Better answers for Democrats

Why is the Democratic economic plan better than the Republican one?

Because Democrats have two fundamental beliefs: that when government acts, it should be to benefit the middle class and not the wealthy; and that when we use government to invest in the crucial functions of our economy, from health care to energy, that we have to pay for what we spend.  That's why, in a time of economic crisis, we're asking the wealthy to go back to paying taxes as they did before 2001 - since they don't need another handout - in order to sustain the middle class.

Would a Democratic President consider a judicial nominee who opposes Roe v. Wade?

A Democratic President is looking for the most qualified jurists to serve on the Supreme Court and would not use a litmus test.  That being said, the chance of their being a candidate for the Court whose judicial philosophy matches a Democratic President and yet opposes Roe v. Wade is downright infinitesimal.  You might as well talk about a Republican balancing a budget.

A moment of silence

Ever had the TV on for three minutes with no ads, taglines, splash screens or network music segments?

I tuned into the presidential debate on C-SPAN, and for the last three minutes prior to the debate, it was just a camera on the auditorium. 

Sarah Palin's Debate Flow Chart

Now you, too, can be a Vice Presidential candidate and successfully navigate your first debate.

Thanks to EJ for the email and to Huffington Post for the image. 

Debate: Palin better than before, still not qualified

CNN did the fastest post-debate polling:

• Palin: 84% of debate watchers thought she overcame expectations (she stood, she breathed, success), but less than half think she's qualified to be President.  
• Biden: Debate viewers also thought Biden performed better, overwhelmingly agreed that he's qualified to be president, and thought he sounded more intelligent.

Neither candidate told the truth the whole way - get the debate facts at FactCheck.org.

My reactions:

• Palin stuck with the strategy of "if I don't know the answer, I won't give an answer," falling back to talking points and slogans.  She's great at slogans.  Won't help much if she becomes president (see: Current Occupant), though I'm glad she wants to put "country first, government on the side of the people, be a maverick, blah blah blah."
• Biden clearly showed he knows what running the country involves, particularly with the nuances required for good foreign policy.  His best line was probably in describing the McCain health care plan that will tax $12,000 in benefits in exchange for a $5,000 tax credit - "that's a bridge to nowhere."

If the election were held today and the polls were accurate, Obama would win in a landslide.  I don't think Palin did enough to change the game.

VP Debate Preview from an expert

He debated Sarah Palin over 20 times in the 2006 Alaska governor's campaign.  What's it like debating Governor Palin?

She's a master, not of facts, figures, or insightful policy recommendations, but at the fine art of the nonanswer, the glittering generality.

She's not much for facts or figures (or knowledge). 

"I watch you at these debates with no notes, no papers, and yet when asked questions, you spout off facts, figures, and policies, and I'm amazed. But then I look out into the audience and I ask myself, 'Does any of this really matter?' " Palin said.

 So what's a policy wonk like Biden to do?

With shorter question-and-answer times and limited interaction between the two, he should simply ignore Palin in a respectful manner on the stage and answer the questions as though he were alone. Any attempt to flex his public-policy knowledge and show Palin is not ready for prime time will inevitably cast him in the role of the bully.

A great debate

If you missed it, you can still catch the first presidential campaign debate here.  The best?  Plenty of time for the candidates to go back and forth, to challenge inaccuracies and to provide point-counterpoint.  It was a DEBATE.

I hope the other two live up to this.

Oh, and if you haven't, always follow up your debate watch with a visit to Factcheck.org.  Get the truth.

The presidential debate schedule

This is where a lot of Americans end up making their voting decision - the debates.  A chance to see candidates speaking unfiltered by the media and unvarnished by advertising polish.  Mark your calendars!

First presidential debate:
Friday, September 26
University of Mississippi, Oxford, MS

Vice presidential debate:
Thursday, October 2
Washington University in St. Louis, MO

Second presidential debate:
Tuesday, October 7
Belmont University, Nashville, TN

Third presidential debate:
Wednesday, October 15
Hofstra University, Hempstead, N

Republican Presidential Debate: Abortion's under fire

Abortion was another significant portion of the debate, with the candidates all given the opportunity to hate Roe v. Wade. It would have been nice if all the candidates were pressed on specifics such as upholding existing law or what restrictions they would try to pass at the federal level.

Here's how the candidates would respond to choice being overturned.

Q: Would the day that Roe v. Wade is repealed be a good day for Americans?

MR. ROMNEY: Absolutely.

SEN. BROWNBACK: Be a glorious day of human liberty and freedom.

MR. GILMORE: Yes, it was wrongly decided.

MR. HUCKABEE: Most certainly.

REP. HUNTER: Yes.

MR. THOMPSON: Yes.

SEN. MCCAIN: Repeal.

MR. GIULIANI: It would be okay...It would be okay to repeal. Or it would be okay also if a strict constructionist judge viewed it as precedent, and I think a judge has to make that decision.

Q to Guiliani: Would it be okay if they didn’t repeal it?

MR. GIULIANI: I think that -- I think the court has to make that decision, and then the country can deal with it. We’re a federalist system of government, and states could make their own decisions.

REP. TANCREDO: After 40 million dead because we have aborted them in this country, I say that that would be the greatest day in this country’s history when that is in fact overturned.

After that round of male back-patting, the questions got a little more into details, with questions being asked about exceptions to illegal abortion within the first 8-12 weeks (trimester). Unfortunately, only three of the candidates were asked elaborate.

