Auros (auros) wrote,

  • Mood:

YearlyKos debate highlights...

So, the question I submitted to the YKos Presidential Leadership Forum got asked... sort of. They attached my name, while saying "lots of people asked about this". And then they kind of mangled my intent. You can hear what they actually asked here, in Part II, somewhere around the 17-minute mark (for some reason YouTube is showing me remaining time, not elapsed time; it's at 8:30 remaining). They basically phrased it as "lots of people are worried about China, what should we do about that?" The question I actually submitted -- and it seems like they must've liked my original language, given that they picked me -- actually put the emphasis on the other side. I don't have the text handy, but the gist was, "China is going to be a superpower within 50 years no matter what we do, and it's critical we build a constructive relationship with them and make sure the Chinese people, separate from their government, see us as people who offered a helping hand pulling them up the ladder, not a boot trying to kick them back down the ladder. At the same time, people have all these concerns -- safety, human rights, etc. How do we balance these two issues?" (And actually, I think I rolled in India as well, because I've been extremely concerned about the implications of our nuclear deal with them. But we already have a strong and constructive relationship with them.) In any case, they posed the question to Obama, and I thought he did an excellent job answering.

The moderator actually had sent me an email, but unfortunately he sent it after the last time I checked my email the previous night, and I got up very early the next morning and went straight to the con. So I never got the message that I was supposed to come find him before the debate so I could read my question...

In general, I think Obama clearly had the strongest performance, though all the candidates did pretty well.

Edwards was very good, making a lot of points that resonated strongly with the crowd. He did pass up an opportunity to make a powerful point on a currently-popular issue, that was tossed to him by Kucinich. Kucinich asked if, in addition to forswearing lobbying money like he already has, he'd give up hedge-fund managers' contributions; this was an opening to say, "Lobbyists exist solely to influence policy. If you participate in a 401k or other pension plan, you understand that the investment business is important and useful, and I don't think we should look at investment professionals all that differently from people who work in technology, education, or plumbing. Hedge fund managers are admittedly a specialized, and very well-paid, type of investment professional -- but "hedge fund" doesn't mean anything very specific these days, it's really just a high-end mutual fund; some managers are good, some aren't. Every business has its bad actors, and they deserve to be identified and prosecuted; we need to beef up the SEC's investigative arm to make sure fewer bad actors get away with their crimes, and to deter would-be thieves. But let me tell you, even if we're talking about fine, upstanding citizens in this business, their income should be treated the same as everybody else's, and if any of them are donating to me thinking that will keep me from closing the loophole we've heard so much about recently -- they've got another thing coming." I've been told that at his breakout session after the debate, Edwards made exactly this point. I guess maybe in the group session he felt like he didn't have time? In any case, it was overall a good performance -- he continues to be the most forthright in addressing economic issues, especially healthcare -- and he was only second to Obama because Obama was either having a very "on" night, or has learned enough from the past few debates to improve his performance.

Hillary pissed the crowd off with a couple of answers, especially one that I guess maybe she was "sincerely wrong" about: the lobbyist contribution issue. Pretty much everybody else on the panel dissected her, for that one. And deservedly so. She performed considerably better in her breakout session (which Xta and I attended), where she had sharp, well-prepared answers on most issues that got asked about. One exception was that she punted on a question about the Telecommunications Act (come on, you're at a blogger convention!), literally saying, "Ask Al Gore." From what she did say, I was not encouraged to think she'd take as strong a position as I'd like (or as the other candidates would take) on opposing continued media consolidation. On the bright side, she did seem to have good positions on the fair, open auction of radio spectrum, and on net neutrality. (But that's not exactly setting her apart from anyone else.)

  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded