DebateScoop.org: Democrats Debate on NPR Today (and liveblog)

Democrats Debate on NPR Today (and liveblog)

By Ross Smith 12/04/2007 10:59:33 AM EST

Update [2007-12-4 19:29:28 by Ross Smith]: You can listen to selected clips or the entire debate at NPR's site here.

The Democratic candidates for president will debate today on NPR from 2 to 4 EST. This is the one and only (so far) radio-only debate. Details of the format are in this press release. You can listen live on your local NPR station or at their website, and at NPR.org. Additionally, the press release notes:

The first broadcast of the debate will be exclusive to NPR Member stations around the country; many stations will also rebroadcast it that evening and in other time periods. The debate will also air on Sirius Satellite Radio, in more than 150 countries through NPR Worldwide Service and on American Forces Radio reaching U.S. military around the world. The debate will be streamed lived on NPR.org and numerous Member stations' websites. Following the initial exclusive broadcast and webcast, NPR will make the recording fully accessible to all media outlets and individuals, without license restrictions; it will also be available for permanent on-demand streaming at NPR.org and via NPR Member stations' sites.

That's good news for scholars and citizens alike.

Since the days of Marshall McLuhan and the first Kennedy/Nixon debate, scholars and pundits have discussed the difference the medium makes. If time permits I'll post some cites to research on that subject.

Meanwhile, use the comments on this thread (click "Discuss")to discuss this debate, the format, and your reactions as you listen.

Tags: debate, debates, democratic presidential primary, radio, NPR, elections 2008

< MTV/MySpace and McCain | GOP Univision Debate Preview >

Democrats Debate on NPR Today (and liveblog) | 64 comments (64 topical, 0 hidden)

Welcome to Louden's advocacy class! (none / 1)

Click "post a comment" to comment on the debate and "reply to this" to comment on what someone else just said.

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 12/04/2007 02:06:09 PM EST

Three big topics (none / 0)

Iran, China, immigration.

Two oddities:

They did not let the candidates know in advance.
No health care or energy/environment.

Good:
China (read trade) has been underdiscussed.
Good timing on Iran given the new NIE.

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 12/04/2007 02:09:16 PM EST

Gravel! (none / 0)

what's he doing there?

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 12/04/2007 02:11:22 PM EST

format (none / 0)

Advocacy class now engaged. Nice to see an open format, interchange absent artificial time limits - let's see if it works.

Allan Louden, Wake Forest University

Winston-Salem, NC

by Allan Louden on 12/04/2007 02:12:58 PM EST

Edwrads first to attack (none / 0)

attacks Hillary when saying "the Senate had a chance . . . " but does not nae names.

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 12/04/2007 02:15:06 PM EST

Hmm. (none / 1)

president, president, president...
It is pretty impressive that some of these candidates know so little about our governmental system that they still believe that the executive branch is the only in our government, and that the president is the sole individual there in.

by presbutikos on 12/04/2007 02:15:18 PM EST

What evidence do you have? (none / 0)

Quite an aspersion.

BTW, they are running for . . . . president.

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 12/04/2007 02:20:13 PM EST

[ Parent ]

: rhetoric (none / 0)

I believe they understand our system very well.
I just think they are using rhetoric that is persuasive almost exclusively to those ignorant of the same.
by presbutikos on 12/04/2007 02:32:55 PM EST

[ Parent ]

hey (none / 0)

Thank God we get a new president

by balllllin on 12/04/2007 02:15:22 PM EST

Switch to diplomacy... (none / 0)

Switch to diplomacy? What have we been doing the past 50 years?

by presbutikos on 12/04/2007 02:16:25 PM EST

Wonks vs Candidates (none / 1)

some are able to engage in a real policy discussion, others seem only able to put into political context. Kucinich was the most offending in this sense. Experience with issues seems one reason - e. g., Hillary

Allan Louden, Wake Forest University

Winston-Salem, NC

by Allan Louden on 12/04/2007 02:18:13 PM EST

Ridiculous (none / 1)

Vote or Die! P.Diddy for President.

by AllStar on 12/04/2007 02:18:37 PM EST

Hillary ducking (none / 0)

"other purposes" -- the question was whether the "weapons of mass destruction" part was still true.

Good interruption for follow up.

