The South Carolina primary debate between Democratic Presidential nomination wannabes Senator Hillary Clinton, Senator Barack Obama and former Senator John Edwards was the most peppery “real” debate yet — with moments where it got intensely personal with each candidate seemingly accomplishing some goals.

Clinton and Obama went at it in a debate that was the closest this season yet to a real debate versus the talking-point-regurgitating televised group press conferences that often pass for debates.

The two quickly pounced on each other, needled each other, with Obama spending much time in defense mode and a meticulously-researched Clinton in attack mode. Edwards played the white male in the middle as the two historic candidates battled it out — challenging each with pointed questions.

But the evening will be known for this exchange which pointed out the personal animosities bubbling beneath the surface that bubbled out before the TV cameras. From a transcript provided by CNN:

OBAMA: Hillary, we just had the tape. You just said that I complimented the Republican ideas. That is not true.

What I said — and I will provide you with a quote — what I said was is that Ronald Reagan was a transformative political figure because he was able to get Democrats to vote against their economic interests to form a majority to push through their agenda, an agenda that I objected to. Because while I was working on those streets watching those folks see their jobs shift overseas, you were a corporate lawyer sitting on the board at Wal-Mart.

Later Hillary Clinton replied:

CLINTON: Bad for America, and I was fighting against those ideas when you were practicing law and representing your contributor, Rezko, in his slum landlord business in inner city Chicago.

Here’s the view of one registered independent voter on how the candidates did:

HILLARY CLINTON CONTINUES TO BLOSSOM AS A NATIONAL CANDIDATE and Republicans are underestimating her at their peril. Even if she didn’t have Bill Clinton running around playing hatchet-man for her she would be formidable. Her way of speaking, grasp of material, ability to show passion, and penchant to go in for the swift and effective attack all underscore her claim that GOPers will find her a highly-tough opponent. She had to show that she could take it to Obama in specifics and she did. She also had to show she could do it without Bill Clinton in the background coming to her defense or handing her notes — and she did.

A response such as the one above (whether you agree with it or not and whether it is accurate or not — and Obama disputed the way it was thrown out) shows a nimbleness that will serve her well if she gets the nomination. Her WORST MOMENT came when Edwards asked her about banning lobbyists from her administration and she skirted the issue. A clear evasion and a portent of what is likely to come if she enters the Oval Office: the lobbyists will change with the administration. Debate advice to Mrs. Clinton: cut the smiles and smirks when Obama talks. Just take notes and speak after.

OBAMA REMAINS A STRONG CANDIDATE SEEMINGLY TRYING TO DO A STYLE OF POLITICS THAT THE CULTURE MAY NOT BE READY TO ACCEPT: He’s arguing for non-polarization, the politics of inclusion, and a more cerebral approach to politics. The system (the way surrogates are used, witness the Clinton campaign; the angry tone of talk radio; the raging tone of columnists and internet commentary) lends itself to more raw emotion. He had to show that he could stand up to Mrs. Clinton (or, rather The Clintons) and he did.

But the often unspoken problem for Obama is this: he is NOT a great debate performer and he is not really “growing” in the debates as Clinton is growing. His fortéis the inspiring speech. And while speeches are vital in a campaign, debate performance — and not always being on the defensive — is also crucial. Obama’s underpinning theme is that Americans are BETTER than the politics we’ve seen so far. The problem: there are few signs Americans WANT a politics that is more elevated. Negative campaigning, demonization and defining opponents WORKS and WINS support and people enjoy the emotion and conflict.

EDWARDS gave his best debate performance yet. In his questions, he proved to be an equal opportunity challenger. And his good-humor and ease, milking the idea that he was the only white male running against two historic candidates, was classy. Edwards’ answers seemed more sincere than in any of his debates and his passion was just that. There seems virtually zilch chance that Edwards can win the nomination, and it’s unlikely he’d run for Veep again — but look for him to have a high post in a Democratic administration.

Here’s an extensive cross section of news coverage and weblog reaction to the debate:

Read the rest of this entry »

Fred Thompson is bringing something new to the ’08 Presidential scramble, and it may just work.

The former Senator/actor is raising cool to an art form and, at a time, when voters are hearing too much from too many, his detachment has lifted him to the top of the Republican polls and may just keep him there.

Take, for example, his demurral to participating in the Values Voter crowd scene next Monday:

“Debates are important, but let’s don’t let the tail wag the dog here. Standing up there 10 in a row, you know, like a bunch of seals waiting for someone to throw you the next fish is not necessarily the best way to impart your information to the American people. I’m not above acting like a seal every once in a while and waiting for the next fish. I just don’t want to do it all the time.”

On the campaign trail, Thompson keeps sniffing at some of the fish and finding them too stale. Yesterday, when he has asked about the Terri Schiavo case, pushed by his fellow Tennessean Dr. Bill Frist, he declined to bite.

“I can’t pass judgment on it.” he said. “I know that good people were doing what they thought was best. That’s going back in history. I don’t remember the details.”

Staying out of the race until this month was a winning strategy. Now that he is in it, Thompson as a campaigner is doing the next best thing. Playing off the eagerness of Giuliani, Romney and McCain may be just the ticket to success.

Cross-post from my blog
For more on the Thompson campaign, click here

This blog and many other blogs and websites reported last year that then-Majority Leader Bill Frist was being investigated on insider-trading charges. It’s now over and Frist has been cleared, the Washington Post reports:

Ending an investigation that clouded the tenure of former Senate majority leader Bill Frist, federal prosecutors have decided not to file insider-trading charges against the Tennessee Republican for his sales of stock in a family-owned chain of hospitals.

The U.S. Attorney in the Southern District of New York and Securities and Exchange Commission staff sent Frist letters last week signaling that they had closed their joint, 18-month investigation. The letters essentially cleared him of wrongdoing.

Frist said in a statement that he “acted properly” and that his only reason for selling stock in his trust accounts was to “eliminate the appearance of a conflict of interest.” Read the rest of this entry »