Saletan gets the debate just right saying that Kerry waffled, Edwards hit a home run and Dean showed moral clarity.
John Kerry lost his lead in 2003 because he couldn't give straight answers to simple questions. Then the guy with the straight answers, Howard Dean, started giving answers so brutally straight (your taxes will go up, sit down and let me finish) that people decided a bit more diplomacy was in order. But Kerry has to watch his bad habits in this area.
I am onboard with Kerry but his performance last night was terrible. Bush's "moral clarity" will clobber that performance. Answer yes or no FIRST and then elaborate.
Edwards' only sour note was when he was following up on a Kerry answer by saying that politicians needed to tell the people the truth: namely that they can't have everything they want and balance the budget too. That was a backhand hit at Kerry who had just laid out his something for everybody program (which by the way seemed very stale last night). But then Gloria Borger came back at Edwards and asked him what the American people couldn't have and Edwards promptly ran off into waffle land. He came off as a good deal less than sincere in that exchange. Edwards also talks a good line on trade but doesn't have anything real to offer beyond what Kerry and Dean are offering.
Kucinich and Sharpton continue to get the most appause because they actually say the things most core Democrats would like to hear said. Kucinich will cut defense spending, get us out of Iraq, give single payer health insurance and end trade agreements. Heck, I think Kucinich is almost from the Buchanan wing of the Democratic party. Sharpton was very strong on principles last night too. He stands up to his core constituency on gay rights for example.
Dean came off as sincere and the most authentic of all the "viable" candidates last night. It was a good performance for him.