For the curious, you can also watch a live stream of the debate from the wonderful people at WMUR.

First up is the Republican debate.  Huckabee moderates his attack on the Bush foreign policy.  Thompson disagrees with him anyway and defends the Bush status quo.  Thompson says we "won in Afghanistan."  Really?  We won?  Past tense?  In fact, even present tense, I'm not sure that's true.

If we won, Senator Thompson, why are our troops still there.

Rudy rails against Islamic fundamentalism.  Calls for bigger military.  I agree, as does Sen. Obama.

McCain endorses the Bush Doctrine.  Gives Bush credit.  Says America is safer now than it was.  Really McCain?

Only a few minutes in, and I'm already left scratching my head, wondering what reality these GOPers are looking at.

Giuliani endorses a kind of clash of civilizations again.  Want World War IV?  He's your man.

Ron Paul talks to Rudy like he's 10.  Romney and Rudy and Fred are desperate to score points trashing Ron Paul.

Huckabee throws out a random date just to prove he knows foreign policy.

Huckabee and Romney get into a fight.  Romney appears arrogant, but probably comes out on top.

McCain avoids the entire thing.  Probably for the best.

Charlie Gibson goes down the line and explains why each GOP candidate has been inconsistent in their views.

Huckabee is speaking circles.  Fred Thompson's face seems droopier every minute and I wonder who much longer it will stay attached to his skull.

Ron Paul is so cranky. Thompson clears his throat....a lot.

Question for Republican candidates: Why does government healthcare necessarily lower quality?

Romney and Huckabee are actually the only ones that understand healthcare at all...underscore at all...in the republican field.  And I guess Ron Paul.  But he's still nuts.

Did Mitt Romney seriously defend pharmaceutical companies? Did I hear that correctly? Dude just lost the vote of every senior citizen in America.

Romney attacks McCain on immigration.  Doesn't actually offer a plan of his own.  Are you going to deport 12 million people? 

McCain attacks Romney for flip-flopping.  He is completely bitch-slapping Romney for spending his wealth on negative ads.

Romney is being destroyed from all angles.  Wow.  He's going to lose NH.  I have no doubt.  This is now a Huckabee-McCain-Giuliani race, unless Thompson wins SC.

As I'm arriving, Ron Paul is comparing himself to Barack Obama.  Wow.

The question "Why Not Obama?" was not appropriate for this debate.  Romney and McCain fight again.  Huckabee actually gave a decent answer.

Giuliani is very average in this debate.  Nothing new from him.

Thompson is supposed to be smart, but he certainly doesn't sound that way.  The price of oil is not mostly governed by supply and demand, it is mostly governed by expectations.

Thompson is pushing the status quo oil dependence. 

Clean coal is the biggest misnomer ever and Giuliani should be ashamed for advocating it.

This, along with healthcare, is going to be one of the nails in the GOP coffins.

Fred Thompson is totally incoherent on the question of windfall profits for oil companies, issuing typical boilerplate about free enterprise and the need for more refineries without stringing them together.

Huckabee sounds almost presidential by comparison (emphasis on the comparison) - this is why he's taking the demographic that Thompson was supposed to sweep off its feet. 

Huckabee mixes up counterintuitive and counterproductive.  But he speaks more sense about energy.

Big winner: John McCain - again the only adult in the room (except for some of the cheap shots against Romney)

Big loser: Mitt Romney - mean-spirited and all over the place

Other winner: Huckabee

Other loser: Thompson

Status Quo: Giuliani

Irrelevant: Paul

 Time for the DEMS!!!

They're bringing out the Democratic candidates and having them shake hands with the Republicans.  Mitt Romney looks awfully uncomfortable witn all of these man-hugs.  Huckabee appears to be getting along with everyone nicely. John McCain has big jowls.

Yeah, I'm with Jarret -- Romney got pwned by McCain tonight. He looked petulant and didn't get his message across. (What is his message?) (Plus, PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES??!?!?)

Though I disagree on Thompson; he had nothing to lose tonight and he didn't lose it. He was calm, confident, straight-talking (even if he didn't know what he was talking about). This was not a man who'd given up on his presidential ambitions.

(and health care: they're going to need better arguments than this if they want to stop a universal health care program. "Yes, it will be universal, but... look how much it will cost!" Since fiscal responsibility is always the voting public's first concern, naturally.)