Her answer still dodges: "many of us believed that . . . " She names Edwards and Obama who get a chance to respond.

Edwards: dodges Hillary's accusation that he characterized Iran as a big threat when in Israel,

Obama: notes 2004 Trib ed. board criticism is misleading (was a hypothetical).

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 12/04/2007 02:18:58 PM EST

The dialog (none / 0)

Saber rattling? The dialog is pretty well framed. Feels more like a circle jerk than a debate.

by presbutikos on 12/04/2007 02:20:38 PM EST

Kucinich helps out Hillary (none / 0)

by undermining Obama and Edwards.

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 12/04/2007 02:21:04 PM EST

Hillary on the vote (none / 0)

"Aggressive diplomacy" and "carrots and sticks" is rhetoric that hews to the middle and hedges her bets.

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 12/04/2007 02:23:00 PM EST

Mud slinging begins? (none / 0)

The candidates almost entirely agree on Iran policy, so they are just trying to cast the other candidates as being more republican: trying to pin their faces to the sinking GOP.

by presbutikos on 12/04/2007 02:24:25 PM EST

"Almost" is key (none / 0)

The differences are quite large in standing for how each would conduct foreign policy -- the degree of emphasis on force vs diplomacy is important, no?

This is also a proxy for the Iraq war vote -- who is more likely to make Bush/Cheny style errors (in the opinion of most Americans) in the future can only be judged by how they see current and past events.

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 12/04/2007 02:28:31 PM EST

[ Parent ]

: Rhetoric (none / 0)

"Bush/Cheny style errors (in the opinion of most Americans)".
Sounds like it falls on the exact same line as "saber rattling".
by presbutikos on 12/04/2007 02:30:56 PM EST

[ Parent ]

Edwards vs Hillary (none / 0)

Edwards: she agrees we are in "war" on terror and that Iran mil. is "terrorist" org. therefore she favors war with her vote.

Hillary: "outlandish"

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 12/04/2007 02:25:14 PM EST

policy (none / 0)

Actually, it is pretty obvious why Iran's support for terrorist organizations is not good for the US. And it is NOT comparable to our support for Israel. One is intently purposed on ending our way of life, the other is not. When we have reached a point of relativism that denies us the right to perpetuate our existence, we've gone to far in the wrong direction.

by presbutikos on 12/04/2007 02:28:03 PM EST

Bullies (none / 0)

How can you force a government upon another country?

by AllStar on 12/04/2007 02:29:06 PM EST

: response (none / 0)

I never said anything about that.
I said when there is a threat to your way of life, that you have a right to defend it.
by presbutikos on 12/04/2007 02:33:50 PM EST

[ Parent ]

whaat? (none / 0)

All star what if they bring hurt to their country?

by balllllin on 12/04/2007 02:29:51 PM EST

Hillary switches quickly (none / 0)

Trying to elide differences.

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 12/04/2007 02:29:57 PM EST

Depth (none / 0)

The depth in this debate makes one want even more. Never enough, but compared by the "drive-by" form of question asking in the Network debates the difference is profound.

Allan Louden, Wake Forest University

Winston-Salem, NC

by Allan Louden on 12/04/2007 02:30:45 PM EST

Biden helping himself with Dem primary voters (none / 0)

Words matter -- not enough to say no "rush" to war. Going to war slowly also needs rejecting is his argument.

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 12/04/2007 02:31:15 PM EST

Excuse Me (none / 0)

I don't think you asked the correct question? Cause it obviously did not make any sense

by AllStar on 12/04/2007 02:31:36 PM EST

: response (none / 0)

Backhand slaps don't count as valid rebuttals.
by presbutikos on 12/04/2007 02:35:03 PM EST

[ Parent ]

Where is Richardson?????? (none / 0)

can't be good for him that he is not there.

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 12/04/2007 02:31:47 PM EST

Good example of LINK argument (none / 0)

Edwards links Iran debate to efforts to reduce global poverty.

