinton was the one who got a little emotional than that Obama is the one that doesn't support mandatory health insurance. Or how about on the republican side – ask voters if they even know which republican candidate supports dissolving the IRS and abolishing the income tax.

CNN, you and the rest of the media have a responsibility to report on what is important – a responsibility to give the voters the information they need to make an intelligent decision in the primaries and in November. Your emphasis on "sensational" news reporting and turning this election into a reality TV show in order to attract viewers is very troubling.

" ...there are only three of them left standing."

Huh, that's funny. Last time I checked, Dennis Kucinich was still running. Not that you would ever know that from the corporate media's manipulative coverage of this campaign.

Wolf,

I am so happy to have someone with your integrity in the process. I think you did well. I did not like that Obama kept on interrupting and intimidating the mediator to let him answer questions in triple the time he was allotted, but the other candidates held their own.

I am happy.

I have been an Obama supporter through this campaign- to this point. However, after last night, a feeling that's been slowly growing in me over the last few weeks became very clear: Obama has very little to say. It took me a while to notice, but it's becoming clearer and clearer that, of the 3 candidates, he is the least specific, the least idealistic, and the least capable of just giving a straight answer. It's funny (not really) how it seems like the people who really delve into the heart of issues and seem to have very specific plans, solutions, and ways to pay for them (biden, dodd, and now edwards), get the least face time and move to the back of the pack. It seems to me that America really loves candidtaes who just spout rhetoric and fight with each other. Sad.

It is amazing that you do not have Bill Clinton falling asleep behind Martin Luther King III...on Martin Luther King, Jr. Day!!! Some of my friends make fun of me for taking the "Clinton News Network" serioulsy...I am starting to understand their point.

I remember when Bush looked at his watch during a debate with Clinton in '92. I was amazed that he could be so "out of touch" in a Presidential Debate. Obviously, you CNN was amazed also...as evidenced by your coverage.

What is the difference here? This is why you guys continue to lose credibility. If you can't cover it...then at least be honest about why you won't cover it.

First Black President falling asleep in a Black Church during a Sermon by the Son of one of the most influential Black Americans, of the 20th Century...and you have nothing to say?

Ignorance? Incompetance? Apathy? or Calculating?

Wolf, with all due respect, I think this whole editorial is a bit pompous. Who cares about your role in the debate? This is just another example of what's wrong with modern media – it's all about the personalities at the expense of real news. Please stop injecting yourself into the story to boost your celebrity. Also, you pundits, collectively, need to lose these ridiculously clichéd boxing metaphors. It sounds and reads like a high-school newspaper. That said, I think that in spite of the viciousness of the attacks in last night's debate, it was still the best yet of this election cycle. It seems that the candidates have finally had time to get their plans and platforms in place, and we're getting more detail, more meat – more information that's actually useful to voters in making an informed decision about who's best to lead our country. And, lastly, let's be honest, Wolf. While you did let the candidates have more room to stretch out last night, you were constantly attempting to interrupt (usually unsuccessfully). Just watch the video.

I agree with you, Wolf! Let the candidates fly, as you did. Good job. At one point I almost forgot there was a "moderator" which I think is just fine. We are at a point where it's critical to hear and see the candidates as they can present themselves, and I think it was fine. I'll bet John Edwards agrees with you – he was able to scrap with the best of them!

Keep up the good work.

Wolf,

I have been a loyal viewer of your program for many years, but I think last night’s debate was less than admirable. I got the impression that your hands were tied by trying to be politically correct, especially as far as Obama was concerned considering the venue. You allowed Obama to change the subject whenever he wanted without responding to the question asked. I think that was a disservice to the viewers.

I don’t know if it had anything to do with MLK day, but even the questions seemed skewed in Obama’s favor. I’d like to ask why there were so many questions regarding Bill Clinton? Last time I looked Hillary was the one running for office. She should not be penalized for having him as a husband; I think she has already paid that price.

I understand that you wanted to step back to allow a dialog, but you stepped back a little too far and that dialog turned into schoolyard bickering. If these two cannot even get along and respect members of their own parties how can they hope to work with the Republicans or even other world leaders?

I think it is time for the media to stop being politically correct and start getting answers to questions based on what is best for our country.

I remain an undecided Independent, however, after last night’s debate I am taking a closer look at the Republican candidates.

Wolfe I think you did a pretty good job on trying to keep the answers on point. Next time i think it will help if no questions are asked related to either candidates past or any recent attacks they may have launched. Next time we need more information on exactly how the are going to attain these campaign promises. Unversal heath care will be very hard to accomplish if the Senate only had 55 democratics since most if not all Republican are dead set against. Also didn't CNN have a poll that said Hillary would have a harder time defeating Sen. McCann than either Edwards or Obama??

I was very impressed with Edwards succinct discussion of predatory credit card and payday lenders and how their practices substantially hurt the black middle class. I would vote for Edwards, if I wasn't already committed to McCain.

The media has to stop promoting political circus acts. Having had a black woman mayor, and a woman governor, both disasters, I ask that we stop voting for the novelty. Just because someone is black and/or a woman does not constitute a automatic qualification for a job like President. And the media has to stop promoting these plotlines like "Ooh, if (he's/she's) elected, they will be the first (black/woman) to hold that position."

I watched the entire debate last night and have read nothing regarding Edwards. He was the only candidate in control of his emotions. He was able to focus on the needs of the people. I was very disappointed in Clinton and Obama. They spoke over each other and at times, I couldn't even understand what they were saying. Unfortunately no credit was given to Edwards.

I just wish someone could explain to me how Obama plans to accomplish the things he says. Change in Washington and rehotric about "reaching" across the isle rekindles nightmares of W's first run.

Can Obama speak? Sure. Is he an Idealist? Yup, so was Carter. I've yet to hear him explain WHAT he will do as President other than bring forth some magical change that every politician claims they will bring to the White House. I'm more concerned with how he will do it. I guarantee it won't be done by standing on principal and refusing to participate in Washington politics, afterall, were electing one man to one office, there is still a Senate and House full of status quoe politicitans to convince, and Obama doesn't strike me as the type willing or able to get much done.

...but he can speak...I'll give him that

First debate that showed me anything worth seeing or hearing And I must say it was clinton all the way. And I do beleive at this point that if the election was set for 2/5 Clinton would win hands down. Hope they keep it up at least this way the nation will pay attention to what the candidates have to say finally

Hillary's politics is all what we have accustomed to and we need a new page in our republic if we really care about our next generation...

Wolf, great job! This is the first debate that I learned some thing from. I loved that the glove were off and finally Obama had to answer some tough questions. And I think they all got their points out. Anyway give yourself a pat on the back for a good job!

