Not only did most of the democrats sound uneducated, but they were a huge snoozefest. They got caught up in using political jargon while barely raising their voices over monotone. As I have noted before I initially declared myself Pro-Hillary about 3 years ago, I was super excited to have her in office as the commander in chief. I consider myself fully on board with Ron Paul, but I still support Hillary as I think she is smart and a safe option for President.
However I was intrigued to watch both Obama and Huckabee in action since they stole the Iowa caucuses. Not to mention, Obama's MLK-like speech post-caucus was powerful although without substance.
For the Dems:
I have found that Barack Obama is the man that epitomizes the whole Twixter argument. By nature he is persuasive; throwing the word "change" around as it is the word we want to hear. He spoke powerfully during his post-caucus speech but overall it was just fluff- no real issues were mentioned. He was more into raising the roof by way of applauding the open-mindedness of America (I suppose because he is a black man). For those of us who would rather accept a candidate because he has the right things to say rather than what he stands for- he is the vote of the 80's babies. If you take the time to do your research you might find he is inexperienced and voted on 300 million going to the Iraq war. During his debate I was bored and unimpressed especially when he spoke of the threat of Nuclear weapons. Using the word "proliferation" repeatedly while babbling away from an actual answer does not prove anything except that Hillary was right in what she said about you.
It's hard to imagine that a TORT lawyer is even a democrat. He made his MILLIONS by being a lawsuit lawyer and suing corportations. If you want a better understanding think McDonald's lawsuit- a lady sued McDonald's for being burned by her HOT coffee. Similarly Edwards was a lawyer who represented cases that are comprable to this. I don't dislike Edwards but I feel that he would be better off as a VP to Hillary then head of the white house.
Of all the Dem candidates she is by far the most well spoken and articulate. She knows what needs to be done and speaks clearly about issues. I was almost watching the debate ready to criticize her because most of the media is. (and they say the media doesn't influence our beliefs) But, I was impressed with Hillary and if the Dems want a real shot at taking office this year she would be the best representative. I do feel that she would be much more popular had she played up the gender card a bit. Obama is doing so well because he is constantly talking about how the country welcomes change- just as Obama is a minority, so is Hillary as a woman. She needs to talk a bit about things she has done in office that would emotionally strike women because she is almost being too androgynous- and I feel that is her handicap right now.
For the Reps:
He is almost like the bully. When other candidates were speaking he was sitting in corner laughing like a joker. I don't like the smug thing, I suppose he feels New Hampshire is in the bag for him. Although he is smart and well-spoken on issues, I feel like he and Romney are both too conservative for a post-Bush election.
I would move to Canada if he was elected. Talk about Nixonlike, Romney is the most blatantly corrupt candidate. He just looks slimey and he has the most money. Mass needs to stop delivering guys like him and Kerry as their presidential hopefuls. He uses his money to attack other candidates and will always find the "grey area" on any issue- nothing is black and white to him. No thank you.
I must say that if I weren't going to vote for Ron Paul I would definitely vote for Huckabee (after Hillary of course). I like his attitude especially in terms of us being more dependant on ourselves. American workers and American products need to be more utilized. The downfall for him is his overly religious nature. Religion isn't tangible to me, so a guy who governs his beliefs around something that is philosophical almost seems troublesome. Otherwise, I like his character.
All the 80's babies who would rather jump on the bandwagon for Obama than actually do their research could possibly put our country in danger of losing the REAL revolutionist, as Obama is the guy who says but not does. Paul is well spoken and unique. He is without a doubt the guy who thinks outside the box. I loved his answer about oil costs, as most of us fail to realize that the value of the American dollar is the reason behind many of the economy's issues. Bring the troops home, get rid of welfare, and save the middle class. It's hard to knock a guy who hasn't changed his views on most issues and has voted against every tax raise.
However, I must say I am appalled at the media for never covering him. They have people who cover Huckabee, Guiliani, Romney and McCain but never show Paul's speeches or talk about his campaign. How can he be given a fair chance if you are giving the other candidates media exposure but not him. I want a fair and just media (as a journalist myself) and I want every candidate to be treated the same- if not how can I accurately form an opinion. Again, the media should be ashamed of their biases- the media doesn't exist to form biases, they exist to give the news.