I think the overwhelming concensus is that the debate was close, but that Hillary had HUGE problems on Iraq. Particularly, while her refusal to admit a mistake is pretty much accepted (if unacceptable), something that is getting renewed look by the media is her explanation on the Levin Amendment. We'll take a look below the jump.
*** Levin Amendment returns: Speaking of Iraq, Clinton was asked a question she doesn’t always get: Why she voted against the 2002 Levin amendment, which would have required more diplomacy before the US went to war against Iraq. At the debate, Clinton answered as she normally does, "The way that amendment was drafted suggested that the United States would subordinate whatever our judgment might be going forward to the United Nations Security Council. I don't think that was a good precedent. Therefore, I voted against it." But as Al Hunt recently wrote, "It did no such thing, Levin said at the time and a spokesman reiterates now. The proposal's language explicitly required that Congress ‘not adjourn’ before it ‘promptly considers proposals related to Iraq if the United Nations fails to adopt such a resolution.’ Senator Joe Biden, a Delaware Democrat who, like Senator Clinton opposed the Levin amendment, said at the time the UN charge was ‘specious’ and that this was a vote about supporting an invasion." Rezko became a household name after last week’s debate. Will the same be true of the Levin amendment after last night?
If Obama has anything to say about it, it will.
Clinton may have opened herself here big time. Her explanation on the Levin amendment rings FALSE. And much like a suregon, Obama looks to dissect:
Beginning his avail in Los Angeles, Obama revisited the toughest part of last night's debate for Hillary Clinton last night: Her long explanation of her vote for war in Iraq.
Clinton "still has not adequatedly explained her vote to go into Iraq," he said. "There continues to be a suggestion that it was not a vote for war."
Obama specifically disputed her objection to the Levin Amendment to that 2002 resolution, which she'd said would have set a bad precedent by handing power to the United Nations.
Obama called her explanation "inaccurate."
"We were not ceding sovreignty in some fashion to the United Nations. The Levin Amendment simply suggested we should allow the inspectors to act" before going to war, he said.
Expect Obama to exploit this opening in the following days. On Iraq, Clinton was put on the defensive and was inaccurate in her explanation of the Levin Amendment. If Obama can continue to hit on this, it will certainly continue to put Clinton on the defensive and disrupt her message.