Analyzing the Debate

Washington Post Chief Political Reporter Dan Balz was online Friday, April 27 at 10 a.m. ET to analyze and take your questions on last night's debate in South Carolina between eight Democratic presidential contenders.

Candidates Unite in Criticizing Bush | Broder Analysis | Liveblogging at The Fix (Post, April 27)

The transcript follows.

____________________

Dan Balz: Good morning from South Carolina and thanks for joining the discussion. We'll spend the next hour parsing last night's debate in Orangeburg, and I'd be glad to have you all tell everyone who impressed you most and why. I'll offer some of my own thoughts and will try to post without comment some of your assessments. Now on to the questions.

_______________________

Philadelphia: Hi Dan. A major theme of your article was that Democratic candidates united in criticizing Bush. Why was that noteworthy, as it was no different than every other day of the Bush presidency (except for a few weeks after 9/11)?

Dan Balz: That's a good and fair question with which to start this morning. You're right that Democrats seem to spend part of every day attacking the Bush administration (and Republicans spend part of their day doing the same about the Democrats). But so often with these Democratic candidate events -- in the 2004 campaign and in the early forums so far with the 2008 field -- I and others have tended to concentrate on the differences among the Democrats over Iraq.
Last night those differences were far less a part of the debate and I thought it was striking. I think the reason is twofold: First, the debate between Congress and the White House this year has tended to draw the Democrats closer together because they've been trying to find a policy on which they can all agree. Second, the timing of the debate, coming hours after Congress passed the Iraq funding bill, meant the president was clearly in their sights.

_______________________

Chatham, N.J.: Honestly, do you think that a debate at this stage of the presidential race will have an impact of people's decisions? Hillary did well, but I am still leaning towards Barack -- this opportunity will give him a chance to regroup and better communicate his message in a debate format...

Dan Balz: I don't think last night's debate will have any significant effect on the race. Most people are still taking their first looks at the candidates and because they don't have to make a real decision about whom they'll support, they're not inclined to lock themselves in at this point. Obviously the leading candidates have their passionate supporters, but most people are still shopping.
The other reason last night's debate won't change many minds is because no one really had a bad night and no one was the clear winner. If you were working for any of the candidates, you could have found something last night to make you feel as if you're candidate had done fine.

_______________________

Reading, Pa.: I'm an Obama supporter and I thought he did well but I was most impressed by Sen. Dodd -- he looked and sounded very presidential to me.

Dan Balz: Thanks for your assessment. The State newspaper here in Columbia quotes Rep. Jim Clyburn, the House Democratic Whip, as saying he thought the second-tier candidates were able to shine a bit last night in contrast to the top tier.

_______________________

Montgomery Village, Md.: Not so much debate related, but why did McCain not return to Washington to vote for -- or more likely against -- the Iraq funding bill yesterday? All four of the Democratic senators running for president voted and then headed off for what was certainly a more important campaign event than anything McCain had going on.

Dan Balz: Good question and I did not ask his campaign, although I'm sure they would say that Sen. McCain has made his opposition to the Democratic plan quite clear and his vote would have made no material difference in the outcome. He was on a pre-scheduled tour formally launching his presidential candidacy and was obviously loathe to scuttle those plans. But he'll certainly get questions like yours if he keeps doing so.

_______________________

Columbia, S.C.: I am concerned about your coverage of the debate. Reading both your article and Broder's, the only candidates that were given any real print were Clinton, Obama, and Edwards. I understand that these are the "frontrunners," but it seems like this newspaper has a self-fulfilling prophecy here -- they are frontrunners, you give them space, they remain frontrunners. There doesn't seem to be an opportunity for them to lose their status or others to gain it. Shouldn't you/this paper provide a picture of the entire debate, with a look at the responses all candidates, not just the ones that you/polls have labeled the Big Two or Three? If these are indeed the frontrunners, then having a reporting of all candidates responses would be beneficial to test that. And you can't argue that you don't have the people to send to New Mexico or some other spot -- all the candidates were in one place.

