Starting Gate: About Last Night
Most of the coverage of last night’s Democratic debate in New Hampshire predictably hones in on two story lines. One, the fact that none of the three big candidates – Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards – would pledge to remove all U.S. troops from Iraq within the first four years of their presidency. Two, the “jabs” taken at front-runner Clinton.
Neither narratives are new. The Democratic candidates, with the exception of Bill Richardson, Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel, have taken towards tamping down the expectations on Iraq for some weeks yet. They all have promised an end to the war but just how much of an “end” could be delivered has become something of a flash point.
Didn’t voters elevate Democrats to majority status in Congress for the purpose of ending the war? Probably not as much as to punish Republicans for starting it. Aside from a hard-core segment of the party, it’s hard to imagine that most primary voters won’t recognize the difficult circumstances the next president will be walking into and allow a little leeway on the subject.
Yes, Clinton was the primary target for her opponents and most of them took at least one opportunity to try and chip away at her large lead in the polls. Edwards did so most aggressively and managed to take yesterday’s Senate vote declaring the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization and hint that Clinton’s vote in favor was helping pave the way for a new war against Iran. Obama did little to insert himself into the fray and, judging by the instant punditry, hurt himself by not doing so. While Clinton did not turn in the kind of commanding performance debate watchers have come to expect, she didn’t suffer any lasting damage either.
Neither narratives are new. The Democratic candidates, with the exception of Bill Richardson, Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel, have taken towards tamping down the expectations on Iraq for some weeks yet. They all have promised an end to the war but just how much of an “end” could be delivered has become something of a flash point.
Didn’t voters elevate Democrats to majority status in Congress for the purpose of ending the war? Probably not as much as to punish Republicans for starting it. Aside from a hard-core segment of the party, it’s hard to imagine that most primary voters won’t recognize the difficult circumstances the next president will be walking into and allow a little leeway on the subject.
Yes, Clinton was the primary target for her opponents and most of them took at least one opportunity to try and chip away at her large lead in the polls. Edwards did so most aggressively and managed to take yesterday’s Senate vote declaring the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization and hint that Clinton’s vote in favor was helping pave the way for a new war against Iran. Obama did little to insert himself into the fray and, judging by the instant punditry, hurt himself by not doing so. While Clinton did not turn in the kind of commanding performance debate watchers have come to expect, she didn’t suffer any lasting damage either.