Since fiscal responsibility is always the voting public's first concern, naturally.

And the Republican Party's!

Why is it that every single candidate feels that we need to increase the size of the military? We already spend more than the rest of the world combined. I just don't understand why there isn't any give and take on this issue other than from Ron Paul.

First question: do you go into Pakistan to take out Al Qaeda?

Obama, Edwards, Richardson: Yes 

Tom Kean is pronounced like Kane not Keen, Senator Obama.

Hillary seems very tired.

First question for the Dems: to what extent should the US government pursue al Qaeda in Pakistan?

Obama, sounding very hoarse and pretty tired, says yes, reiterating what he said in his foreign policy speech this summer about working with Pakistan's government but independently attacking al Qaeda if necessary. Segues into arms control.  Charlie Gibson accuses him of espousing the Bush doctrine.  Damn!

Edwards says: bin Laden is bad (yes!).  Expounds on the importance of checking nuclear development in Pakistan; criticizes the administration's "ad hoc policy" and suggests a long-term counterproliferation effort.

Richardson talks about the importance of diplomacy and public image, including not invading large Muslim countries without solid cause. He bashes Bush's foreign policy re: Pakistan, in that he's allowed Musharraf to neglect al Qaeda and abuse the Constitution.  Richardson says, as president, he'd ask Musharraf to step aside, citing a provision of the Pakistani constitution allowing for an interim caretaker government - clever move for the candidate with the most foreign policy experience.

I'm missing a lot of Clinton's response because of various conversations in the room, but she's talking about the importance of carefully vetting any intelligence that might lead to an attack on Pakistan - probably clever if she thinks that NH voters are wary about her earlier support for invading Iraq, though that could be pegged as a flip-flop.  "The elections are about parliamentary positions" - a quick correction of her mistake a couple of days ago in saying that Musharraf would be on the ballot when, in fact, they're parliamentary elections that don't directly affect him.

Richardson interrupts and talks about the importance of getting Musharraf to step aside, of "being on the side of the Pakistani people."

Obama comes back and points out that Iraq hindered our ability to get the trust of the international community in issues like Pakistan.   

Next question is about nuclear terrorism.  (Sadly, I find that when I miss the precise wording of the question, it's impossible to reliably gather from answers because nobody answers these questions directly enough.  I don't much like these debates for that reason.)

 Edwards talks about the importance of presidents reacting calmly to crisis situations, rather than instilling fear in people - good call, possibly a reference to Giuliani's 'an attack could happen any moment' ad?

Obama refers to his work in the Senate about disarmament and talks about various failures in US counterproliferation efforts, mostly with regards to Russian and other nuclear stockpiles.  The broader point is to focus on long-term threats, not just short-term ones.

Charlie Gibson points out that the next nuclear attack will probably be by a non-state actor.  Hillary backs up a little and argues for a better, more unified organizational approach to counterproliferation - true although sort of boring. "The stateless terrorists will operate from somewhere; part of our message has to be that there is no safe haven."  Okay, though I wonder where she draws the line between a state aiding and abetting terrorists (Afghanistan pre-2001) and a state that doesn't have the capacity to rein them in (Afghanistan post-2001).  

Richardson alludes to his time as Secretary of Energy.  Two things (of course, a list!): immediate negotiations with the "Soviet Union" (did I mishear that?) and a treaty on arms control with verification measures.  Also, realization that our problems are "transnational" and require international cooperation - solid point and a great case for a foreign policy that doesn't piss everyone off. 

Hooray! A debate about mandates in health care plans! Here's a topic that will interest absolutely no one who does not already read Ezra Klein.

(Cut to Hillary)

Edwards: "The forces of status quo..."

(Cut away from Hillary)

Heh heh. 

Moving on to domestic policy: a video!  Balding guys playing basketball. Social Security checks and dire predictions about insolvency by 2017 for Social Security and 2013 for Medicare.  

Actually, Charlie Gibson is going back to asking about "change" with reference to the Iowa caucuses and Hillary's criticism that he hasn't been vetted.

Hillary: everyone wants change in the sense of not Bush. Standard line that change comes about from hard work, not demanding it (she leaves out the line that you can't make change just by hoping for it, which got her roundly booed by the Obama crowd at a NH party fundraiser last night).  "There is a lot of room to ask all of us questions" - huh?  Hillary, citing the AP, calls Obama a flip-flopper with regards to single-payer health care and says we need a president we can count on with consistent stances.  "I have no problem with whatever scrutiny comes my way."