Dan Balz: You know, every time we write one of these debate stories, we get -- legitimately I would add -- criticism like this. Let me try to offer you the perspective of a journalist and it may or may not satisfy you. For starters, I believe in trying to make sure everyone in the debate is represented in the story, including the real dark horse candidates, like Gravel and Kucinich. I also am aware when I write one of these that they are not events held in a vacuum; in other words, they are part of a campaign and that campaign has some structure and the structure of this campaign is a top tier and a lower tier. Given that I try to be attuned to what the frontrunner is saying and what leading challengers are saying. But I also try to pay attention to everyone and make sure they are part of the story. Also, the flow of the debate affects the story. For example, the exchange about Clinton's vote involved Edwards. Had it been Biden or Dodd who had been implicitly critical of her for not apologizing, I would have used them. Also, in writing one of these stories, the big issues of the day get more attention, and for a long, long time, that's been Iraq. When you put this all together it means that any debate story by necessity is incomplete and some candidate will feel slighted. We have a limited amount of space and a very short amount of time and I always look back the next day critically and find things I should have included.

_______________________

Thornton, Colo.: Dan -- how many viewers do you think actually watched all 90 minutes of the debate last night? I know I didn't, and I'm speculating that many others were in similar situations.

Dan Balz: We'll probably get some estimates from the TV world some time today about total viewing audience. How many stayed with it is another question, but I'm sure many did not go the full 90 minutes. However, you and everyone else will have plenty more chances. There will be about a debate a month starting this summer.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Hi Dan, and thanks. It sure seemed like that debate was an MSNBC exclusive. It wasn't on public radio or PBS, and I was really surprised. What's more, the MSNBC.com video feed wouldn't work on my iMac regardless of the software I tried. So, despite really wanting to, I couldn't watch or listen and I'm stuck reading recaps and transcripts. Why would the debate be exclusive to a single network? Shouldn't the DNC be trying to get this out to as many people as possible?

Dan Balz: This is normal for the primary season debates. When we get to the general election and the debates between the nominees, those will be available on multiple networks. But this was an MSNBC debate. Other networks will get their chances over the coming months. As for the iMac issue, you should check with someone to get that solved, if possible.

_______________________

Ann Arbor, Mich.: In response to the "catastrophic attack scenario," do you think Obama revealed a tendency to be a little too cerebral and nuanced?

Dan Balz: That's a good point. I think that, if he got that question again, he would be more direct about swift retaliation and talk about the other matters as a secondary thought. You notice some of the other candidates seemed to go to school on his answer and when they got a chance to answer were anxious to project their toughness in going after the bad guys.

_______________________

University Park, Md.: Mike Gravel ... I did not know him before the debate. The way he debated last night, is he desperate, or is that who he is?

Dan Balz: He tends to rant a bit, doesn't he. He was more that way last night than in previous forums, although only a little.

_______________________

Houston: How do you think Brian Williams did as a moderator? Will be interesting to see how Chris Matthews moderates the Republican debate, I think he will ask tough questions in his "Hardball" style...

Dan Balz: I thought Brian did very well. He is a very polished presence and his (non) exchange with Biden when Biden offered his one-word answer ("Yes.") was very well done. He and Chris are very different personalities and Chris has a distinctive style of firing questions at his guests. That will make for a lively debate next week in California with the Republican candidates.

_______________________

They're All Winners!: After reading your coverage of the debate, I'm convinced that this stellar slate of Democratic candidates has accomplished one thing, at least: they've guaranteed that George W. Bush won't win re-election next year. Kudos to them all!

Dan Balz: Thanks for your comments.

_______________________

Bealeton, Va.: John Kerry lost the previous election because his message seemed little more than "Bush is bad; I'm not Bush." Bush will be gone in 2008, and he no longer will be directing policy. Someone else will be there, and that person will need to lead the nation. Here is my question: Will the media hold the current Democratic candidates' feet to the fire and demand specific and detailed answers to questions about policy, or will you continue to focus so many column inches on what the candidates say about Bush? Also, with so much at stake, I hope this doesn't end up as an "Idol"-ization of celebrity and personality. Only the media can control that.

Dan Balz: Short answer is yes. President Bush certainly is a central character in this coming election even though he's not on the ballot and he'll come in for regular criticism from the Democrats. But that certainly won't be enough and the press and the public will be asking for more specifics about what a Democratic candidate would do if elected.

_______________________

Rockville, Md.: I like Bill Richardson's resume and accomplishments. In your judgment, after having seen him in action against all those senators, does he have a chance/is he running for vice president or secretary of state?

Dan Balz: Gov. Richardson has an impressive resume and is a natural campaigner. He has a good sense of humor, he knows the world and he has wide-ranging experience. That said, he makes no secret of his desire to bust into the top tier and he's trying to do so. Whether he'll succeed, no one knows. But remember that four years ago John Edwards languished in single-digits for most of 2003 and surged when it counted. The key is to develop a strategy, have confidence in it and stick to it. If Richardson doesn't win the nomination, he'll no doubt be on the short list of vice presidential prospects, but right now that's not what he's looking for. He's a competitive politician who thinks he'd make a good president.