Wolf, I think you handled this one better than the UNLV debate in November. The exchanges were good last night. I also think it was Barack Obama's best performance yet. His debating usually doesn't live up to his speeches, but he outshined Clinton and Edwards last night.

I think this debate and the debate anchored by Charlie Gibson in New Hampshire were both excellent. There is much to be said for hearing the candidates without interruption. Also seeing their demeanor, and how they react in these situations, is as revealing as what they say.

very ininteresting debate yestersay. however there were 3 contenders not 2 . and the "3d." {edwards} covered more intersring subjects for the american voters although he was not given equal time in

The debate showed that Clinton is just a naggy old hag and far from capable of being president of the United States. She lacks any vision and can't even control her own husband, how will she run a country with 300 million people? I don't care which other candidate people support, just realize that Clinton is useless.

To Tyler,

When attacked by the clintons and do not respond, YOU ARE GONE.

Obama did good by exposing these vengeful pair of pathetic human beings " The Clintons"

Take away from last night: if you believe in universal health care and can't stand Hillary...support Edwards!

With all the childish behavior and finferpointing the Dems are looking for the fastest , surest way to give the White House back to the GOP. The old "mine is better than your's" "Oh Yea" performance from Clinton and Obama last night will do little to unite the party and will result in a split in the party supporters that will result in neither candidate winning the general election.
It is amazing how the quest for power has led to such destructive behavior and the smear campaigns by both groups seems to suggest that their leadership styles warrant a closer look.
Joe

Wolf, you wrote: "now that there are just three candidates left, as opposed to nearly three times as many."
You know that's not true, Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel are still running, but your network and you have decided to make the American public believe that they're not running, That's very dishonest.

I think Wolf Blitzer did a great job as debate moderator last night.

Wolf......You did a great Job. The Candidates where just as good. They willingly and not so willingly exposed themselves. Best Debate I have seen in Years. Keep up the good work. Was a MSNBC viewer until they change into idol worshipers of Obama. They for me now are comparable to FOX. Chris Matthews has a problem with women in power, station has become a real turn off. All I have left is CNN C-Span and PBS . Oh, and of course the net. They are all good candidates. You brought out some terrific answers.

Blitzer was absolutely horrible – I read this article and, were I him, would tout the fact that he's hosted so many debates previously. I stayed up until 5am watching the interview (I live in Eastern Europe) and thought how unfair the debate's moderator was to John Edwards (I should note that I am not supporting Edwards) and how the change of topic questions were so poorly aligned and misdirected. I.E. Poor Edwards sat there and waited for Clinton or Obama to "have their chance" to reply to the personal attacks, and then when the mediocre moderator would finally intervene because it was going on too long, one of your other two people would direct the questions to either Obama or Clinton.

And CNN, seriously, why make such a big deal about the candidates "sitting down" for the second half of the debate – after seeing the free-for-all first half, that was the only difference.

You should be disappointed in your efforts as moderators and hosts.

Did most of you even watch the debate? Yeah, Clinton and Obama fought like cats and dogs and yeah they kinda got to their points but John Edwards Was AMAZING. He's right! Where does any of that fighting and blaming get any of us?
If it keeps up this way Americans brand of democracy will be like feudalism with running water no time.

I loved last nights debate..for the first time Berrack had to try to answer questions rather then rely on slogans.. like he will unite us..sounds like Bush's slogan..the uniter not the devider..we all know how well that worked out. Wolf, for the first time I thought you did a great job.

Wolf,

I watch the entire debate with great interest. It was one of the best so far. Yes, Clinton and Obama scratched each other's eyes out, but they also talked about the issues and that is what it's all about. You did a fine job at letting them get things off their chest.

Thanks.

The debate was the best I've seen. You did good, Wolf. I hope people paid a little attention to John Edwards. He seems to be the only one who wants to address the problems without getting personal about the other candidates.
Allen from sunny Hartwell, GA

If Bush is where he is, the cause is the Clintons, people ran away from them and grabbed the first idiot they found.

Now the Clintons are back and believing they are wanted.

Wolf has always been fair and impartial in all his reporting. To know Wolf is to know nothing but the truth. Unfortunately, in last nights debates he had to sit by and listen to the lies of Hillary Clinton.

Wolf, I hardly recognized ya. Without the swirling graphics, multiple monitors, skewed camera angles and the exaggerated tone of importance, you looked rather diminished. I suggest CNN drag you back to the studio and step up the spin cycle.

WZ

I disagree with Mr.Blitzer, I thought he did a terrible job of controlling the debate. The behavior of Mrs.Clinton was horrible, but Obama was the instigator most of the time. Both of them came across as not looking very presidental. Obama never answers a question. I can't help but think the most qualified Democratic candiate is John Edwards who actually has the audacity to stick to the issues and discuss policy. Edwards or Bill Richardson would have been better choices for President. I encourage fellow Democrats vote for Edwards and let Clinton and Obama know they both came across as idiots last night.

Just once in the debates I would like them to address all of the job leaving the US ans the impact on all americans.

SIMPLY STATED WOLF DID NOT DO A COMPETENT JOB AS EDWARDS WAS NOT GIVEN EQUAL TIME.

Obama needed to come out and fight! Which he did very well! He was quite presidential! Hilary, I still don't trust! Edwards might have scored some points but not position to the point of him being a force to reckon with. Obama should pick Edwards as his running mate.

My only criticism of the debate last night is that I wish you or one of the questioners had asked Senator Obama if he thinks that he has a problem with Latino and women voters. And if so, what he plans to do to address it if he wins the nomination.

i did not watch the debate but i know that if it continues like this democrats will lick their wounds again when john mccain is innaugurated... if getting married to a president is experience then barbara bush is the one we should be voting because she gave birth to a president and also married one.

It was like Hillary TV and not pretty! All I can say is if we put her up as our candidate then we are going to loose!! She has shown her true colors so Our side will not be as motivated to vote for her and the GOPers have been licking their chops just waiting to make fools of the Clintons so they will Unite their warring factions to vote against her...Just like what happened with John Kerry! I almost wonder if Skull and Bones connections ARE thicker than blood?

Wolf, next time, try to control the candidates rhetoric a bit more. Last night was a useless exersize in nonsense. The back and forth did nothing to clarify their positions on the issues that actually MATTER to voters. Perhaps the debates should be scratched in favor of town hall meetings with voters asking the questions.

The cable news networks can't make up thier minds what they want to raise thier ratings. Six weeks ago all we heard is. Why or when will Obama take Hillary on. Now it's all the bickering between the candidates coming out of your mouth. When ever you interview someone you don't ask about someone's plan or what the will do about a paticular situation. The first thing you do is play some snipitt of something that the media has orcastrated and then draw them in to an argument. Only the ratings matter. Let's devide the country I need ratings say's the media. Signed by Wolf, Candy Crowley,Lou Dobbs, and all those following campaigns.

