CNN/Youtube Dem debate

My hat is off to CNN. For the time being they have exonerated themselves by taking the right steps to correct a string of poorly planned and executed debate performances. How did they do it? By replacing Wolf Blitzer with Anderson Cooper, telling Larry King to stay home and engaging regular people via YouTube. Brilliant? It goes without saying that I'm a little more interested in this stuff than the average person but I've got to tell you that I thoroughly enjoyed this debate.
What I found to be so unexpected and refreshing was that most of the candidates excelled in this format. Those who knew the difference showed how much easier and natural it is to answer a real question rather than some dreamed up, insincere, over-thought concoction that we've come to mistake for reality. It's like the difference between exercise and actually running the marathon.
It most definitely has changed the debate process but these clever candidates proved that adaptation will be quick. In fact it may have lasted only through last night. There were a few insights that I found particularly interesting that were made possible in part by the YouTube format. For example, the question that has really made the rounds in the press is the one about making contacts in the first year in office, with the Leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea. Sen. Obama got the question and said, "I would, the notion that not talking to countries is punishment to them, which has been the guiding light of this administration is ridiculous." For my taste this was a superb answer and in general this format seemed to build passion and intensity in Sen. Obama. Now on the other hand Sen. Clinton got the same question but answered in a much different way. She was measured and cautious, saying she did not want to be used by other countries for propaganda purposes. Frankly she sounded very similar to the current administrations policy.
So where this format seemed to help Sen. Obama differentiate himself from business-as-usual and the current administration, it did the opposite for Sen. Clinton.
Incidentally this seems to be a change of heart for Sen. Clinton who earlier in the year said, " you don't refuse to talk to bad people. I think life is filled with uncomfortable situations where you have to deal with people you might not like. I'm sort of an expert on that. I have consistently urged the President to talk to Iran and talk to Syria. I think it's a sign of strength not weakness."
I believe that this format was exactly one of those uncomfortable situation Sen. Clinton was talking about. Where Sen. Obama seemed young and vibrant and invigorated by the YouTube format and answered from the heart, Sen. Clinton seemed old and mechanical and defaulted to the game plan. Her whole campaign is machine like as can be seen by their instant attempts to discredit Sen Obama calling him irresponsible and naive for an answer I suspect they now wish they had given. When a campaign reacts this quick you know you got to them and Obama did and they had no choice but to attack. The Clinton camp proved again to be too smart for their own good, looking too far out and not in the moment where they belong.