Presidential debates on ABC right now-both parties

saluki · January 2008

This is one debate following another--first the Republicans --then the Democrats.

Wonder of wonder --they are talking to each other not at each other!

Very different type of debate--

Very good so far.

djd · January 2008

This is the only debate I've been able to stomach! Thank you, ABC, for allowing the candidates to talk about their views and policies, instead of the lame-ass crap that the previous debate hosts have done!

nosurrender · January 2008

Geez! thanks for telling us this was on- I didn't even know.

JoanofArdmore · January 2008

Well.

I saw the debates(thanx Susie!)

I saw the SPIN, I saw the aftercomments, I saw abc news.

My comment?

I KNEW I shouldnt have eaten my salad while watching.

I have a huge case of dyspepsia.Lotta burping.

GEE that Hillary is a loud, rude b!tch!One wonders how DARE she?

And can someone tell me what her "35" years of experince" are?Only was a senator for a few.Does she mean she was a LAWYER?Hell, then I have almost 50 years of experience(and CHANGE) ,being an artist.

I liked all the other dem cands.But cant quite reconcile Edwards' thousand dollar haircuts with his being "the underdog candidate".

And sorry, Elizabeth looked weak and weary, not well.I can feel her suffering.And feel that he should take her HOME and stop putting her through this.

For the Repugs, I liked McCaine--who'd believe that?(Iwill not vote for a Repug in this election)Rudy was quiet and sensible.But Mitt was a mess.Loud, bratty, rude. Should partner w/hillary.

So thanks, I think, Susie.I wouldnt have missed it for the world.But I feel a lot of teeth-gnashing in sleep coming on.

NoH8 · January 2008

I saw most of the debates. I missed the first part of the republican one because I was watching Gay Usa.

djd, I agree this was the best (and probably only read) debate format so far. I liked that the candidates were asked follow up questions when they evaded answering and were allowed to address each other. I think we got a better handle on how they are when they're (a little) more spontaneous.

NS-- shouldn't a political junky like you have had her popcorn ready five minutes before the debates started. You are slipping my friend .

Joan I agree with you that Elizabeth didn't look well. I thought that the last few times I saw her interviewed on tv. As for her husband- he had a $400 hair cut. Do we know if this was a pattern for him or whether it was a one time thing when he was in a pinch for time and didn't bother to ask beforehand what the price was? I think it's really easy to get caught up on a sound bite and have that distract from the real issues.

As for my opinions-

I have been trying for a while to figure out my "favorite" republican candidate when most of them scare me to death, particularly their antigay stances. I have decided that John McCain is the one I'm least afraid of, even though I don't endorse him. I think he also looked the best of the 1/2 of the debate I saw.

On the democratic side- I was very impressed with Bill Richardson, particularly trying to keep the debates positive. I think Edwards looked the post passionate (and least tired) but I worry that his strong stance against big business will make him unelectable in November. I want a candidate who will unite rather than divide the country even further- one of the reasons obama is so attractive to me. I thought Obama did a good job being more specific about his plans. I worry because he has a bit of a stutter and tends to get long winded in his explanations and that could be judged as nerves or being unsure. Hillary didn't do very well alst night in my opinion. She let her emotions show a little too much when she got mad. That and her coquettish response about likability, batting her eyes and speaking in a girlish voice played right into her using being female when she also uses that to say she's being attacked because of being a woman.

ravdeb · January 2008

Oh..wish I had seen this...

Anonymous · January 2008

Well Thanks to Saluki I saw the debates. I didnt know they were on as I was too excited about watching the playoffs. So I see the Republicans debate and started watching the Democratic debates and darn if I didnt fall asleep half way through.

It was very interesting. I guess from what I saw, Hilary was the biggest loser cause she showed her emotions to everyone. The anger in her face and voice made me feel a little embarrassed for her.

So for us here in Illinois the primaries are not until February and I still dont know who Im gonna vote for.

nnn

NoH8 · January 2008

Ravdeb, you can watch it here http://abcnews.go.com/politics

TenderIsOurMight · January 2008

deleted

Lynne · January 2008

I actually picketed at the debates last night, with the Susan Komen "Vote for the cure". They emailed me and asked if I would stand out there. I live only a couple of miles from St Anselm's College where the debates were held, so how could I say no.