Ruby
Az.

I thought you done a good job Wolf but I was disappointed that Illegal Immigration was not brought up. The democrats need to let us know exactly where they stand on this.

Wolf:

Well done last night, my friend. The candidates came out swinging and people enjoy that the same way they love to see a fight at a hockey game.

Wolf I was very happy that you actually let them go back and forth. Without any back and forth, it's nothing more than a televised stump speech. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz boring!!!

Without any back and forth, it's very difficult for people to really understand where the candidates stand. You need the back and forth to peel back the onion, to make people really answer the question, to get to the bottom of something, and to actually here a reply to the other candidate's criticism.

I am a stauch Republican, but I found last night both entertaining and educational.

Go Obama!!!

Last night's debate was really great. I loved seeing the emotions of all three candidates. There were moments when I felt like I was eaves-dropping on a private meeting - the candidates were so into their arguments. Writers' strike? Whatever! I could watch debates like this every night.

Excellent job, Wolf. I truly appreciated seeing more of the candidates' personalities, and I gained more of a feeling of them and their positions.

Both candidates (Clinton and Obama) lost any possible vote from me with their bantering. It's McCain all the way.

I don't know where you people get this idea WE LIVE IN A DEMOCRACY. IN FACT WE LIVE IN A REPUBLIC. STOP SAYING IT ISN'T FAIR IF A NEWS CORPORATION INVITES SOME AND NOT OTHERS. That IS fair in a democracy, which we DO NOT LIVE IN.

If you do not like our Democratic-REPUBLIC then either LEAVE the country, or LEAD A MOVEMENT THAT WILL TRANSFORM THE U.S. INTO A DEMOCRACY.

Hillary shows her true colors by deflecting criticism, refusing to give any straight answers, and she has really made all the Dems vulnerable now to McCain.....by her deplorable tactics...

She is very despicable and very low-class.....she is a true politician, since she has shown to be very politically calculating and insincere.....

Don't delude yourself in thinking she cares....for latinos, bush was also attempting to garner the latino vote, and now he would kick everybody out.....instead of helping them become citizens......why not vote for somebody who actually has some morals for a change???? instead of hill/bill.....

I would really have liked more light and less heat last night. The debate had little substance with the exception of John Edwards answers. The play-ground sniping at one another done by Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama was really contemptible and did nothing to illuminate their positions on the issues.

We know who won the debate last night no matter how any body will spin the whole thing but I will just say this.OBAMA won the debate.and he will be the next president of the united state of america come jan 29.

aware January 22, 2008 2:34 pm ET

I have one complaint. You let Obama away with too many "Wait a minute. This is important." moments. This unecessarily ate up the clock and particularly took time from Edwards.

Otherwise, this was a very revealing debate. The Obama strategy failed miserably. Obama continued his ploy of taking things out of context to make his case. Most people look things up for themselves online or have someone do it for them. Obama also betrayed a very controlling and arrogant attitude. No unity candidate in Obama.

I think we learned that Obama is not ready for 08

Thanks CNN!

Dear aware, (obviously you're not that aware)

What debate were you watching? Did you not see "Broom Hillary" ranting and raving. Of course, you all along were planning "not" to vote for Obama because of his race. It has nothing to do with experience because if it did, tell me what experience does "Broom Hillary" have?" What public office have she been elected to before New York? You un-informed critics are just plain out ridiculous in your blatant racist views.

"Jack ny, ny January 22, 2008 2:21 pm ET

I think it is important to state who started it. In this case it was Obama. If hillary had let it go then it would have been considered as weakness."

Are you 12 years old? Seriously, that was the argument I used when I got into a fight with my siblings growing up.

Wolf,

I thought you did a decent job. However, I was annoyed when you took time to ask Obama if he wanted to respond to Hillary's comment about his slum lord connection.

I suspected that Obama was a smooth talking orator with little substance and he proved it last night. He came across as a cry baby, accusing Hillary of misrepresenting his statements and record. Well what did he and his camp do when they took Hillary's comments about Martin Luther King out of context.

Also, Obama blew it when he came in to the debate prepared to get back at the Clintons. He brought up Reagan's name and she didn't even mention it in the debate!! He is not ready to be president. He's bedazzling people with you know what!!

Wolf,

Here's my problem with the way you or any of the Media do these debates. You always seem to looking to start a fight between the candidates, raise some controversy, improve ratings.

Why not ask a serious set of questions about policy and governing philosophy?

Ask for an explanation to their approach to solving the nation's problems. Ask them about energy policy, fiscal policy, national defense etc...

Maybe to boring for the viewing public?

I thought the CNN team handled the intensity of the debate quite well. I didn't care for all the bickering, but it did make me see the true character of each candidate. I started liking Edwards more because he didn't get dragged in to the fight between Hilary and Obama and actually talked about the policies. It made Hilary looked presidential with her ability to stand up to the attackes with class and some great zingers. I think the looser was Obama with his "this is really important" and "last point I have to make" which ended up being nothing substantial. He seemed to be on the defensive and didn't really answer any questions. I do think CNN should have stopped Obama rambling and let Edwards answer some questions and rebuttals. I like Obabma as a person because he seemed to be very charming, but I have yet to see what he can do as President.

I thought it was a great debate. I didn't like the attacks, but that is the nature of the system. I appreciated that there was plenty of time for the candidates to speak.

I think that debate last night was an excellent example of what we can look forward to with the democratic and republican nominees. And last night Hillary could have beat em. She was strong and forceful and never waivered. Obama stuttered and said I I I and um um um and wait wait wait – he was totally shaken up. The republicans (John McCain) will have him for lunch.

Hillary showed she can be tough and stand her ground without stuttering. Obama was a shaking mess.

Hillary is getting my vote. She can beat ANY republican nominee

It's interesting to see how many Hillary supporters are responding here & claiming "Obama started it!" Seriously, Hill has been on the attack, both advertently and inadvertently outside of the debates, while Obama has been forced to defend himself. Up until this debate, he's been remarkably restrained; it is now time for him to defend himself and his record. Are the Obama supporters' responses being deleted?

Personally, I was willing to vote for Hillary if she was the Democrat to run, but after her recent behavior and her dirty tactics, I don't want her representing my country. Besides, didn't she used to be a Young Republican back in the day?

Wolf did a great job last night, trying to be fair and truly listening in order to get it right. Great job, Wolf!

For the record, Obama began the mud slinging with the Walmart comment, and Clinton took it up a notch with the "slumlord" comment.

Very good stuff! Never a boring moment!

Or maybe, Mr. Blitzer, moderating debates is not your cup of tea.

The debate was exciting. I was sure glad to see Obama take a strong stand.

