- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
I am a New Hampshire Democrat, and I went into the debate leaning towards Obama. Edward has always seemed too slick to me. I feel Hillary may be electable, but would rule as a very divisive figure, and that's a problem for me. Richardson, honestly, is an embarrassment. Although he may have been a decent civil servant governor for all I know, extemporaneously he is a nightmare--not Presidential material at all.
I guess I was disappointed. Although Obama gives great speeches, he debates poorly and does not seem to have much to say for himself other than he wants to "unite" everyone.
I was angry at Hillary's anger. It could have been a powerful moment if it had been justified. But to compare her "record" to anyone else's on the stage was completely disingenuous. She wasn't elected to any office before this first term in the Senate; she picked and chosen her issues--hasn't even had to APPLY and be hired for a job in many many years. She is the one who needs a "reality check."
Edwards (who is, indeed, slick) has, like Obama, lived a life that reflects what he believes. He actually reminded me a bit of Tony Blair last night.
I don't have a clue who I'm voting for on Tuesday.