I've never done anything like this before (as well as the other 20 or so people that came from our group). We held pink signs that said "Vote for the cure". We were stuck between the "Stop Global Warming" and "Mike Huckabee" groups. They both had busloads of people come in. They must have had 200 people each. We would yell "Don't ignore, vote for a cure", as soon as they stopped all their chanting. We had one radio station stop in front of our group and interviewed one of the ladies. A few media took pictures of our groups, but the tv stations mostly went to the 2 large groups on the sides of us. Our group met at a local restaurant and car-pooled. We got to the college around 4:30 and stayed till 7pm. My daughter and I left at 6 (I had another place to be and we were frozen (30 degrees out and standing on ice and snow). We saw a few of the candidates buses, and a lot of crazy costumes and people there. Our group was going back to the restaurant for dinner, but we went home instead.

I don't know if I would do it again, but I hope that someone heard our message.

We just want mammograms and testing for ALL women (mine was found on a routine mammogram!). Those that don't have insurance and can't afford them especially. Hopefully, somebody heard us...

Lynne

abbadoodles · January 2008

Wow, the debate was really pretty good. That Charlie Gibson is a real charmer, isn't he? And has that reassuring air of competance. He's today's Walter Cronkite, but cuter.

What entertainment. I vote both ways and have not made up my mind about this election.

Tina

saluki · January 2008

Well folks-Tonight on the Fox news network the Republicans get to do it all over again at 8:00 minus Ron Paul which I think is a big loss to the debate.

This is the time they should be letting the little fellow in. Although, I don't share in his opinions he does have a very interesting view and made the debate all the better. I'm completely undecided but I do find a big comfort level in John McCain-and the fact that he can work both sides of the aisle is a plus.

With the Democrats Hillary is irritating me more and more.

Yes Joan- Everytime she starts harping on that 35 years experience-I scratch my head! What is she talking about?---Does being First Lady count as experience?

You are right Nicky--Looks like she has a lot of pent up anger. And I don't even think she is in her attack mode yet---- She's going to start in earnest soon. Wait till Super Tuesday approaches.

Which ever way you look at it, even if John Edwards doesn't go all the way--he will probably be a power broker. Don't think he has the money to keep going.

Don't know enough about Obama --change is good. I am however, getting tired of the talking heads going on about the Kennedy mystique.

I guess I'm getting old and I do worry about experience.---President Jimmy Carter was a very nice man but was clearly over his head. Still remember the day President Ronald Reagan was inaugurated and at precisely that moment, as he was taking the oath of office waiting for Ayatollah khamenei to release our hostages!-was there a split screen on the TV?

And the world is a far more dangerous place today.

Tender--I didn't view Bush jr as having all that much experience except as Governor and Cheney always had the reputation of a very strong hawk.

I'm completely undecided.

NoH8 · January 2008

Faux news is always suspect, in my opinion Susie. I won't watch, but predict that this will be far more about attacking democrats than each other. You know, Susie, I remember the moment too, when the hostages were released and I think that had little to do with Carter's experience and more to do with the Ayatollah's trying to align himself with Reagan, than Reagan's experience. It was a FU to Carter, the way I saw it. I don't believe Reagan had any more international experience than Carter when he took office.

Tender, I would imagine that sheer exhaustion had something to do with the dem's body language. Diane Sawyer mentioned that Edwards went for a run while the other three didn't take a break that day. I would like an Obama/Edwards ticket as well as Obama/Richardson-- I think Richardson's experience would be more helpful to the ticket than anything Edwards brings to a general election.

Anonymous · January 2008

I too am undecided. However, I'm beginning to like McCain more and more.

I thought Hilary looked like she was going to fall asleep like she did at Reagan's (it was Reagan, wasn't it) funeral.

I see all politicians as TALKERS more than DOERS. And Congress has to help get stuff done too.

nosurrender · January 2008

Ha! This 35 years of experience grates on me too!

I guess if your plumber is busy you can always have his wife fix your sink because apparently wives learn jobs by osmosis.

JoanofArdmore · January 2008

Absolutely, Gina!(Actually my plumber's wife and I HAVE done some plumbing together, over the phone.!But it just involved turning the knob to shut off the water!)

But is THAT what she means by 35 years??Why did no candidate ASK her?I have always wondered WHY, and by what aegis she "drew up "healthcare Plans for the nation, while Bill was prez.

??????????????????????????????????

She was Secretary of health? I must have missed something.

(So as an example of her "35 yrs of experience" she babbled about healthcare for some kids in Alabama.)