While I think the debate was enlightening, it was not because of the issues (though I will say the healthcare discussion was much needed to alleviate confusion). No, what was most enlightening was the conduct of the candidates, which I think Wolf allowed to shine through independent of prodding from reporters. It's a difficult job to moderate a debate such as this, and I think overall it was helpful.

However, it is NOT difficult to ask intelligent, pertinent questions. Asking Barack Obama if he thought Bill Clinton was the first African-American president of the United States? Seriously? While race is an issue in this campaign (maybe made more so by the media), questions such as these serve to detract from real policy debates. After all, that's what you hoped for from this debate, right Wolf?

You did a great job last night, Wolf, along with Suzanne and Joe Johns. I really didn't like all the bickering but I thought there was a more substantial discussion of some issues, particularly healthcare, than ever before. It certainly wasn't boring as past debates have been. You're a great moderator.

Wolf did a great job! Who can control high school kids ready to fight?
Drop Edwards next time. There isn't a reasonable man or woman who believes he can win now. Therefore he should be dropped.
My comments about the debate. Disclosure: I am clinton supporter. Barack is a smart, decent guy, who is running a decent campaign. Hillary is a better politician, more ready to take the heat from the republicans. I am having some doubts about that being effective in the 21st century. But if politics look like what they did in the 90s, she will be more effective.

Leave it to the first poster to throw out the "who started it garbage"... It shows just how petty the Clinton followers really are.

Merriam Webster's Collegiate Dictionary defines debate as:
(n) a contention by words or arguments: a: a formal discussion of a motion before a deliberative body according to the rules of parliamentary procedure; b: a regulated disussion of a proposition between two matched sides.

What transpired last evening fits neither of these definitions.

As an independent voter, I tuned in last evening to find out where each of the three Democratic contenders stood on specific issues. Unfortunately, most of what I heard was childish bickering.

Substance, specifics, respectful give and take on issues....that's what most Americans want. The candidates, CNN and Wolf Blitzer did not deliver. It was a waste of my time.

Come on folks, let's face the facts, OBAMA THREW THE FIRST PUNCH, DID YOU EXPECT HILLARY TO FALL FROM THAT PUNCH? instead she showed everybody what she had, and Obama couldn't take it, the old saying is If you play with fire, you will get burned. Obama got burned. Obama came out on stage looking like a whipped Chipmunk who is in over his head. HILLARY 2008, ALL THE WAY TO THE WHITE HOUSE. NO ONE KNEW WHO OBAMA WAS UNTIL 2007, WHAT HAS HE DONE TO HELP THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. GO BACK TO THE SENATE AND GET SOME EXPERIENCE. TRY AGAIN IN 2020.

The so-called "debate" convinced me more than ever that I won't participate in this election at all.

All I can say Wolf...is thank you!!!

I think you did us a good service by letting them good head to head. Now we can see their underbellies!!!

No one really respects anyone who does the zinger thing, Both Obama and Clinton have their faults. Obama has more fluff to offer. not sure what he stands for in all the issues. Both of them never mention much about terrorism and what they are actually going to do with stopping up our borders. Secure borders make for a more securer nation. As all of us know, politicians say one thing and do another when they are running for the highest office in the land. Just to get the votes. They say what they thing we need to hear. Then when they get in, its whos giving the most money and filling up various pockets. There is no perfect president anywhere. The Republicians are turning into liberals. Spend, spend, spend.

Wolf,

I think you did a great job. There several times you tried to interject and return them to the question at hand. However they were not listening to you. As for Obama, yaaaaahooo.. he needed to say his peace. Hillary needs to run her campaign.. Bill needs to conduct himself as a spouse of a CEO, better yet like a future first lady... so funny. Sorry I cant see that happening.... Does Hillary really trust him to keep the cigar holders use as they were intended and that he will keep his pants on while she is attempting to lead this country on her experience of being a first lady. I see a movie in the making and it wont be pretty.

But honestly Wolf, you and LOU Dobbs seriously need to consider running as a team. You two would be fantastic when compared to the rest of the pack. Step out and be leaders if you will please.

I was a big supporter of Senator Clinton before the debate. However, after watching the entire debate last time I must say that I have changed. I am now a BIGGER and more of a solid supporter of the Senator from New York. She handled her own after Obama started the criticism. I agree with Hillary, it is clear that Obama was rehearsed and scripted because he said he didn't agree with Reagan and so on and Hillary corrected him by saying she did not say Reagan...hahah. Folks, look at that part of the debate again.

If Obama doesn't have his rehearsed speeches and scripted then he is without his luster and coherence. Hillary has proven to have substance and strength! She is what the country needs. Senator Clinton is experienced and can challenge the republicans and win!

I am an African-American male in my 20's and I support Sen.Clinton! Not every Black will vote for Obama!

New Jersey for Hillary

I have watched several of the democratic debates and found this one to be informative, enlightening, and even entertaining. The format allowed for both a traditional and relaxed atmosphere. Blitzer did a good job of moderating without being a distraction.

Wolf, I have a simple request.
The next time you have a debate, don't allow the candidates to talk about the other Democratic candidates. A simple rule. If they start, their mics are cut off.
Then ask them each about their plans for the economy, health care, Iraq, etc.
No comparisons to another Democrat's plans – just theirs.
You or Anderson are more than welcome to question perceived shortcomings in all of their plans – but they will not be allowed to criticize each other.
That would lead to an educating conversation on the differences between the candidates.
But that won't happen will it, Wolf?
Because that's boring. When I saw an ad for one of the earlier Democratic debates you actually had a boxing ring bell go off. You guys want them to fight and create drama. How long did you guys milk the "racial spat" after Obama and Hillary had already agreed to a truce over MLK?

Obama said he was against the typical Washington politicians...he sure acted like a typical Washington politician last night.

I enjoyed the debate. However, I do not understand why the democratic candidates are never asked about illegal immigration. This is where you let us down, by not asking about all issues important to us.

Comments on this blog suggest that Hillary actually accomplished her GOAL:
Make Obama look and sound LIKE me (Hillary) so that everyone will turn out to HATE him just as they hate me (Hillary).

Next day, go out there are tell the world that Obama is equally as diversive.

Make Edwards look good in the debate, and then join forces with him AGAINST Obama after the debate. Does anyone recall the brief meeting between Clinton and Edwards after the debate?

Well, the Clintons have fooled you again, idiots!!! and you have indeed fallen for it!!!
Good luck because she cannot fool Independents and moderate Republicans, only dumb democrats!

Wolf,

Most entertaining debate I've seen in a while. Great job. Oh and anyone saying that Obama isn't truthful needs to go back and look and the Clinton record on telling the truth. To quote the man "It's a fairy tale, give me a break"

Obama says he is taking the high road during his campaign. But yet he continues to make attacks on Hillary as well. He certainly didnt take the high road last night and he apparently still isnt.

