Five questions about Monday's presidential debate

Sunday, July 22, 2007


As The Citadel prepared to host Charleston's first-ever presidential debate, Post and Courier political reporter Robert Behre talked with several political science professors to get their sense of what's at stake. All eight Democratic candidates — Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware, Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York, Sen. Chris Dodd of Connecticut, former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina, former Sen. Mike Gravel of Alaska, Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio, Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson — are set to face off at 7 p.m. Monday, live on CNN.

1. Who has the most to gain from Monday's debate?

DuBose Kapeluck, political science professor at The Citadel, said Edwards could be viewed as having the most to gain. "He has the most to gain to revive a rather sagging campaign so far," Kapeluck said. "He's the only native Southerner, and he's in a Southern location, which might be good. His accent will play well here, and he might seem more comfortable in Charleston."

That said, lesser-known candidates might have the most to gain if they deliver a solid performance, said College of Charleston political science professor Bill Moore. "People know Obama. People know Hillary. People know John Edwards," Moore said. "The one candidate I truly think has the potential to emerge out of that second tier is Bill Richardson."

Adam Warber, political science professor at Clemson University, said Obama might have the most to gain because it's a chance for him to build on the momentum he already has by raising the most money of all presidential candidates during the past three months.

"I think voters will be paying more attention to him because he's a serious contender," Warber said.

2. Which candidate has the most to lose?

Almost everyone agrees that Clinton, as the frontrunner, is in a sort of no-win position. If she delivers a solid performance, she simply remains the frontrunner. If she were to stumble, that's another story.

To some extent, the same is also true of Edwards and Obama. "Slips are more likely to negatively affect frontrunners," Moore said. "People don't pay much attention to those in the a back of the pack right now."

Warber said he's not sure any candidate has much to lose, but he adds that Clinton's campaign probably wishes the campaign were shorter. "You have had this campaign drawn out so early, and she's been ahead in the polls for some time," he said. "It looks like, by all indications, she's doing strong still and they've not been able to chip away from her very much."

3. Who will be watching?

Most agree the Democratic faithful will be the debate's primary audience, and many of them already have made up their minds.

"On the Democratic side in particular, a large percentage have already committed themselves," Moore said. "It's not like the Republican side, where 'none of the above' leads the polls."

Because the debate is being held in Charleston, the audience can be expected to include a proportionately larger share of potential South Carolina voters.

"I think it's going to be heavily watched in the Lowcountry and perhaps in all of South Carolina," Kapeluck said. "This novel idea of soliciting questions through YouTube is unorthodox, and you're going to get some questions that aren't quite as canned as you normally find at these debates. I think that's going to be a draw."

Warber says the format — submitting questions through Internet site YouTube — might stir more interest among younger voters, "but I don't know at this point. I think if this were in the fall, it would generate more interest among college students."

4. What questions will be asked?

When the Democratic candidates held their first debate in Orangeburg in April, Iraq dominated much of the discussion. Don't expect that to happen this time.

Monday's debate will feature questions posed by ordinary people, submitted by video through YouTube. CNN's producers have said they've received relatively few questions about Iraq and more about health care, Social Security and other issues that hit home for the person asking the question.

Warber said he expects the questions —as in other debates — to touch on many topics, "but since you're asking average folks to do this, they may be picking more policy issues that concern them, more issues in the domestic realm."

Kapeluck agrees. "Since these questions are prerecorded, it allows the people asking the questions to say things he or she might feel uncomfortable saying live, standing up in a crowd. You may get questions that are more personal in nature."

5. How much of this will matter Jan. 29, when South Carolina's Democratic voters go to the polls?

Warber said the candidates have been well-prepared for earlier debates and have avoided any major gaffes. "You're not seeing the poll numbers after the previous debates shifting that much either," he said. "But there could always be a surprise."

"I think this is a blip on the radar," Moore said. "By the time the South Carolina primary is held, several of these candidates will not be in the race. They will have withdrawn by that time. You may have even one of the three top candidates out. It's a long way to the South Carolina primary, and this is just a small step."

Monday's debate might not end up being as significant as how the candidates fare in the first primary and caucus battles, but Kapeluck said it will continue the winnowing process.

