the Greater Nomadic Council

A Few Quick Rants About the Presidential Campaign

1. I watched the debate last night and it was largely a draw. Dean and Edwards were on top form--just excellent. Edwards could hardly have been better. As for Dean, don't count him out yet. He still raised more money post-Iowa than Kerry and Edwards combined. And the public has a short memory.

Kerry also did great, but partially because his questions were softballs. Clark had some tough questions, including being asked to denounce some comments by Michael Moore accusing Bush of being AWOL that were spoken in Clark's presence. What rot! How can they hold Clark responsible for Moore's mouth? Who cares if he doesn't know whether Bush was AWOL or not? Then they asked Clark how he could be pro-choice and Catholic at the same time. Clark did well, but he failed to simply make a distinction between his public views and religious views.

Unsurprisingly, some are spinning last night as a Clark defeat. Yet Clark did what he had to do--he looked and sounded like a Republican while actually articulating Democratic positions. This is a guy that can appeal to GOP voters at a gut level and I think he's still a better speaker and debater than Bush or McCain. With all of his electoral assets, Clark doesn't have to seem as articulate as the more experienced Dems, and since he was good enough last night, he looked strong to me.

I don't know. I'm torn between Clark and Edwards as our best bet, but I wish both of them had a lot more experience.

2. I watched Dean's post-Iowa remarks on CSPAN. In itself, there was nothing wrong with Dean's speech, although Harkin's intro was pretty pathetic. I suppose it didn't sound good on radio (perhaps one couldn't hear him laughing?), but seriously, how can the way the media spun this be interpreted as anything other than a smear? Reading the headlines, it's getting hard not to be something of a conspiracist these days. I guess the likliest explanation is that most members of the media simply don't like Dean and were eager to go for the throat. Obviously that doesn't bode well for Dean. I suppose Kerry and Edwards are capable of sucking up to them more effectively and have greater respect for the power of the image, which is damn important.

The other day I was speaking to one of my roomates about the primary, and she asked me.

"Who is the guy with the terrible red face who goes around yelling "You have the power. You have the power!"?

"That was Dean. Where did you see that?"

"Oh, on the news the other day."

If there's one lesson coming out of Iowa--it's this. Television, and not the Internet, is the dominant media for the vast, vast majority. We need a master of the medium. This campaign is going to be won or lost in news clips and we need to get used to it.

3. Meanwhile, Dean and his wife apparently endured an interview with Dianne Sawyer yesterday (eeek). I suppose Maureen Dowd will have a wonderful little column about Judith's wardrobe in her next NYT op-ed.

I wonder if Dean ever asks himself-why didn't he just stay in Vermont and let these vampires feed somewhere else?

Update Timothy Noah nails Sawyer and Dowd much better than I ever could. And check out Suellentrop's wrap up of the debate on the same site.