_______________________

Plymouth, Minn.: Eight contenders, eight private jets -- how did you get to S.C.?

Dan Balz: I flew in on Wednesday night from New Hampshire with the McCain campaign on the charter he was using to haul his team and the reporters covering his announcement tour. So, I too got here on a private jet -- although I should hasten to add that the Washington Post and not McCain's campaign will foot the bill for my airfare, which is the standard way it works on campaigns. The candidate's team charters the plane and bills reporters for their share of the cost.

_______________________

Bethesda, Md.: Was it just me, or was Richardson completely unable to limit himself to one sentence answers as requested by Brian Williams? The other candidates appeared to do better. How harmful or hurtful do you think it is to the overall impression that the candidate makes the moderator continually intervene?

Dan Balz: Some other people I talked with afterwards -- reporters mostly -- thought the same about Richardson, although others thought he had a pretty decent night. So much of this is totally subjective that I don't think it means too much. If someone continually goes way over the time limits in debate after debate, voters will notice, but one debate does not a campaign make.

_______________________

Indianapolis: The format of the debate was very fast and shallow. This does serve a purpose, especially given the fact that some of the candidates are being presented for the first time is such a bright light. But, some of the issues (Iraq and health care) are very complex and the devil is in the details. Do you think the next debate should delve deeper into a few topics?

Dan Balz: That's an excellent question and one the debate organizers in the future will have to think about. The network that carries the debate wants a good, lively show, and they don't want candidates to filibuster or just throw out their standard stump speeches. On the other hand, many voters don't get to follow the candidates hour by hour or day by day and it's only fair to give candidates an opportunity to present themselves as they see fit. For example, should the candidates have been given the chance for a closing statement last night?
One way of dealing with your concern is to limit some debates to a specific topic. There was a Democratic forum sponsored by the Service Employees International Union and the Center for American Progress that focused strictly on health care. Unfortunately it wasn't a debate, just a forum, so while the candidates were able to go into more detail about their plans, there was no give-and-take to test which of those plans is best.

_______________________

Concord, N.H.: I've been surprised all morning by coverage of the debate describing the candidates as having been impressive. My read was that the frontrunners in particular were just appallingly evasive. (Ex: When asked how they would pay for their health care proposals, every candidate who answered spent the allotted time plugging the plan itself. Not word one about the costs.) Why do political columnists appear to think that nonresponses are acceptable?

Dan Balz: Thanks for your comment. John Edwards has said plenty of times how he would pay for his health care plan and a few of the others have too. You're also right that the candidates sometimes evaded the question -- for example the early question about Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid!

_______________________

Fredericksburg, Va.: As someone who supported Edwards in 2004 and voted Kerry in the election, I am appalled by Edwards answer about his $400 haircuts. His answer sounded like something Hoover would have said -- that he wanted an America where everyone had the opportunity to grow up and pay $400 for a haircut! Does he think most Americans, especially Democrats, admire that and aspire to it? He has lost contact with the mainstream of his party even if he has yet to realize it. If he thinks most Americans describe being "blessed" that way, his value system is really warped. Obama, Clinton, Biden all have more compelling stories -- grow up and spend your life serving others.

Dan Balz: Thanks for your comments.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: "No one had a bad night"? You don't think that Gravel came across as a bitter, old man? Contrast him with Biden, who appeared positively Reagan-esque in appearance and succinct wit -- how can you match the answer "yes"? It brought the house down.

Dan Balz: I was speaking mostly about the major candidates.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Thank you taking questions this drizzly morning. I missed the debate, and none of the reporting I've seen indicates that the candidates were asked what I think is a critical question -- if we withdraw troops from Iraq, what are the long-term implications to the region? If a humanitarian crisis the likes of which the world hasn't seen since Rwanda occurs, what will your response as president be? Am I correct that this is a key issue?

Dan Balz: It's a good question but it did not come up. Iraq was the opening segment of the debate, but Brian Williams wanted to touch on a lot of topics and the specific issue you raised did not get a full airing. I'm sure it will at a future debate. Sen. Biden talks a lot about this when he's asked about getting out of Iraq.

_______________________

New Mexico: For what reasons do you think the non-major candidates, i.e. Richardson, Biden and others, have to even stay in the race? I mean what are they looking for -- a huge mass stumbling by the major candidates or gridlock in the vote, and they will be the only choice to the voters? Thanks.