The debate was fiery at first, but it needed to happen. Obama needed to respond to all the mischaracterizations and misquotes the Clintons have slung his way. What would it look like for the future president of the United States to sit by and not stand up for himself. Sure he took some low blows at her, but that's fair game as she and Bill have been playing games with him in these past few weeks. People please. Listen to Hillary Clinton on the issues. She's the one with no substance and no direct answers to questions. She meaders around the question and vaguely answers them. She wants the power that a seat in the White House will bring. She will not follow through on anything she's promising. Four more years of the same political crap. I don't think so.

ApolIo, I am impressed by Mitt Romney's and resume and believe he is likely the most qualified leader in the field of candidates. Unfortunately, the man has no integrity. He panders to voters, telling them whatever he believes they want to hear, His newly found conservative values are a facrce and his promises to bring auto jobs back to Detroit during the Michigan primary turned my stomach. What will he promise the people of Florida? 4 years free of hurricanes?

We need a president with the courage to stand up and do what's right for the country and the wisdom know just what that is.

You know what drives me crazy is the free pass some of you guys give Obama! Why isn't he or his campaign held to the same standards as Hillary's?? So are you people saying Bill Clinton is the only spouse of the presidential candidates on the campaign trail stumping on the part of their spouse?? I do not think so, I hear Michelle Obama speak at rallies, just as we have seen Mrs. Edwards doing the same thing. Moreover, both of these women constantly question Hillary's record, so what is the difference?? WHY THE DIFFERENT STANDARD? So Mrs. Obama and Mrs. Edwards can attack Hillary, question her record and stump on their spouses’ behalf, but if Bill Clinton does the same things as these women for his spouse, he is accused of being the one running for President. How is this fair? Make sure your litmus tests are fair and given equally to each candidate. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

Comments on this blog suggest that Hillary actually accomplished her GOAL:
Make Obama look and sound LIKE me (Hillary) so that everyone will turn out to HATE him just as they hate me (Hillary).

Next day, go out there are teel the world that Obama is equally as diversive.

Make Edwards look good in the debate, and then join forces with him AGAINST Obama after the debate. Does anyone recall the brief meeting between Clinton and Edwards after the debate?

Well, the Clintons have fooled you again, idiots!!! and you have indeed fallen for it!!!
Good luck because she cannot fool Independents and moderate Republicans, only naive democrats!

Trust me, all of you will get what you paid. I can't wait to see us Americans complaining about the Clinton's scandals over the next few years. Do you honestly think the Congress would want to work with HRC? I don't care if the Congress is controlled by the Democrats. They differ on how some issues. Hey, she is very presidential. Let's be honest! HRC would be some corporate lawyer somewhere if she wasn't married to Bill Clinton.

This despite the bickering, this was one of the most significant debates in recent memory. The candidates were forced to defend their records, explain their positions on important issues like the economy and healthcare. Barely a mention of the war, however. I hope we don't forget this important issue.

Wolf...you're the man.

People are making WAY too much of "conflict." Of course, the candidates are going to attack one another's records and policies. Grow up, folks. Frankly, it was good to hear both Clinton and Obama refute/explain the charges. In my mind, Obama seemed less riled and had better explanations. Edwards held his own as well. Having researched some of the original accusations since, I'm a bit disappointed that Bill and Hillary took so many of Obama's comments out of context. What that says to me is that Hillary must not have too much ammunition to use against Obama. I was leaning toward Hillary, but the more I learn, the more I'm moving in Obama's direction.

While Wolf may have done fine I think debates as a whole accomplish very little. I learn almost nothing on a candidate's positions because no one will focus on the questions and moderators rarely call candidate's on the carpet for giving prepared speeches to questions no one asked. The fact that we have had more debates this campaign than ever before and still very little substance beyond three or four sentences is disheartening.

I don't want to choose a president based upon witty comebacks and questions on former President Clinton's dancing ability. What I want to hear is why Obama is considered inexperienced but Hilary's only got one term under her belt. (If you are counting her experience as first lady then I think we might as well throw all the other first ladies into this race). I want to hear where the money is coming from for suggested programs, etc. These debates don't provide enough information – only entertaining sound bites for the media.

I agree with you Wolf. I still prefer Hillary over Obama. I think that he is
mudding his own waters with his vague half truths...he's lawyering.
Hillary and Bill want him to actually be truthful if he really wants to run our
Country. I still do not think he as the knowledge and experience to do it!

C'mon, Wolf, you just know that she hates anybody who just might defeat her...

Surely I'm not the only one who noticed that Obama was so into himself and what he was going to say or so nervous when he walked on to the stage last night that he forgot to shake hands with Blitzer! The moment was very awkward and Wolf had to walk over to Obama to shake his hand. The job of President is the most demanding, stressful job in the world. Obama's awkward moment last night is very telling about whether he is ready for the job.

I really like Wold Blitzer is always lookign for the most sensational piece of news and it does nto surprise me that he woudl let HIllary go on the attack for more than 2 minutes creating falsehoods and making accuations on such minor details as to what content is posted on Obama's website. What on earth doe sthat have to do with the issues.

Conversely even when a candidate did not answer the question yo unever went back and asked them to answer it. I can't stand Wolf Blitzer in case you couldn't tell and I would prefer to watch MSNBC over CNN any day of the week. The only bright spot is Anderson Cooper.

Wolf...Great Job!! Letting them cut loose allowed us a better glimpse of how they handle conflict and stress–and recovery from mistakes.

The format was superb...we could really see what the two leading contenders were like with their hair down and their fur up!

I'm please my personal choice–Edwards kept his cool–and I believe his responses and overall presentation was the most Presidential.

Although I am pleased with their agendas–I do not believe they will achieve universal healthcare–because of the mandatory enrollment requirement.

Most American's will fear another program like social security on the horizon...and neither of the candidates involved healthcare organizations, pharmacies, insurance, hosptials in their plan–which I believe is a mistake. If we're to change healthcare–we must involve the providers/sustainers/facilitators of that care. I would prefer a commitment to try–rather than an unachievable golden carrot for voters.

Regarding the economy–only Edwards was not in favor of the current hot topic: paying government money to Americans to go out and stimulate the economy. This is the most ridiculous idea I've seen. The way to fix out of control debt–is not more debt. This is tantamount to using your credit card to pay your mortgage–and is not a good way to manage family finances–nor government finances. For that I am pleased–I guess that makes him a fiscal conservative when compared to Obama and Clinton!!