Q: Governor Gilmore, you have said in the past that you believe in the first eight to 12 weeks of pregnancy, that a woman should have the right to have an abortion. Do you still stick with that exception?

MR. GILMORE: I do...However, my record as governor of Virginia, I think, has been one that the pro-life community, of which I am a part, would be very proud -- passing a 24-hour waiting period, passing informed consent, passing parental notification, signing the partial-birth abortion law in Virginia.

MR. THOMPSON: I believe it should be left up to the states.

The final abortion question went to Governor Romney, who has been quoted as "effectively pro-choice" as well as "always for life."

MR. ROMNEY: Well, I’ve always been personally pro-life, but for me there was a great question about whether or not government should intrude in that decision. And when I ran for office, I said I’d protect the law as it was, which is effectively a pro-choice position. About two years ago when we were studying cloning in our state, I said, look, we have gone too far; it’s a brave new world mentality that Roe v. Wade has given us; and I changed my mind.

In sum, all the men would rejoice at having a women's right to choose undermined, although the few candidates questioned about the nuance weren't willing to come out and oppose abortion in all circumstances.

Republican Presidential Debate: Iraq won't be over soon

The format of the debate (rapid-fire question and answer) pretty much guaranteed that no candidate would have an opportunity to make more than a few pithy statements. So unfortunately, that's exactly what we got.

First, from Senator McCain:

Q: What would you need, as commander in chief, to win the war in Iraq?

A: I would need the support of the American people. I would need to be able to show them some success in Iraq, both on the battlefield as well as with the Maliki government. We have a new general, we have a new strategy. That strategy can succeed....[various criticism of Democrats as defeatists]... We must win in Iraq. If we withdraw, there will be chaos, there will be genocide, and they will follow us home.

Then, from former Wisconsin governor Tommy Thompson, who had three major propositions to change the Iraq strategy:

Q: If you’re commander in chief and you want to win this war in Iraq, what do you need to do to win it?

A: First, you have to support the troops...Beyond that, there are three things that I’ve laid out. Number one, I believe the al-Maliki government should be required to vote as to whether or not they want America in their country. If they vote yes, it gives us a legitimacy for being there. If they vote no, we should get out. (emphasis mine)

Secondly, there are 18 territories in Iraq, just like we have 50 states in America. I would require those territories to elect governments, just like we do in our states. And if you do so, the Shi’ites will elect Shi’ites, Sunnis will elect Sunnis, Kurds will elect Kurds, and you won’t have this internecine civil war.

Third, I would split the oil reserves -- one-third to the federal government, one-third to the state government, and one-third to every man, woman and child. If every man, woman and child is getting part of the oil proceeds, they’re going to have a vested interest in their country.

Next, the same question to Representative Hunter:

A: The key to winning in Iraq is standing up the Iraqi military...[some explanation of how Iraqis should take over the military piece].

And now Gov. Mitt Romney gets to talk Iraq:

A: We don’t want to bring [the troops] out in such a precipitous way that we cause a circumstance that would require us to come back. Because if we leave in the wrong way, the Iranians could grab the Shi’a South, or al Qaeda could play a dominant role among the Sunnis. Or you could have the border with Turkey destabilized by the Kurds, and as a result you could have regional conflict develop.

But with that occurring, you could have our neighbors get involved, our friends get involved around Iraq, and we could have to come back again.

Governor Huckabee was asked about the firing of Rumsfeld, but he basically just pointed out that the problems in Iraq were due to too little attention being paid to qualified military personnel:

Those generals told us early on it would take 300,000 troops to successfully go in and stabilize Iraq. Instead, we gave them a limited number of troops and a budget and said you have to do it with this...But rather than simply walking away and leaving the Middle East in a complete disastrous chaos that will spread to the region and to the rest of the world, it’s important that we finish the job, that we do it right, rather than have to go back and someday do it over.

Next, they fired a question at Congressman Paul, who voted against the Iraq War and would like to re-establish Republicans as non-interventionists on the world stage.

Q: you voted against the war. Why are all your fellow Republicans up here wrong?

A: I would suggest that we should look at foreign policy...that we should have a foreign policy of non-intervention, the traditional American foreign policy and a Republican foreign policy...How did we win the election in the year 2000? We talked about a humble foreign policy. No nation-building. Don’t police the world. That is a conservative, it’s a Republican, it’s a pro-American, it follows the Founding Fathers.

Overall, it seems like most of the "mainstream" candidates are firmly for continuing the war, despite admissions of past mistakes. Governor Thompson's idea of a referendum on the American presence is probably the most democratic notion, while Representative Paul is most interested in getting out for philosophical reasons.

A nifty new way to see candidates debate

Minnesota will be allowing all the gubernatorial candidates in this year's election to participate in 10-day online debate that started this Monday. Check out the announcement from E-Democracy for more details:

E-Democracy.Org and the Blandin Foundation are pleased to announce an online candidate debate with Minnesota’s gubernatorial candidates. The e-debate starts on Monday, October 9th and goes through Thursday, October 19th.

The officially confirmed and participating candidates - everyone on the ballot - include:

* Gov. Tim Pawlenty, Republican
* Atty Gen. Mike Hatch, DFL
* Peter Hutchinson, Independence
* Ken Pentel, Green
* Leslie Davis, American
* Walt Brown, Quit Raising Taxes

With new responses each weekday, this “on-demand” debate let’s you choose which candidates and questions to follow. With Voter Voices (below) you can have your say in text or multimedia. This is what any time, anywhere democracy is all about.

See the debate here or sign up to receive the e-debate e-mail by sending an email to MN Politics