Dan Balz: I don't consider Biden, Richardson or Dodd "non-major" candidates. At this point, they are in the second tier of the field, based on polling, overall support, money raised, and other such factors. But they're all substantial and experienced politicians and qualified to be president.

The reason they stay in the race is that we are a long, long way from knowing how this ends. Events change the dynamic and campaigns matter. Former Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack quit the race earlier this year because he was having trouble raising money. I thought that was an indictment of the system. He like Biden, Richardson and Dodd, is a serious politician and I think these campaigns are better with people like that a part of them.

_______________________

Louisville, Ky.: After the debate, one of the MSNBC commentators said that Clinton did a better job at her post-debate campaign rally than Obama did with his. Do you think this is accurate?

Dan Balz: I can't answer that because I didn't attend any of the post-debate activities -- didn't go into the spin room and didn't appear at the rally. When these debates end, most reporters are in the filing center writing up their stories. By the time most of us finish, the circus has moved on.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Let's be honest -- the best part of the debate last night was when Kucinich did a little mental happy dance when he realized that he was not the kookiest person on stage last night. Seriously, though, I was not all that impressed with Obama until towards the end, when he seemed to get his feet under him. The exchange with Kucinich was nice: firm, direct, without seeming angry.

Dan Balz: Thanks for posting.

_______________________

Dakar, Senegal: Dear Dan: In your assessment, do you think Brian Williams asked the most pertinent questions last night? Or were the questions tailored to the rapid responses they were expected to elicit from the candidates?

Dan Balz: I thought he did a good job of asking about pertinent topics and trying to find ways to get the candidates not just to throw back at him and the audience lines they've used many times already. This is always a challenge for someone moderating a debate. Williams is a pro.

_______________________

Goose Creek, S.C.: I thought Sen. Dodd's comment on gay marriage was quite good. Sen. Clinton seemed well prepared and knowledgeable...not stiff, as she sometimes appears. All the candidates seemed refreshingly candid ... unlike the current administration. It will take more discussion to determine who to vote for.

Dan Balz: Thanks for your comments.

_______________________

Chicago: Why don't candidates just answer the questions asked of them? I had a really negative reaction to Gov. Richardson because he constantly ignored the question at hand to speak about one of the other questions not directed to him. Do candidates not see that when trying to portray themselves as the opposite of Bush, their stubbornness in answering questions brings up the same comparison?

Dan Balz: Thanks for your comments.

_______________________

Annandale, Va.: It seems the most important question that should be asked of Sen. Clinton is her plan for Iraq should she become president. She has made several statements that indicate a plan for a long-term U.S. presence of some kind. Somebody should ask her how many troops she envisions for such a presence, and how her vision is different from Bush's. Why didn't Williams ask that question last night, and when is somebody going to actually pin her down on this?

Dan Balz: The New York Times did an interview with Sen. Clinton a month or so ago in which she was asked, and talked at length, about these very issues. One of the interviewers was Michael Gordon, the Times veteran military correspondent and co-author of the book "Cobra II." I believe you would find it interesting. She foresees a longer term U.S. presence in Iraq even after we withdraw most combat troops.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: Biden impressed me with his strong support about using the military in specific circumstances (and he rattled them off -- Bosnia, Darfur, Afghanistan, etc.) and Kucinich impressed me for his principled stand against using the military as a substitute for diplomacy or to secure resources. I think they both were being honest and straightforward, and that's more of what we need.

Dan Balz: Thanks for your comments.

_______________________

Raleigh: Going into debates, how do candidates and their staff prepare? Are there actual strategy discussions? Do they discuss things like ... need to be aggressive ... use vocal inflections ... make joke about a particular subject ... etc.?

Dan Balz: There are all kinds of such discussions. Campaigns look at these early debates as events that can hurt a candidate more than they can help. They try to anticipate the questions, game out the kinds of answers they want, try out clever lines that look funny but not too scripted, and try to figure out the one or two or three things they most want to get across to the audience.

_______________________

Maryville, Tenn.: Did you see anything substantive, or were all the responses pretty much scripted and rehearsed?

Dan Balz: We'll have to end with this question and thanks to everyone for sending in your question or assessment of the debate. It's been great to hear from so many of you.

I thought there was some substance put on the table by a number of the candidates, but there wasn't a lot new, although that's to be expected. Debates aren't the best forum for unveiling new policies or programs. Some answers were obviously scripted in the sense that people have been asked about some of these topics before. But some weren't scripted, particularly some of the more personal questions.

Again, thanks to all and have a great day.
_______________________

Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.