Hey Wolf,
Not bad at all, finally a debate! A little fire under the kettle never hurt. Now that we know both Clinton and Obama can bite back it feels like we can actually start talking about the issues like Edwards has been doing. We want to know when and how they will deal with the issues in the first hundred days!!! It's a long way to the White House now give us definite plans!!!!
Yeah Wolf!!!

Include DENNIS KUCINICH in the debates.

Stop asking petty questions about race and start asking more meaningful ones.

What happened to the ENVIRONMENT and global warming?

I think it would have been nice to include John Edwards the first hour. You shouldbe aware that Mr. Edwards seems to be a worthy cadidate , with worth while ideas. as an undecieded, I would have liked to hear more from him. I have boiled it down to Sen Clinton or John Edwards. I like Obama, but Hilary sort of chewed him up pretty easily. Makes me worried that he couldn't stand up to the GOP and their nasty campaign stuff. And they are desparete, so they will come out fighting. Thank you,

I think it's disingenous to say that there are only three candidates remaining. Simply because your news organization CHOSE to only allow three candidates to debate does not mean that somehow Dennis Kucinich is off the ballot. You specifically said "three standing" and I think you should apologize and correct yourself as a good journalist would – Kucinich continues to stand for the nomination, whatever your opinion of his polling numbers.

No one's disputing your right to tailor your debates – I think it's underhanded, but it remains your right. However, you shouldn't pretend that another candidate simply doesn't exist – it shows clearly your bias and institutional disregard for democracy and accuracy.

Wolf,

You did a poor job. The issues, the issues, the issues Wolf. Forget the cat fights, who the hell cares.

What are the issues in America today and shut them up when they loose focus. Poor job in the last debate.

Joe McCormack

Enough is enough, Wolf! From now on, wear a referee shirt and use a whistle, PPPLLLEAAASE!

Wolf,

I want to say that first...you letting them actually debate the issues or even doing the mud slinging without the 90-sec soundbite limitation was worthwhile. Normal debates are usually 5-7 minutes per candidate and sometimes with round robin and open debate sections. It was clear that the clock watching was bothering all of the candidates and there was no reason to put them in straight jackets.

They are also adults and not children, so they should be able to show some decorem on their own and your job is moderator...not referee.

The only area I think that needs to be done better is ensuring equal time as best you can. Edwards was the one who mostly got the short end of the stick here and you could definitely have said a few times..."Let's give Sen. Edwards some additional time for his comments to be fair." If the debate time is within 5-10%...no problems, but beyond that you must step and an force more equal time.

That was a debate? Hmmmm....Wolf, maybe you should go back to high school and check the rules for debate. Those three just pitched their rehearsed stump speeches with occasional jabs at each other. Nobody came away feeling better about America or the candidates.
Better luck next time, Wolf.

The fighting began with Hillary, and all of you should ask yourselves, who signed
NAFTA into law? BILL CLINTON! He signed that into law instead of fighting for universal healthcare for Americans.
So remember when we were told we would hear a sucking sound well now we have it. No jobs, no money!
I will not vote for Hillary if she is the Nominee for the Democratic Party,
The Clintons are only about power and if you think she will get anything done remember the fights of the 90's.
Also her comment about Obama taking responsibility about his votes she should talk, she voted for the war, she voted for the bankrupcy bill, so give me a break!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
She is so poll tested it is unreal, and when she said she found her voice I guess it was Bill's and I voted for him twice.

We needed to hear this debate. For some canidates, personality, poise, and charm seem to go away in political debates such as CNN's. You helped uncover what some of us needed to see. Thanks and keep up the good job!

Wolf, I have both positive and negative feedback for you.

On a positive note: you did a good job letting the candidates speak at the debate. I personally don't mind a heated debate and believe that America is richer when there is uncensored discourse.

On a negative note: I am very tired of CNN's biased coverage. It is increasingly clear to me that all of your commentators (perhaps with a couple of exceptions) are rooting for Obama. For example, Wolf, when you were asked on LKL who was ahead in the polls, you hedged and avoided answering but finally said Clinton by a narrow margin. Wrong, Wolf! Look at RealClearPolitics.com and you'll see that Hillary's current lead is 8.7%. A Rassmussen poll 2 days ago gave her a 10 point lead. Another example: Although Clinton beat Obama by 6 percentage points in Nevada, you went along with the spin that it was a "split" decision, while at the same time calling McCain's 3-point win in South Carolina a clear victory.

Many of us bloggers have commented that CNN has been way too easy on Obama, both on your website and on the TV. Lately I have found FOX to be more balanced, believe it or not!

So please make an effort to be more like the objective journalists you were trained to be and provide factual news reports, not slanted sensationalist reports.

Mr. Blitzer,

Your work last evening was exceptional. You let them speak and your follow-ups were spot on. It was good to see them so engaged ...as we knew they would be after the Nevada / Bill / Churches weekend.

Please ask more questions of the candidates if you feel they have either dodged the question or haven't answered to your satisfaction. We are watching and listening. I enjoyed your sense of humor and did I see you smile?

Thanks CNN for helping us all understand the differences between these brave and courageous Americans as they realize their ambitions. What a great nation we have!

Rick
Port Orange, Fl.

Thank you Wolf Blitzer for keeping as much civility as your were able considering the candidates, two in particular, appeared bent on keeping the atmosphere charged with their vitrolic banter.

As a declined-to-state voter, and more importantly as a citizen of the USA, I am concerned about the lack of productivity by our elected officials, in particular all of the federal and my states legislatures.

I am looking for a candidate (wouldn't it be nice to have several) who are move concerned about constructive discussion of critical issues affecting our nation and our place in the world verses their petty sand box bickering and "i am better than you are!" The "one up manship" dialogue and in particular the period when Senators Clinton and Obama kept talking over each other to get their jab in, was embarassing! And certainly not presidential...even kids in sand boxes are usually more civil.

Also as a woman, a professional and a member of the original class of baby boomers, I am sorry to see Senator Clinton loose her decorum when going one on one when trying to get her point across. I wonder how she would handle negotiations with another world leader who just might not like her ideas?

Thank you for all of the thoughtful coverage of all the many topics you address on the Situation Room and your Sunday show.

It was so obvious that O'Bama was ready to fight but it was Bill Clinton who had handed him the material for his challenge...This made it appear that Barak was being tortured by the Clinton. It created a double whammy for Hillary who had to defend not only herself but to defend her husbands remarks. I have had tremendous respect for O'Bama but that respect evaporated with the debate. He totally minulipated and monopolized the debate with an attitude that spoke louder than words. The attitude? "I have never been intensely involved in Civil Rights but I have somehow EARNED the right to be President." Thus far, we do not know what he has actually done to EARN that right.