??????????????????????????????????????????????????

And how about when Obama was talking in the beginning and she rolled right over him, rudly interrupting "Oh I have to say something here" and then goes on in a totally inappropriate , strident voice...

Her SPINNERS must have gotten to her, because did you notice--during the second half she had FINALLY modulated her voice.She was bawling lowdly like a hoarse frog for the whole first part.

HONESTLY!WHAT a politician!I guessshe thought the thing to do, since everyone else was talking in a well-modulated voice,was to yell real loud and she would "win".

(Oh I dislike her intensely)!

Tina, I was FURIOUS w/Charlie Gibson.And the other guy they fished in.These newscasters are just TOO MUCH!!I mean time is SO limited, the candidates have so much to say, and CHARLIE is perering over his glasses and wasting MY and their time, blurbling away.

Amy, I disagree about Barack's voice and stutter being possibly a detriment.

I think his voice is WONDERFUL.This is the sort of president we ned right now--one with a soothing and calm voice.The loudest voice does NOT win!I could listen to Obama all night, and love to hear him.Hav you noticed his voice is like Nat King Cole's?At one point I sang to Woody:"Chestnuts roasting on an open fire..."

And Amy, I too was impressed with Bill Richardson.I loved everything about him.He too has a soothing, calming voice.And he certainly has the most credentials for the job.

But I have to say, he doesnt IMHO have enough "Show Biz"appeal.Which, rediculous, DOES sell candidates.The Kennedy mystique is what made us elect him, and be ready to follow him anywhere.

Amy, John is known for having VERY pricey haircuts.

And whoever suggested an Obama-Edwards ticket..I'd tend to think John has been there-done that.Unless HE gets the top slot this time.

But is it only I who hold letting Elizabeth (AND the kids) go on this nightmarish, endless campaign trip?What a lousy idea.I'm not sayingthis because she has mets,which can be stabolized, but because she is on femara, which has left me for years, feeling too exhausted and sore to even lead a simple, normal life.

Speaking of which, it is past time for Woody and me to take my simple, normal walkees, which on femara SEs is like climbing Everest.

Susie do you mean they're going to SHOW it on Fox tonight (I dont have cable) or they are having another debate?Because if the latter, I SO bet miss hillary shapes up and acts decent.(Trouble with her is she has no middleground.Either loud and strident or camping it up as a"girl" fluttering eyelashes,high voice...)

Why cant she be a simple, dignified woman?Like Nancy Pelosi.

saluki · January 2008

New debate tonight Joan---only Republicans.....moderated by Chris Wallace (who I find a bit irritating as well.)

In a clever move CNN has decided to re-air the ABC Debate on its channel

simultaneously.

And I still for the life of me don't understand why no-one calls Hillary on this 35 years of experience??????????? What is the deal with that? Why doesn't anyone call her on it?

Blundin2005 · January 2008

thanks ladies...I tried to catch it but the web site seems like the highlights only...

I saw the debates on CNN and was very disappointed. I hope that the debate forum returned in this one...from what you are saying, it did.

Joan, yeh what about the 35 year thing...why isn't someone calling her on it? D*#m I hate this kind of smoke and mirror. She said it so it's true? Once it's on air without being questioned, people believe it to be true. Her legal experience is not political, hands on, in the frey experience nor should it be framed as such ... especially insulting to those who are in the frey for that long...I think.

saluki · January 2008

Marilyn, CNN is repeating the entire ABC debate we are talking about this evening. Do you get CNN in its entirety over there? 7:00pm USA Time--Are you about 5 hours ahead?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CNN to air ABC News/WMUR/Facebook debate Sunday

(CNN) — CNN will air a special encore edition of the ABC News/WMUR/Facebook presidential debates — both Republican and Democratic — Sunday at 7 p.m. ET, the network has announced.

The debates follow a full day of political coverage starting with CNN’s Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer and continuing with New Hampshire’s “Ballot Bowl” coverage throughout the afternoon.

CNN Chief National Correspondent John King is set to anchor coverage around the debate.

iodine · January 2008

I am not in Hillary's camp, not anyone's really, untill the field gets narrowed down---oh, about June.

But, I have to say Nancy Pelosi scares the s**t out of me. I have never seen anyone with a skeleton's smile All the time and seeming so passive agressive.

