Kerry: B. Looked presidential, stayed on message, and generally reassured voters that he’s the front-runner for a reason. Emerged without being bloodied by attacks that will certainly occur below the media radar in the coming days.
Dean: C+. Did okay. Emphasized his centrist record and exhibited some self-control, for a change. Unless he seizes the agenda tomorrow, Dean will likely continue bleeding in the polls. The ball is in Wes Clark’s court.
Edwards: B. Helped himself immensely with a sharp performance, and could have a better-than-expected finish next Tuesday. Looks more and more attractive as the field shrinks.
Lieberman: B. Best debate performance for him. His humor went over well for a change. Came across as strong, principled and consistent.
Clark: C-. Underwhelming performance, as usual. Acquitted himself well when questioned, but failed to truly grab the spotlight as needed. Also failed to leverage his military experience and, as a result, is losing the stature race to Kerry.
Faux News: D-. Botched opening. Confused moderators that made even the Ted Koppel debate look good. And a mysterious early conclusion without even closing statements from the candidates. Why is the Democratic Party holding debates on this network?
What did the gecko think of the Howard-and-Judy show on Primetime? (go to deanforamerica.com if you missed the broadcast)
It reminded me what’s special about Dean… I think his chances of beating Bush are at least as good as Kerry’s. Clark has looked awful in the last few TV appearances I’ve seen… Edwards has looked good, Clintonesque. But Dean is the one who’s really different from politics as usual – and even his detractors have to admit he’s got a knack for drawing free publicity!
Hmm…Well, I didn’t see the show. I really don’t care for that kind of stuff.
However, I can say, definitively, that Dean is toast today after losing New Hampshire. I think I’ll post on that in a bit.