Obama really botched the healthcare issue last night. And no one cares about the Iraq war vote. Even Democratic primary voters don't care that much.

Obama doesn't come off well in these debates. He comes off as rambling and unfocused.

and when they talked about both of them on the ticket it was obvious that Clinton/Obama made a lot more sense.

No one except bloggers care about the Iraq vote.  Her reasoning was sincere and I believe her.  The media can spin her as a liar, but that is not what America sees.  

Rachel Maddow was a real disappointment last night.  She seems to be stuck in the cynical angry meme of 2002 about Clinton's vote.  She needs to go watch Clinton, Edwards and Kerry's floor speeches where they explained their vote. Edwards was a full out hawk , Kerry was standing on both sides of the issue and completely disengenuous and Clinton said exactly what she said last night.  Even Olberman was a disappointment because he didn't seem to know that was not a new stance by Clinton.

But in any case, not many people care about that vote.  They care about getting some relief from the misery of the bush years.

I would not say it was a bad night for Obama, but after watching the debate late last night I have to say that Hillary won it pretty convincingly.  Iraq is not an issue here (IMO) with those who made the Iraq vote into a big thing (a dealbreaker) not only a very small portion of the Democratic electorate, but also already decided long time ago.   So, taking the rest of the debate, Hillary won it pretty clearly.  

The primary right now is about these issues, in descending order:

1. The economy

2. Health Care
   
3. changing government
   
4. Iraq

I think Hillary is poised to win this thing despite the media yelping, despite Obama's money advantage and establishment ties, on her relative strength (in comparison with Obama) on almost all important issues.  

Obama did not do badly, he just did not do well enough.  For one thing, he just doesn't have the goods.  The only poilicy advantage he has is that he stood against the war when it cost him nothing politically. Obama can and does make that argument well, for a few minutes, but after that he's done. Hillary dominates on everything else.

The other thing is that this is just her perfect setting. No one does this better, especially when they are constrained to be on good behavior and she goes on a charm offensive.  The only hope he had was to draw her out into an angry exchange, and she wasn't biting at the tentative bait Obama and Wolf threw out.

She even pre-empted one attack, based on the speech Obama gave in Denver.  Near the beginning when they were talking about differences in foreign policy, she went on the offensive in a disarming, not attacking, way, and led with the reference to Obama saying he would meet with all the dictators in the first year of the presidency , and saying how her approach differed in that she would talk to enemies after proper groundwork has been layed.  In his Denver Speech, Obama outright lied about her position on that, saying she would never talk to enemies, just like Bush. She didn't even give him the chance to do that last night. I think that threw him off at the beginning.

She would mop up the floor with McCain or Romney, that was clear.

By the end I really had the gut feeling that she has won the nomination.  I have never had that feeling at all, not even in the months she was ahead in all the polls.  I knew that would not last. But short of a major disaster over the weekend, I think she will have a great Tuesday.

My wife is nervous about Hillary but she got jazzed last night. And that was what she said. Hillary is presidential, Obama still has the wannabe aspect.

I was in agreement with you until they got to Iraq.  Also, people are just getting to know Obama.  They're showing up to his rallies in huge crowds because they're curious.  Anybody who watched last night liked what they saw.

Anyway, I hope you're wrong because if Clinton wins, we will lose in November.

Naturally everyone tends to say their own candidate "won" but I was struck by the fact here last night that even the most dedicated Obama fans were giving her a lot of grudging credit or talking about "draws". It's a cliche but my take was she was in control most of the time and only looked shaky on the Iraq vote issue which is only really of importance to the folks who are most opposed to her anyway. This was the conclusion the folks in the CNN focus group came to almost exactly. Shaky on Iraq, but a 60/40 win on everything else. At the end of the day these debates are only important if there's a major gaffe, otherwise they really just reinforce positive or negative feelings about a candidate. Neither made a major gaffe and so broadly speaking it probably just reinforced existing perceptions. Overall this probably helps her slightly more than him because he failed to demonstrate a compelling reason for choosing him while she displayed the usual steady competence and detailed grasp of issues.