Obama:  "I think the AP was quoting some of your folks, Hillary."  Obama clarifies: he'd set up a single-payer system if he could start from scratch, but given that lots of people are already getting employer-based health care, switching to single-payer would be impractical.  Draws the distinction on mandates - says Hillary and Edwards believe that the government should "force" people to get health care; he says the real problem is that people can't afford it, so we should focus on reducing costs.  Switches over to Social Security, saying that he and Edwards agree very specifically on raising the payroll tax cap.

Hillary interrupts and says that Obama has a mandate about health care for children in his plan, but stops short of a full mandate.  Says that Obama has changed positions within three years on "a range of issues" - the Patriot Act and Iraq, specifically.

Obama answers some things Hillary said about what Obama said about Edwards.  Explains that he mandates for children because they don't have a choice, while adults do; if it's affordable, adults will choose to buy health care.  "That is different from saying that I will refuse to cover or leave out a bunch of individuals." Then: candidates shouldn't try to "distort each other's records."

Edwards, finally: "Senator Obama and I have differences... but both of us are powerful voices for change, and I might add, we finished first and second in the Iowa caucuses."  This leads "the forces of status quo" to "attack."  Damn!  He's almost literally pointing at Hillary.  "I didn't hear these kind of attacks from Senator Clinton when she was ahead."  DAMN!

Hillary: "Making change is not about what you believe... it is about working hard."  Claims credit for 7,000 kids in NH who have health care because she helped create SCHIP.  "I've already made change... I'm not just running on a promise of change."  She's getting a little testy.  "We don't need to be raising the false hopes of our country about what changes can be made."

Richardson: "I've been in hostage negotiations that are a lot more civil than this." 

Wow, Senator Clinton is mad. HILLARY ANGRY! HILLARY SMASH!

Hillary finally hit her stride talking about her record in making change.  Nicely done.  Including a shot about false hopes.

Richardson: Is experience a leper?

I want Huckabee v. Richardson - funniest election ever!

Richardson is playing the statesman (appropriately!), calling for a more civil debate and saving the attacks for the Republicans.  This is a pretty good moment for him, as he gets both the laugh and the high road. "We want to change this country, but you have to know how to do it. And there's nothing wrong with having experience."  Says we have to examine records of people who have produced change and that we need experienced people.

Edwards: "nobody cares about hearing a bunch of politicians fight."  Really?!  Brings it back to the middle class; blames wealthy entrenched special interests for blocking change.  There are lots of big parenthetical interjections - disrupts the flow a little bit.  Taking on entrenched special interests is a key part of making change.

Obama: "enlisting the American people" is important.  Transparency and accountability help this happen and give people more faith that government is working for them and listening to them.

Final question: Iraq.  (What happened to Social Security?)  "So far political progress has been frustratingly slow" - understatement of the week.  "Are any of you ready to say that the surge has worked?"

Clinton says that the surge was supposed to make political reconciliation possible, but failed to do so.  More troops will "dampen down the violence" (is that a word?), but the Iraqi government isn't taking advantage of it.

Richardson calls it a "massive failure," citing American lives.  (Someone in the room with us points out that nobody ever cites Iraqi casualties - this is what my father hates about Vietnam, too.)  Goes back to change and says ending the war is key to making change.  Pounds the table in a manner that the microphone catches.

Charlie Gibson talks about various other evidence of 'progress.'  Obama says we've lowered the bar so much that little things will seem like successes.  "We started in 2006 with intolerable levels of violence and a dysfunctional government... we've come full circle."  Redeployment sends a signal to the Iraqi government that we won't be there forever.  Hooray for reduced violence, even though much of it is a result of agreements between tribes, post-2006 midterms, to reduce violence given the realization that the occupation would end eventually - interesting reasoning.  We'll support political efforts, oil-sharing negotiations, de-Baathification, etc. but without maintaining a costly troop presence.

Gibson: legislatures are slow.  Whoa!  Brings up the idea of timetables - if the generals in Iraq came to you, as the president, and said withdrawal was a bad idea, would you change plans?

Edwards: the commander-in-chief makes policy decisions, not the generals.  Repeats Hillary's line about the purpose of the surge being to create space for political reconciliation.  Reiterates his withdrawal plan. 