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 12/04/2007 02:33:12 PM EST

Obama - Guantanamo Bay (none / 0)

Senator Obama is correct in his statement that the U.S. Government needs to restore Habeas Corpus at Guantanamo Bay!

by LJB4 on 12/04/2007 02:34:34 PM EST

response (none / 0)

"Habeas Corpus" only applies to citizens.

by presbutikos on 12/04/2007 02:36:48 PM EST

[ Parent ]

: Wrong (none / 0)

any evidence for your assertion?
Be the debater you want to see.
by Ross Smith on 12/04/2007 02:40:16 PM EST

[ Parent ]

Medium is the Message (none / 0)

Listening to a debate is different than viewing a debate. Part of it is attention, part lacking visual cues for interpretation, part cognitive reversal changes. But there is also a level in which, absent video, the candidates themselves seem to massage their messages. What is different between radio and TV in a debate. Thoughts Class?

Allan Louden, Wake Forest University

Winston-Salem, NC

by Allan Louden on 12/04/2007 02:36:24 PM EST

: Ideology (none / 0)

The most important quality of a presidents is his/her ideology! What do they think the president does? Micromanage every aspect of our country? Ideology is the measure of a president: they set the standards, and the secretaries beget the results.
by presbutikos on 12/04/2007 02:41:06 PM EST

[ Parent ]

question from listener (none / 0)

pol sci prof -- high brow version of YouTube.

Hillary answer is not a doctrine, it's a laundry list.

Edwards: longer term visionary not really one either.

Bad question, really, if a direct and precise political sci. answer is desired. Does get at the "vision thing"

Biden's prevention, not preemption is actually a doctrine change, well grounded in the law of war and in political science's understanding of foreign policy.

Obama: Common security and common prosperity.

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 12/04/2007 02:38:57 PM EST

Lots of commercials for a non-commercial NPR (none / 0)

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 12/04/2007 02:39:18 PM EST

China & Toys (none / 0)

China is definitely sending in dangerous toys as a secret plot to kill the youth of America.

Haha.

by yangjh4 on 12/04/2007 02:42:13 PM EST

China (none / 0)

Who has more leverage U.S. or China?
FACTS: U.S. Lou Dobbs version: China.

Edwards does what many do in these debates, recites the problems, not solutions or answers. It's a way of showing how much the candidate cares about voter concerns.

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 12/04/2007 02:42:29 PM EST

Obama on China (none / 0)

Good to frame it as a choice -- we have leverage but not if we do not use it or mishandle it.

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 12/04/2007 02:43:35 PM EST

Fear Chinese Toys (none / 0)

Is this the same Edwards, dove on all of the Middle East, lamenting the administration not being more hostile to China.
Obama as least did not call them "enemies."

Allan Louden, Wake Forest University

Winston-Salem, NC

by Allan Louden on 12/04/2007 02:43:41 PM EST

Hillary (none / 0)

same answer as Obama, sounds as good, too.

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 12/04/2007 02:45:55 PM EST

listener question on trade (none / 0)

Biden claims we can stop products

EXCELLENT to talk about actual FACTS concerning China's power. There is not a political scientist on EARTH who would argue China is anywhere close to U.S. in aggregate power.

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 12/04/2007 02:47:35 PM EST

Dodd (none / 0)

Adversarial? China is child. "Toothpaste here."

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 12/04/2007 02:48:53 PM EST

Obama, what would you do? (none / 0)

Enforce current law. Block toys, use our own food inspection standards like Japan (which the U.S. sees as artificial trade barriers btw).

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 12/04/2007 02:50:19 PM EST

Edwrads LINK (none / 0)

"Big corporate America" is the problem. Washington. He is the outsider populist in case you hadn't heard.

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 12/04/2007 02:51:28 PM EST

Dodd funny (none / 0)

will buy Iowa toys, Iowa food

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 12/04/2007 02:52:20 PM EST

anyone admit to trade off? (none / 0)

Trade pressure on China will raise prices for American consumers. Willing to say it's worth it?

Kucinich kind of says so.

Obama: China will modify its behavior if we are tough. (Dodges the question, because the safety and env. standards are costly). Casts the benefit as JOBS, though.

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 12/04/2007 02:56:15 PM EST

Toxixcs from a listener (none / 0)

Moderator poses it as whether there is overeaction for Hillary.

Hillary recites problem, says need tougher standard, et.

Her use of "number one" and "number two" makes her sound more substantive and wonkish than her answer actually is.

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 12/04/2007 02:58:21 PM EST

top of hour news highlights Iran NIE discussion (none / 0)

quotes Hillary and Dodd.

