The New Republic

Yipes. That was a well placed shot between the eyes. Neh?

- boxofrox

November 2, 2007 at 12:42pm

It is effective.  Its also dishonest and, in my opinion, repugnant.   Every one of the examples are only contradictions if you take them out of context and refuse to accept any nuances in a position.   Do Democrats really want to enable and encourage the idea that nuanced opinions equal dishonesty?  The same thing can - and will - be done to whoever wins the primary.    

- newdex

November 2, 2007 at 12:50pm

Frankly, i don't see why everyone is making such a big deal over this.

I understand where she was coming from.  Yes, you don't want to reward people who come here illegally by giving them drivers licenses, but if they are going to be driving on roads, don't we need to know who they are and to require that they register and insure their cars.  I mean, it's not a simple black-or-white issue.  I understand why she answered the question as she did.

By the way, by saying that, I don't mean to suggest that I agreed with the way she answered the question.

Gotcha!

- adisarro

November 2, 2007 at 1:00pm

newdex -- My first thought was a little reluctantly to agree with you -- this sort of thing, after all, is way too easily the video equivalent of Maureen Dowd's use of ellipses -- but then: Which pair of statements here actually add up to a nuanced position, as opposed to a contradiction? I watched the debate, and I can't identify one.

adisarro -- I think the problem is that Clinton did not say, "Yes, you don't want to reward people who come here illegally by giving them drivers licenses." She talked around whether or not this is a good idea -- sounding one minute very much as though she was saying it is, sounding the next minute as though she was saying it isn't, then getting irritated to be faced with a clear, yes-or-no question on the issue, claiming that this was "playing gotcha" (?), and ultimately pretending she was victimized by the whole thing. Not cool!

- J.J. Gould

November 2, 2007 at 1:07pm

Newdex - Do Democrats really want to enable and encourage the idea that nuanced opinions equal dishonesty?

Yes, absolutely because the Republicans are going to lay the sh*te on Hillary so thick, even her own family won't want to be near her.

More of the same. I suspect that the liberal base will rally around her and her numbers will stay steady, which is exactly the opposite of what will happen in a general.

I'm more and more convinced she's Kerry2 The Revenge.

- The Ignorant Populist

November 2, 2007 at 1:30pm

JJ GOULD:

"Which pair of statements here actually add up to a nuanced position, as opposed to a contradiction? I watched the debate, and I can't identify one."

Thats the thing.  These debates are not  "debates" at all, so much as gotcha contests.  And this one especially.  Its hard enough, I'm sure, to give both an accurate and honest opinion of complicated issues in 2 minutes or less, even when the moderators aren't blatantly trying to set you up.  

Presidential debates are a TERRIBLE way for Americans to learn about candidate's positions, but however effectively or ineffectively Hillary presented her positions, you know that Edwards and Obama understand what they are:

On Social Security: fix the budget first, which will improve its solvency, then reassess the problem and take appropriate action at that time.  Before reaching "fiscal responsibility," don't mess with it.  

On illegal alien driver's licences: she doesn't like the idea, but since the Federal govt. hasn't been able to address the problem, she sympathizes with the need.  In other words, she'd rather the bigger problem was fixed, which would make it unnessecary, but until that happens she's not willing to condemn it outright.  

On Iraq:  She wants it to end as soon as possible.  She doesn't think Bush is doing everything that should be done to end it as soon as possible.  But she's not going to promise to pull out all the troops all at once.  

IgPop:

"the Republicans are going to lay the sh*te on Hillary so thick, even her own family won't want to be near her"

The Republicans are going to lay the sh*te on whichever Democrat wins just as thick.  Only, if Obama and Edwards do the same sh*te to Hillary they won't be able to say, "look, the Republicans are full of sh*te, this stuff is all sh*te!"

This is exactly one of the Republican's favorite generic charges against Democrats.  And don't think for a moment that any of the other candidates couldn't be cuaght in the same kind of "inconsistencies."  Obama's already on record being both for and against cuts in social security benefits  - if you take his statements out of context.  

- newdex

November 2, 2007 at 2:00pm

Hillary stumbles!

What next? The sun rises in the south? George Bush invents a time portal to the 25th Century? People lose weight after they get married?

Hillary stumbles!

Oh yeah, and she also still wins the nomination, then wins the election, and then does a half-way decent or maybe even three-quarters-way decent job as President: terrorists actually lose a little ground, a few hell-holes progress to mere heck-holes, a passable health care overhaul overcomes its breech birth and starts to walk at 10 months, tax and entitlement tweaks steady the economy and cheer up the dollar, per capita carbon footprints peak and begin to decline, and Bill doesn't pork anybody that anybody else finds out about.  She effects all of the above (except the Bill part) by talking out of both sides of her mouth, horsetrading, cutting closed-door deals that would shame LBJ, hiring mostly competant people, not sweating the petty things and not petting the sweaty things.  SCOTUS sits in the corner and pouts. Edwards makes a killing as a consultant, Obama is co-opted and gets with the program, and a few new, bright, articulate GOP voices arise in the hinterlands who ultimately will lead the party back to, if not the majority, at least respectability, by 2016, or maybe sooner.

Next?

- williamyard

November 2, 2007 at 4:56pm

If Hillary wins the nomination, let's hope Bill Yard is right about the rest of the story

.

- purcellneil

November 5, 2007 at 9:56am