History, however, is full of tricks. Who in 1940 would have predicted the next three presidents would be Truman, Eisenhower and Kennedy.  

Clinton/Obama? Can't wait for the Chris Matthews on air meltdown!!!!!!!!!!!

I was shocked last night. After listening to all the pundits for the last month, I expected this Clinton lady to come out on stage in a KKK hood eating live puppies. They made her seem like the wicked witch of the west and satan's spawn all rolled up into one.

But, she came off as pretty impressive to me.

Luntz's focus group said that Obama won by about 25-5... overwhelmingly said Obama took her down on Iraq.

None of these focus groups are scientific but you are deluding yourself if you think Obama did not dominate the Iraq discussion and with 65 dead today in bombings in bagdad and attacks on US troops rising the last 40 days... Iraq is going to re-emerge as the biggest issue by summer.

Obama is on the right side of IRaq and HRC is stuck on the wrong side. She is a good debater..no doubt about it but even a great debater cannot defend her vote for AUMF and against the Levin Amendment. The last piece of the puzzle was asking her why she did not bother to read the NIE before voting to go to war. Too bad Wolfe did not ask that question after she said she did all her homework on Iraq before voting..no you did not HRC..you know it.

She is a smart person and a better person than Bill and I do not dislike her..just prefer Obama,Ok?

I think Hillary won the debate, despite Obama probably having the strongest debate on policy that I have seen him have. Hillary showed a whole new audiance how knowledgable she is on policy, highlighted her experience brilliantly and won or tied every section with the exception of Iraq. She also scored points in the likability issue. She had the biggest applause line and probably the best line of the night.

On the other hand Obama has the best line against McCain about the wheels coming off the straight talk express. He scored high with Iraq. If Iraq was still the biggest issue you could make the arguement that he tied or even won the debate, but the Economy across the board seems to be peoples' top concern, and healthcare I believe is not far behind Iraq. I'm not sure if Hillary won the nomination, but she certainly won the debate.

I concur with all of the above.

Going into the debate, Hillary had only the worst of press, which is to be expected from fifteen years of anti-Clinton feeling by the MSM.

But last night, nobody but the most rabid anti-Clinton person could not conclude she was truly focused, truly astounding in the breadth of her analyses, particularly on health care.

Focus groups by CNN and others gave the nod to her.

And focus groups of undecideds broke her way 60-40.

And she had the most wildly applauded line of the evening: "It took a Clinton to clean up after the first Bush, and it may well take another Clinton to clean up after the second Bush!"

The applause and enthusiasm in that room just after that remark was thunderous.  It was not merely the most winning line, it was THE LINE of the entire fourteen-month campaign.

Obama folk are quick to point out that they better remember his "Being right from Day One!"

But it is in this fact alone that they do not acknowledge just why they cannot prevail on Super Tuesday.

The Clinton remark was all about being a DEMOCRAT, and Democrats ate it up.  The Obama remark was all about being OBAMA and Obama fans ate it up.

Unfortunately for the latter, this is a DEMOCRATIC primary and DEMOCRATS will decide their nominee.

Democrats love their history; they loved the peace and prosperity of the Clinton years.

Obama fans began their endorsement of Obama with his intended anti-Iraq War vote.  It has formed the nucleus of their gripe against Senator Clinton ever since.

But whereas for them that forms the first basis for their Obama attachment, for most Democrats, as for most of the nation, other issues have long since eclipsed the war--the economy and health care being paramount.

After Senator Clinton's dazzling peformance last night, there is simply no reason for hardcore Democrats to abandon her in favor of a three-year Senate veteran.

For that to have happened, Obama would have needed a knock-out, a sort of "This is why I am so loved; this is why the MSM hates Hillary."

It just didn't happen.  Nobody but the most mindless anti-Clintonite witnessing that debate can conclude that Hillary is hateful.