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 12/04/2007 03:02:33 PM EST

Richardson at a funeral (none / 0)

for Clem Boody - the Korean war vet whose remains he got back from North Korea on his last trip - he was from Iowa.

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 12/04/2007 03:03:54 PM EST

Chnese American listener question (none / 0)

on human rights pressure balanced with free trade.

Biden: hold China accountable at U.N as human rights violator. We are capitulating.

Hillary: "I agree with Joe" (the phrase Biden uses in one of his ads). "Would make it very clear" and "use every tool" (really? every tool?).
She claims to have been "deeply involved" in the Clinton admin.

Dodd: radio makes him sound like he is babbling even though his answers include facts and are composed of coherent (but long) sentences.

Edwards: chance to mention the mill in his home town, Newton Iowa, "corporate profits" and a daddy in Iowa.

Good follow up for Edwards: textiles era of U.S. economy is gone, no? Edwards claims reason is catering to corporate interests. Absurd, as if the world is not flattened out so as to make textiles a relatively obsolete industry.

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 12/04/2007 03:15:25 PM EST

Obama (none / 0)

What does "take them to the mat" on currency mean? Good question.

He dodges it. Picks on Gravel. Easy foil.

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 12/04/2007 03:17:09 PM EST

Commercial -- immigration up next (none / 0)

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 12/04/2007 03:19:16 PM EST

Immigration and American Citizens (none / 0)

This topic ("what should be normal citizens responsibilities) results from the CNN/YouTube Julian-Romney immigration interchange. The debates ought to be seen and part of a larger debate, ongoing and reflexive. On topic the topic: What no one suggesting vigilantes?
Only Dodd seemed to offer moderation in terms of China. Perhaps Hillary did indirectly via her attending meetings during the administration. Terribly safe, middle of the road answers, as usual. . .

Allan Louden, Wake Forest University

Winston-Salem, NC

by Allan Louden on 12/04/2007 03:25:23 PM EST

Marshalltown, Iowa (none / 0)

has had raids -- do citizens have obligations --

Obama, would you expect citizens to turn in illegals?
A: We do not deputize citizens to do what federal government is supposed to do. We should hold employers responsible. Do not criminalize priests and doctors.

Dodd, if you were hiring a nanny . . .
A: obligation here, here, here. He transitions to the know-nothings. 20 years chaired a committee (another argument for his remaining in the Senate). Long non-answer.

Kucinich: rely on (my pocket) constitution. Too bad it is not on TV. recites his talking points.

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 12/04/2007 03:25:35 PM EST

Marshalltown citizen says don't ask don't tell (none / 0)

appropriate?

Hillary: I agree with Barack, Dennis, others. Do not criminalize the woman who provides services. That's not in keeping with American . . .

follow up: but if citizen witnessed another kind of crime . . .

Hillary: that begs the question (she should point out difference between criminal and civil law).

Biden: distinction: service to children differs. Providing a service is different from hiring. Illegal nannies and 60% of illegals are not Hispanic!!

Whoops, facts on it say 56% Latin America. Dodd notes recent arrivals numbers may differ.

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 12/04/2007 03:30:19 PM EST

Not drive down wages, Edwards? (none / 0)

He says serious academic studies . . . but quickly reverts to anecdotes, imagery, a man with broken back on the job in Canton, Mississippi poultry factory.

Says lots of factors in wages. Middle class.

Michelle Norris follow up from "Black and Brown" debate: what "rights" were you referring to for immigrants without proper documents?
Edwards does not really have an answer. Enforce labor standards.

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 12/04/2007 03:35:01 PM EST

Hillary with numbered arguments (none / 0)

Comprehensive immigration reform means 5 things . . .

Issues are related. Labor force participation rate, I traveled a lot in 1990s, people's perceptions have changed.

Jan 2009 crackdown?

Will do all 5 things . . . unrealisitc to deport and round up 12 million people. 200,000 buses!

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 12/04/2007 03:43:00 PM EST

Obama and Dodd (none / 0)

January 2009 crackdown? The process takes time. I helped put together comprehensive immigration reform package, but president has not led.

This true? Bush favored the comp reform package. But he had no political capital and ran into public opinion that favors the nativist side!