Thirty seconds for each candidate.

Richardson: get the troops out so they're not targets.  I don't know his stump speech well, but this sounds a lot like boilerplate to me.  Some confusion about numbers.  (Eight-year-olds, eighth grade, five years from now?)  He's thumping on the table again.  I'm surprised not to hear the phrase "no residual troops," though maybe I missed it.

Clinton: we agree about withdrawing troops.  We have to find solutions for US civilians and Iraqis who cooperated.  "This is a complicated enterprise" - yes.  Began demanding last spring that the Bush administration begin telling the American people whether they were making plans to withdraw.

Commercial break! 

I'm very glad all of the candidates seem to have raised their rhetoric on ending the war.  They seem more urgent than in previous debates.

Richardson's message of bringing everyone home might sound careless if anyone else was the messenger, but his experience in diplomacy and international relations is unparalleled among all the candidates, and quite simply, I trust him.

No major missteps yet.  Seems like a draw to me so far.  A draw is actually a victory for Obama though because he still has the momentum... 

Commercial thoughts, from my very biased perspective: Obama could've done a better job of more specifically answering Hillary's attacks on his record.  It's a pretty gutsy thing for her to accuse him of flip-flopping and it would have made him look awesome if he could concisely refute that.  I would guess that when he started talking about the payroll tax cap, he was about to finish by accusing Hillary of reversing herself on the issue (I'll link this later) - but he didn't get a chance, and he didn't do it strongly enough. 

Why are they advertising for Serenity underwear? 

What's the deal with Charlie Gibson, anyway? He seemed all chummy with the Republicans, but with the Dems, not so much..

I liked Edwards's comments on why this was personal for them.  Barack jumps on the train.

Hillary shatters their bubblegum dreams.....she's mean.  Did she say the energy bill was "larded" up?  Is that proper english?

Scott Spradling time!

Talks about poll data: Hillary is most experienced and electable; Edwards and Obama are change agents in NH voters' minds.  Asks Hillary how she responds to the likability deficit.

Hillary: "Well, that hurts my feelings."  Nice. "I don't think I'm that bad."  This election is momentous (so is every other NH primary), and "the most important question is who's prepared to be president on day one."  Talks about how crappy 2000 was.  "If you want to know what change each of us will bring about, look at what we've done."  Hillary says she embodies change - e.g. having the first woman president (her advantage is NOT unique).  This is the same argument she's been using on the stump lately, but possibly more civil.

Obama is asked to respond to Republican attacks: "I was going back and forth between the Republicans and football.  The Redskins lost."  (Seattle at Green Bay, next Saturday!)  Talks about cooperation in creating a searchable database of government spending - "those are the kinds of steps that will actually lead to real changes in people's lives."  Cites state legislature record.

Spradling talks about how Thompson paints Obama as a leftist.  Obama: that's fine for Republican candidates; they'll always do that - but rank-and-file Republicans and Independents are disaffected and can join a "working majority for change."  Nice words for the other candidates, but they haven't done as much with across-the-aisle coalitions - that's what you need to get big things done.

Richardson is asked about the importance of executive experience.  Cites executive and foreign-policy experience - I think this is the third or fourth iteration of the phrase "I've faced down the North Koreans."  Spradling interrupts ("I don't mean to interrupt") and wonders if Richardson's failure as energy secretary to keep the price of oil down means that he won't be able to do it as president - pretty direct.  Richardson says (STOP THUMPING THE DAMN TABLE) that both parties have failed on energy policy but cites various achievements.  Richardson cites JFK's "relative youth" - good for Obama.

Edwards: "What's my question?"  Good laugh line.  Talks about his record re: lobbyist and PAC money.  Daddy worked in a mill.  "This is a fight for middle-class families."  Grandma worked in a mill too.  "This battle is deep inside me and it's personal" - any other motivation is insufficient.  Spradling asks him to justify his time in the Senate; Edwards points to the Patients' Bill of Rights.  He comes back to his battle being personal; zoom to Elizabeth Edwards.  Very nice "I'm a normal person, not a fat cat" depiction.

Obama cuts in; after some banter with Spradling about the vagaries of ethics reform, talks about his ethics reform bill.  Agrees that fights have to be personal; tells a familiar story about his mother's death and her difficulties with insurance.  But "if we're gonna bring about real change, then we have to bring in the American people."

