This Conversation – Submarines
The Democrats had their second debate two nights ago. I messed up with time zones so didn’t start watching until pretty late, but thanks to the magic of the internets I managed to fill in the holes. And there were some interesting things going on. Most importantly, it actually seemed to include some components of a, well, debate. Back-and-forths on ideas, some slightly wonky disagreements, and so on. Sure, there was the usual political pageantry but at times the soul of the Party really shone through, and I enjoyed that.
The general consensus (which I agree with) seems to be that everyone performed relatively well, with the exception of Kucinich and Gravel (not that they were bad, it’s just who cares) and Richardson, who has rapidly lost the tentative support I was giving him. He’s got a great resume and when he’s on an issue he knows a lot about he sounds great, but frankly he just looks lost out there. He also mentioned about 735,000 times that he is a governor, just in case anyone missed it the first time.
As for the big three, Hillary held herself very well – she appeared presidential in every meaning of the term, demonstrated a firm understanding of issues, and took the initiative to call out Wolf Blitzer for his ridiculous questions. People often insist that they find her voice grating “not because she’s a woman” they hastily insist, but frankly I can’t really imagine what they mean if not that. She has a perfectly pleasant voice and sounds credible, determined, and like someone I would entrust the country to. She’s not my favorite candidate, and there are lots of things I could find to criticize her about, but she is mightily impressive nonetheless.
Edwards rubs me the wrong way for some reason that I can’t fully explain, and some of that influenced my perception of him here, but even with that, I think he did quite well. And as much as I find him subtly wrong, he’s a great candidate and I would be happy to vote for him in November, 2008.
Obama improved on his first debate performance. He seemed a little more comfortable, and was much better at reigning in his broad responses to fit within the limited time. Once again, he seems to be at his best when challenged directly. In the first debate, he was mightily impressive when Kucinich threw a jab at him. This time, it was Edwards criticizing him and Hillary for casting the “right vote” but not “leading” on the issue. Obama responds: “the fact is is that I opposed this war from the start. So you’re about four and a half years late on leadership on this issue.” And as I said last week, I thought it was perfectly appropriate for them to be wary of voting no on this issue, even though it was ultimately the right decision.
* * *
Lawyers, Guns, and Money – Warren Zevon
Fred Thompson appears to be in the race for serious. If you’re anything like I was a few months ago, you’ll be asking “who is Fred Thompson?” He’s the guy that took over Al Gore’s Senate seat. He’s also apparently on Law and Order. He’s also the Great White Hope for all the Republicans dissatisfied with their current crop of candidates, and has approximately zero chance of winning in my estimation.
I can’t for the life of me figure out what he brings to the table. It seems to me he’s the Wes Clark for the GOP 2008, except without any of the things that made Clark a unique and good candidate. All Thompson has going for him is some witty comments and the ability to look “tough” without actually having anything to support it. He polls well now but once the shine rubs off and he actually has to get into the down and dirty of running for president, he won’t go anywhere, and the right will start lusting after Newt.
* * *
Power and the Glory – Phil Ochs
Today’s entry in the “can’t figure out whether it makes me happy or sad” or category – a poll from Gallup about public opinion on gay issues. The title is encouraging: Tolerance for Gay Rights at High-Water Mark. But when you get into it you discover that the data for this is that the “yes” response to the question “do you think homosexual relations between consenting adults should be legal” is the highest it’s ever been… at 59%.
41 percent of people in this country think being gay should be ILLEGAL. Jesus.
One thing that I find surprising is that 46% think “Same-sex marriages should be legally valid” which is quite high given that I’m pretty sure the 41 percent who want to ban gay sex probably aren’t keen on the marriage either. I would really have thought there was a wider range of people who morally disapproved, but just wanted it to be a legal void (no laws against it, and no support for the symbolism of gay marriage). Not sure what to make of it.