"This debate is not as important as later ones, but you've got to remember the pivotal nature of the South Carolina primary," he said. "This will be a good one that will set the tone for how well the candidates are received here."

Share this story:
E-mail this story E-mail this story  Printer-friendly version Printer-friendly version  

Copy and paste the link:

Comments

poorboy (anonymous) says...

When will the main stream media ask Obama about his relegious upbringing? That's what I would like somone to ask. If you want to elect a muslim to the whitehouse continue on this path... He will be, at the very least, the VP nomination if not the democratic party's nomination for president. The american people better wake up!

July 22, 2007 at 10:04 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

nonprophet (anonymous) says...

Poorboy, the truth about Barack Obama's religious upbringing has been featured in countless news articles.So I'm surprised that you've posted this nonsense. Barack Obama is a member of the United Church of Christ. He did not attend a Muslim school.

Read and learn:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16813267/
http://www.ncccusa.org/news/070123oba...

I hope you'll post a retraction of your scurrilous comments.

July 22, 2007 at 6:41 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

hawneena (anonymous) says...

I went to a web site awhile back to check on Obama's name. It did say that he was a Christian and a member of the church nonprophet mentioned. It also said that the name Obama has something to do with African honor. I don't know what Barack comes from and I don't know why he has a middle name of Hussein. That name concerns me somewhat.

July 22, 2007 at 8:15 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

hawneena (anonymous) says...

To Thewexler: If Clinton had been in office when 9-11 happened, we would have definitely been screwed. He would not have done a damn thing. This country was attacked numerous times during Clinton's reign, and he did nothing. I don't agree with everything Bush has done, particularly the immigration bill. However, how many president's have barely taken office when such a horrible catastrophe has struck? Everyone thinks they could do a better job. Try walking in his shoes before you judge so harshly.

July 22, 2007 at 8:58 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

yoffe42580 (anonymous) says...

Barack Obama is a Christian. He and his wife belong to the United Church of Christ. I suggest that you read news sources other than right-wing hateful websites. Your ignorance and prejudice are apparent. I also would say that hawneena must be clairvoyant to know what Clinton would have done. I do believe that: Clinton would not have created a terrorist state in Iraq because he wouldn't have invaded a country that had nothing to do with 9/11, would have captured Bin Laden, would have allies in our fight against terrorism, would not have allowed a resurgence of the Taliban in Afghanistan, would not have left us with a 9 trillion dollar debt to China, would not have destroyed our military as Bush is doing. I wonder about the educational level of poorboy and hawneena. Could they please let me know. Also. if you are able to read Obama's book, "Audacity of Hope", you would be wiser and better educated.

July 23, 2007 at 9:30 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

rpugh10 (anonymous) says...

I don't understand how you (or anyone else) "definitely" knows that we would have been any worse off with Clinton in the White House than George Bush. Divine intervention perhaps?

Our country has been attacked a number of times in recent history (Reagan comes to mind) and, rather than dive in head first into conflicts with no end game, past Presidents have choose to reacted with a measured response. You can call that doing nothing but, in the end, it may be the best course of action.

As the 2008 election approaches, rather than vote the party line look at the candidates very closely and cast your vote for the most qualified candidate. There is no time for a learning curve once they take office.

July 23, 2007 at 9:43 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

califdreamin (anonymous) says...

To Thewexler
Are you blind....re-read your own comments and you will "maybe" see the way you are mimicing all "your" liberal idiots. Oh yes, and George Bush is also responsible for the plague of 1535. As for impeachment, Clinton was probably the the most blatantly immoral president to date and what happened to him? The difference is.....He's got schmoozing down to an art.....I'd rather have a president who is a "what you see is what you get" president!

July 23, 2007 at 2:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Notice about comments:

Postandcourier.com is pleased to offer readers the enhanced ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Postandcourier.com does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not postandcourier.com. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "report abuse" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website.

Users can now build user-to-user connections, follow friends' recent posts, add an avatar that fits their personality, and more. If you have posted here before you'll need to sign up again, or if you've never posted before, start now by signing up!

Full terms and conditions can be read here.




.Link.