Letters to the Editor
-
I only heard 45 minutes or so,
but in that time (mostly the China stuff) I thought Clinton was outstanding. I've avoided the televised debates -- too early, too many participants, and the cameras queer everything. I've heard about Clinton's debating skill, and she certainly put the other front-runners to shame -- Edwards was "branding" too obviously, the way he shoehorned his stump speech into any question, and Obama's inexperience was evident to me. The two of them, along with Kucinich, brought the least to the table, and this comes from someone who has toggled among exactly those three to this point in the process. Maybe someone who listened to the whole thing can dispute this claim -- I'd like to know.
Clinton was on point, confident, and contextual. And if those sound like wishy-washy qualities -- well, maybe they are. But I'm not in the mood for an ideologue, and I think the tenor of the nation agrees with me. Level-headedness and wisdom are the qualities I'm searching for. Clinton has them.
Biden's wealth of knowledge and experience was also evident. But though I try not to be cynical about process, we've seen what opposition research can do to a longtime Senator.