I found last night's debate lively, illuminating and encouraging. No matter which of the three wins - and I hope it is one of these three - I believe we will have a first-rate president. All are bright, committed to their ideals, hard-working and articulate. The discussion was not ranorous, in my view, just rowdy - something to expect in a high-stakes, highly emotional situation. None of them can let a comment go by that might come back to haunt them if left unanswered or unchallenged. The brass ring is the Oval Office, and this crowd jostling to get on the Merry-Go-Round knows you have to use elbows to get to the horses that move up and down.

I thought Wolf showed the right balance between letting things run and keeping them moving.

I agree with Russ in WA. I was beginning to like Obama, but last night felt Edwards was the hands down winner. He at least tried to stick to policy. I have never liked Hillary, but Obama's antics made me as mad as her's did last night.

So, maybe Edwards 08?

And Wolf, you were fine. Many of us got a pretty clear picture of these candidates last night.

It was more of a heated "conversation," but much more to the point and informative. I enjoyed it very much! Anything that gets them really talking about issues and what's really on their minds works, as far as I'm concerned!

Thanks for all your efforts.

wolf – you did a good job last night, making sure the candidates had enough time to refute false claims and lies by the other candidates, keep up the fair and good work!

I thought the debate was one of the best I have ever seen. It was time to anrrow the field and let the front runners have it out. People are still in limbo on Clinton and Obama, and I think they may even be weighing Edwards. It was time that some of the dirty laundry got cleaned, and it was time for them all to stand face to face and talk this out.

Wolf, EXCELLENT job! You did exactly what you should have done in the process of the candidates hashing it out!

Wolf-

Great job. You actually allowed us to see the candidates for who they are. Clinton came across knowledgeable about the issues, tough on approach, and calm on the attack.

Obama came across of the typical washington politician promising everything under the sun. Obama needs to ask himself, who IS really against healthcare? against jobs? against education? This guy is an empty suit. No substance whatsoever. He should go back to being a state rep or city councilor or whatever the heck he was. Where he can fool people with his largesse.

I thought it made Sen Edwards look a lot better, with Sen Obama second, and Sen Clinton way too prickly.

That said, why are the other candidates still in the race not allowed on stage? Keeping Kucinich out is as silly as not talking about Ron Paul while you in the MSM tout both Guiliani and Thompson who both get fewer votes.

Wake up and stop trying to choose for us. We want to choose – not have the media do it for us.

And here I thought that the Democrat contenders were all supposed to be friends now. Their friendship lasted about as long as the promise of a return to civility and trust in government did when the Democrats took back both sides of Congress.

Fortunately edwards did a wonderful job of hitting the issues and contrasting everyones positions. He controlled the debate far more than the moderator and where we discussed policy details last night it was largely his doing. Not only did he hit his positions he contrasted with the other two forcing them to talk issues and defend positions. He showed there are differences in platform between them. Something alrgely ignored in media coverage.

I can't recall a nastier debate people were throwing roundhouses for the head. That is obama and clinton were.

Obama sounded and looked like he was making it up as he went along..Too much stammering..Jack, ny,ny, you're right, Obama started in on Sen. Clinton with the remark of her being on the board of Wal-Mart...She had to bring him back down to size..Thank you, Wolf, I learned alot last night.

I think Clinton came looking for a fight. And I think Edwards was so desperate that he chose to attack Obama and do a double-team with Clinton. I do think there should have been some rules – if there were any, they weren't enforced. It was like a free-for-all and they all came off as quite childish. I would also like to see a facts check report published after this debate, and all the debates – so we know who made valid points, and who is twisting words and spreading lies. I know some things that were already disproven were brought up several times during the debate.

A debate is not supposed to be a test of who can yell the loudest or make the most insulting comment at their opponent. It is supposed to provide information on the candidates and where they stand. There was not much information out of this debate – more like misinformation, tantrums, finger pointing, and threats to tell mommy.

Wolf–why didn't you call them on the fact that none of them has ever done ANYTHING in the real world? Edwards has taken money from people, Obama organized campaign rallies and HIllary–we all know what she didn't do.

We need someone who understands the economy.

Obama's plan to freeze interest rates would eliminate banks from lending. It would not happen–banks would invest their money elsewhere.

Socialism didn't work–look at France (I lived/worked there for many years) it sucks. 23% sales tax, 50+% income tax, tariffs...on and on, and no economic growth–French leave the country to find new lives in America.

We need Mitt Romney–someone who has taken financial disasters and turned them into successes time and time again.

Mitt understands how government intervention damages our economic prosperity, why companies leave the US and what can be done to make the USA competitive so that companies and jobs stay here.

Experience? Mitt Romney

Clinton and Obama both made me disgusted. The only one who showed any maturity was Edwards. Too bad he is not one of the media rock stars. He got short changed as usual regardless of what Jack may think.

Hillary Clinton is a total joke.

Leave it up to the democrats to put her in as a nominee.

Experience? Give me a break!

We are waiting for her fat ass. We are going to slap her down and wipe that smirk off of her husband's cheating face!

Wolf did a great job. Sometimes when there is two people needling each other, it is wise to let them release their anger and from there they become good friends.

President George Bush...President Bill Clinton......President George Bush's son George Bush becomes President George Bush........ and now we want President Bill Clinton's wife to become President...... yeah thats sounds like the America I want. Hey, Laura you can be next.....

I'd give that round to Edwards

Wolf, you are my least favorite moderator...of all time. You and CNN are descending into the pathetic realm of sensationalism and pointed sound-byte questions that lower the level of discourse and discredit the presidential election process. I know CNN is eager to compete with Fox (your graphics have become even more seizure enducing than theirs – congrats!), but your desperate quest for ratings, drama, and headlines has finally caused this viewer to decide to tune out.

I felt that this was the most issue centered debate so far. Yes ,there was bombast, but there was real substance on Iraq,the economy and health care. Significant differances in the 3 candidates became obvious last night. Wolf and the others did a great job.

The only problem that I had was that Wolf did not follow-up on what the candidates were saying or ask them to clarify what they meant. There were a number of statements by Obama on credit card interest rates, single payer health care, and Rezko for example.

Wlof, I think you did a great job on this. In the first few debates, you came accross as a Hillary supporter. In the last debate, you appeared as a JOURNALIST, just doing your job. I think what you did on Monday was great and this should be used as a benchmark for future debates on a journalistic stand point.

The debate was well handled. I thought the freedom was well worth any criticism. I was starting to feel like CNN was too biased towards Obama. Thanks for letting everyone know just how bad he is.

I think it is important to distinguish this from an actual debate. This was glorified Springer. It makes me wonder if any of these so called journalists have ever even seen a real, actual, moderated debate. Probably not. Real journalism is dead, and has been dead for a long time.

Wolf

You did a great job last night.