She came across winningly, deflty avoiding the mines planted by Wolf Blitzer and others, and she came across as an absolute master of most issues presented.

Whereas, however intelligent and thoughtful, and whatever his rhetoric, it was apparent that Barack Obama has many fine qualities--but was still, in terms of sheer comprehension and experience, not in the same league as Hillary Clinton.

And one need not look to "tightening" poll numbers.

Such numbers mislead for several reasons.

California is a prime example.  Over one-half of that electorate has already voted.  Hillary was well ahead in every California survey heretofore; thus, that one half would already be breaking for her easily. And it would mean, therefore, that roughly twice that number would need to go to Obama on election day--even with hopes to come close.  Which, of course, isn't going to happen.

These early voting patterns are also evidenced in other states, when, again, Hillary was far ahead in numbers.

Thus, a very significant part of the national electorate has already voted for Clinton in high numbers.  These votes cannot be recalled, and any measure of current polling is not relevant to them.

One has only to examine the campaign history thus far.  Clinton has won in every contest save two: Iowa and South Carolina.

But Iowa was a caucus--and its outcome represented some nine months of busing in outside forces by the Obama campaign.  And, even on that caucus day, bedrock Democrats split between Edwards and Clinton, whereas Obama collected the nontraditional first voters, indies and cross-overs.  Thus, Iowa was an anomaly--not a norm.

As to South Carolina, again, one must consider the fact that this was a very heavily racially charged primary, and in the end, Obama won a massive share of African-Americans, while losing the massive share of non-African-Americans.  So, again, an anomaly--not a norm.

The Florida results--however "uncotested"--are the true model for Super Tuesday.

This was the most populous and diverse state to have voted thus far; a true presidential "bell-weather" in every sense of the word.

Real people voting--some one million four hundred thousand on the Democratic side.  They voted KNOWING that their votes might not be realized at the Democratic Convention, and knowing full well about the Kennedy endorsements and the Obama South Carolina success.

Yet these voters overwhelmingly chose Clinton--and across the boards, save for African-Americans.

That is the true model for California and other major states on Tuesday.  One does not need poll numbers to understand reality--not when one reads actual results out of Florida, only a week before Super Tuesday.

For the MSM, this campaign has been all about stopping the Clintons.  They loathe them, and hope that they can drive Democrats to loathe them as well.

That isn't going to happen.  It was never going to happen.

Florida proved that, and come Super Tuesday, Hillary will have a very big win--collecting the lion's share of state triumphs.

And she will become the nominee.  Should she choose Senator Obama, that will be an extraordinary ticket.

But whatever her decision, she will become the first woman President of the United States.

The numbers may now favor John McCain.  But Hillary has yet to engage in a debate--and she will prove masterful.

And the Clinton tandem?  Well, they know how to win national elections.

Which is another reason Clinton will triumph on Tuesday.

I thought they both did well.

I think Hillary helped herself a lot by going back to the softer side of her, which seems regular people like more.  She went back to the "I found my voice" mode- which is appealing.

She came out like a bulldog in South Carolina- yes, she was tough, hard as nails, but it comes across as caustic- although she might have to do that at times just because she's a woman and she needs to prove she can be as tough as a man, so maybe alternating the two is a good strategy.  My mother says she won't vote on a woman for President- she says a woman can't represent the office as well as a man.  Look, I know that's archaic and seems impossible in this day and age- but that mode of thought is still out there- not only among men but some women, as well- so Hilary being tough helps her at times, but I think the majority prefer her like she was last night.  Reading other message boards, there were SO MANY people saying they found they "liked" her when they had hated her before.  It's all such a fine line- I saw her changing some minds last night-  what will happen next Tuesday- I don't know, we'll see soon enough.

He just needs a large chunk of the Bay Area and LA votes to come in close enough.  He'll take the valley and the rural perimeter and do just fine here delegatewise.