Clinton interrupts: "Can we have a reality break?"  Once more... damn!  "We don't have a patient's bill of rights."  "Senator Obama's chair in New Hampshire is a lobbyist."  Obama voted for the 2005 energy bill that gives tax breaks to oil companies; Hillary didn't.  "What we've got to do is to translate talk into action."  Talks about her record again.  Skip in the blogging for my blockmate entering the room; she keeps talking about her record.

Spradling stops them.  Every president came into Washington talking about change.  All the candidates start yelling at him at this point.  Hillary comes out loudest and tells Spradling that Bill Clinton turned a deficit into a surplus; change is possible.

Edwards: entrenched interests are "literally stealing our children's future."  You can't take those people's money and then stand up to them.  Back to things being personal.  Talks about Teddy Roosevelt not cutting deals with monopolists or trusts; "we have a battle in front of us."  Classic.  Second reference to cocktail parties of the night. 

Edwards: "special interests killed my mother, and raped my father!"

Edwards: I am today's Teddy Roosevelt

Obama takes it back: we're at a pivotal moment at which Americans can be mobilized around big changes, not incremental ones.  Props to Bill Clinton for budget-balancing, but he failed to build a long-term majority around getting other things done.  "Words do inspire... don't discount that power."  Cynicism makes people believe that they can't make big changes; "I'm running for president to tell them that we can."

Richardson says the public hates this bickering - legit.  "I'm gonna have a cabinet of Republicans, Democrats, and independents."  Importance of bringing people together.

Edwards: agrees it's the president's responsibility to bring people together, but brings it back to "entrenched money interests" - "you cannot nice these people to death."  Nice line.  You have to fight to take those interests on.

Gibson switches over to climate change.  Richardson gives a long list of necessary measures.  

He's cut off and time is handed to Obama, who talks about cap-and-trade systems - reduces pollution and generates cash money.  Points out that costs will, in fact, be passed on to consumers; we have an obligation to shield low-income people from the worst impacts, but we also have to ask people to make sacrifices and use less energy.

Hillary brings up the word "recession" and talks about pressures on middle-class families.  Energy costs for typical NH families have tripled under the Bush administration.  Energy is an opportunity to "jumpstart economic recovery"; various measures to increase efficiency.  This is good for security and the environment, but also for the economy.  I'm not sure she had enough time to make the connection, but it's absolutely true.

Sudden switch to tax cuts.  Hillary: end tax cuts above $250,000, fix the AMT, and implement tax relief for middle-class families.  

Edwards: very few people are getting wealthier; veterans are homeless.  It's bad for college graduates, too.  Focus on the middle class.

Obama: specific, immediate tax relief to working families, mostly under $75,000 annual income; paying for it by closing loopholes.  Bigger point: return to a president who fights for opportunity and "bottom-up economic growth."

Spradling asks Richardson about small-business owners who might be affected by ending tax cuts. Richardson: "I'm the only one that's actually run a state economy."  (You run an economy?)  Balancing the budget is key; line-item veto authority is key (?!).  Investments in science, innovation, green energy; tax credits for companies that pay well.  We haven't talked about education (a really, really good point).

Gibson: tell us something you've said in a debate that you wish you hadn't said.  Big laughs.

Hillary: "what's really so important about these debates is that the Democrats are so different from the Republicans."  Come on!  Failing to answer the question is a poor closer.  Hillary is a much, much better debater than her performance has indicated tonight.  "I'll leave it to the pundits" to say what I shouldn't have said.

Richardson: wouldn't have said his favorite Supreme Court justice was White, which he said since JFK appointed him - then he discovered he opposed civil rights.  Oops.

Edwards: "teasing Hillary about her jacket... I think you look terrific tonight." Clever.  I thought that was coming.

Obama: "I agree with Hillary" - Democrats aren't Republicans.  COME ON!  You had three responses, one of them rather long-winded, to come up with one damn mistake.  Answer the question.

Gibson: placating closing words. 

Richardson is God.  Why didn't he take off.  He's so funny.

What a great debate! We got to focus fairly seriously on both some real policy issues (mandates, carbon tax vs. cap & trade) and the philosophical issues about change that have underlied this whole campaign. Plus, Richardson was on his game, which is always nice to see (he's rapidly becoming this party's lovable bachelor uncle). Even the Republican debate was more focused on policy and less focused on bullshit than usual. Good job ABC, and good job Charlie Gibson.