Wolf, on the Universal health care question, you seem to imply that Hillary's plan advocated illegal immigrants getting health care because Edwards was quick to say he thinks all Democratic candidates plans did not include illegal immigrants. Does Hilllary universal plan include illegal immigrants?

Wolf, I totally don't like how you do your job, but last night was the first time I've ever been ok with your performance.

Thank you for keeping out of it and not being controlling.

to howard: Dobbs instead of Wolf. Nope, Wolf did very well, Dobbs?! At least Wolf does ok from time to time in The Situation Room, Dobbs?! I have yet to see him do anything well. His opinionated comments are unruly and uncalled for, unprofessional and unwise.

Wolf does a much better job.

I think what we are seeing is Obama and Clinton's strategy of eliminating John Edwards from the Presidential Democratic campaign falling apart before our very eyes. You did nothing wrong. Obama and Clinton are the ones that made the fools of themselves. It is obvious that each one of them is more concerned about their own egos and agendas than the fact that most of middle and poor Americans are fighting to stay alive. I wish, in fact I challenge CNN to show John Edwards talking policy as much as the American media (including CNN) spends time watching Clinton and Obama in the kindergarten sandbox throwing sand/mud on each other. Who would want either of these two children to be President of the UNITED STATES.

Well Hillary didn't stay on topic nor respect her time limits. I guess you did a little better this time Wolf but really can't anyone shut her up and make her be respectful of the other candidates.

Oh....I forgot this IS Hillary we are talking about. She has no respect for anyone but herself and Bill. What a sleeze.

Nobody takes responsibility for anything these days.

Vince Los Angeles, CA
please stop cut and paste. Just because you can doesn't mean your right or smarter than anyone else.

As a lifelong Democrat, I was ashamed to see the political and personal bickering between Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton during the South Carolina debates. This type of deeply rooted negativity from members of the same party is unjustified and should cease and desist immediately. While both candidates charged each other over records and personal relationships, few issues were directly addressed and this is what should matter the most. Mr. Obama said it best when he stated that “no one’s hands are clean” in the election - a responsible assessment of the landscape in which they all play in. It would behoove all Democratic candidates – and that includes former Sen. John Edwards as well, to stop with the personal attacks and focus on America and its stunning and profound issues. So many people – Democrat, Republican and Independent are turned off by this type of nasty back and forth that instead of uniting the country as Mr. Obama touts will actually do the opposite. It is also unfortunate that Sen. Clinton cannot see past the irresponsible rhetoric that her husband and former President Bill Clinton is bringing into her campaign. It is unnecessary for Mr. Clinton to polarize what is already a heated contest between three worthy Democratic individuals.

I have read tons of comments on message boards and web sites supporting all three candidates – most downplaying other candidates that they do not support. When will we get past the bickering and arguing as Americans and realize the dangerous shape that the economy is in, as well as the fact that we are in a war. Support the candidate of your choice, but leave the personal, frivolous and school yard attacks to children and stay focused on the prize that is getting a Democrat in the White House on Jan. 20, 2009.

God Bless.

I wanted to include this but was called away. I'm sure Wolf is a good guy but we somebody else do the debates. There is just to much kid gloves in these debates. People want meat and potatoes in this soup, not broth. Why don't you try Dobbs or someone that might push the envelope. We might as well find out now how they will be tight spot than to find out later they with unacceptable results.

Bottom line…………By putting Bill Clinton in the white house to be second opinioned on everything Hillary says is going backwards not forward. FACT….his bully pulpit is much larger than hers will ever be!!!!

Fireworks was started by the CNN woman asking questions – when she asked Obama what his response was to some of Hilary's comments. This question opened up the whole debate to backbiting. I was not interested in the she said,did /he said ,did. This should have been cut off immediately and the candidates told to simply answer the questions as they are asked. i was interested in what the candidates planned to do about resolving economic issues, wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, health care and other issues.

Before any more debates are held, I think all potential moderators should take lesssons from League of Womenn Voters. They appear to be the only ones that know how to moderate a political debate.

Yesterday, at debate Barack Obama accurately predicted that the stock market may have a problem tomorrow due to some other country's stock market having low numbers and Wolf shot back, no one knows what will happen on the Stock Market tomorrow. Well, apparently, Obama DID and was able to have the foresight to connect the dots and prove that he is encomically astute!

No more Obama for me! GO HILLARY

To Vince in LA (first post)....I am very well educated and will be supporting Hillary.

I am sick of all the drama. But good job, Wolf!

I am Hispanic and I support Hillary. In the debate last night she was very presidental. If Sen Obama wants to succeed where past black candidates have fail, his campaign must be a biracial one.

South Carolina offers a large black electorate, by February 5 white women and latino's will out weigh the strength of black voters.

Let's get out of the school yard and into some serious discussion on how to save our beloved country . We have had enough of the Republicans, the Party of Fiscal Discipline. YEAH! RIGHT!

I have one complaint. You let Obama away with too many "Wait a minute. This is important." moments. This unecessarily ate up the clock and particularly took time from Edwards.

Otherwise, this was a very revealing debate. The Obama strategy failed miserably. Obama continued his ploy of taking things out of context to make his case. Most people look things up for themselves online or have someone do it for them. Obama also betrayed a very controlling and arrogant attitude. No unity candidate in Obama.

I think we learned that Obama is not ready for 08

Thanks CNN!

I feel that Wolf & the co-anchors done a good job the only thing that bothers me is that they knew that certain questions that were ask of Obama & Clinton would create a FIGHT so why not take responsibility. Instead CNN spins it like they had nothing to do with it or had no idea it would happen & critique the debate with a negative tone toward Clinton..I like a firey debate so I thought it went fine, I think giving the candidates time to respond to accusations is a good thing. I think Edwards was the most impressive, I know now I will not vote for Obama in our primary on Saturday if he can not handle a debate and take on a fight that he started with Clinton we do not need him in the white house. I also found that his message has no substance just a bunch of words...I can not blieve 50%+ of the black voters in SC are going to support him.

"As riveting as the back-and-forth might be, it wasn't the point of the event: I hope the people watching Monday night came away from this debate in South Carolina with a better understanding where the candidates stand on key issues."

Unfortunetly I didn't do that. Instead, I became more confused on their positions, and just grew tired of their bickering. Instead of a debate on policies, it felt more like a session of who-can-throw-the-better-retort. It almost seemed imature

I think that Obam's flerting tactics with the Republicans was silly in Nevada.

Regan was a neo con. Obama is getting desperate.

I liked the debate. It was fiery, not angry. You several times repeated questions when they wandered off and you can't be held responsible for a certain guy who likes to talk over people.

Wolf ,

You did a great job in the Debate last night. It was good to see some action.

I think it is important to state who started it. In this case it was Obama. If hillary had let it go then it would have been considered as weakness.