JMHO

Blundin2005 · January 2008

Hi Susie,

Thanks for the info...I can stream it on the computer. I went to the CNN site...Election 2008...but didn't see anything specific about the airing tonight. I'd really like to watch it. I went to the ABC and New York Times sites to get snippets and highlights. I'll go to NPR next.

We are +6 hours to EST. So 7 pm EST is 1 am here. I'll find a way...I always do.

We have a sat dish but only basic channels that includes Bloomberg and BBC World. Maybe I can add more, at least for this year.

Thanks again....

ravdeb · January 2008

I also only got the highlights of the debate and Hilary's was a highlight... Tongue out

I haven't kept up with any of this until I read the highlights and recently got an opinion from a friend in the States.

I was a Hilary fan until yesterday. I had no idea she was "acting out". I'm surprised and disappointed as I really wanted a woman president this year. From what I see..I don't like any of them...

Obama is gorgeous and I also love his voice so if that's a criteria..I vote for him. Smile I need to read up on him..From recent info, I think I'm not going to like his international policies which would affect me more than his domestic policies, which may be good for American residents.

Paulette531 · January 2008

Two things I find MOST irritating about Obama, first the Kennedy comparison, get a life, he is in no way shape or form comparable to Kennedy (who I admire greatly) and Obama's wife reminds me of Hillary Clinton.

I also get MAJOR irritated at "the first black American president", isn't that like saying "I have black friends?" which is politically incorrect?

His political stands would also continue to break the bank so to speak, and I don't care for his immigration policy.

abbadoodles · January 2008

God, I love America. We can have such different opinions without blasting each other to kingdom come.

Still, I'm not listing my opinions about the various candidates because I've already lived through one "duck and cover." No fool here. Sealed

Tina

NoH8 · January 2008

In my opinion, having the first black president is no way similar to "having a black friend". With the history of blacks in america, many of their ancestors coming to this country in shackles, not having the right to vote and having to sit in the back of the bus not even half a century ago, having a black president would be historical. Perhaps in another half century a black, hispanic or woman president will mean nothing more than having a white middle aged male as president. I still remember when Sandra Day O'Connor was nominated to the supreme court and the whispers that one day there might be a woman president. The percentage of both women and racial minorities in leadership roles in the goverment is disproportionately smaller than those of their caucasian counterparts. This needs to change if we are to have true representation of a america, IMHO.

Naniam · January 2008

I agree with all of you that Elizabeth Edwards did not look well. In fact, I've seen his daughter with him in Iowa but not Elizabeth very much lately.

If you guys remember, Edwards name was tossed out when Gore ran for President and he was passed over. He had only been in the Senate for a short period of time - after that he did nothing but start working on getting his name out there to run for president and was not there to even cast votes on important issues and did nothing for NC. He finally got his wish when Kerry chose him - he has never stopped running since Gore first mentioned him and passed him by. Remember his remark - "I've fought for the little guy all my life" - yes, and he is wealthy by his lawsuits towards insurance companies and malpractice suits. Malpractice insurance companies pulled out of NC - the high cost of the insurance has made many quite some forms of practice or leave the state. He has made his mark in health and insurance reform here.

Joan, Hillary grates on me too and I have wondered about that 35 years experience and I think at one point she said something about being involved in decisions during the Clinton administration - like you, didn't realize she was a cabinet appointment.

I see Obama and just as with Kennedy (and I fell in love with Kennedy too at age 19) and Clinton - he has charisma. He is calm and cool but he sure bites at Hillary. I agree wtih something one of the Rep. candidates said: we need to "think" about what change means - what is it we want changed and follow the responses carefully. I see Obama as getting by on his Charisma and that truly scares me.

I'm not a fan of any of the candidates to be honest. I don't like Huckabee - I think he is totally unelectable.

Do any of us truly believe that if the ticket is Hillary and ????? or Obama and ???? that they will not beat any republician? One of them is going to be the next president - I truly believe that.

I did hear last night that Hillary attacks against Obama have started in NH but also saw this morning that Obama according to the poles has surged ahead of her there. I think we are going to see some dirty stuff start.

Anyway, thanks for letting me share "my" views too.

Brenda

NoH8 · January 2008

Brenda I voted for Edwards in the primaries against Kerry last go around- are you talking about those elections or the Gore ones in 2000.

In the latest poles Obama has a 10 % pt lead since the debates, beforehand they were tied.. but a lot can change before the polls close tomorrow.

At this point I think it's the democrats' race to lose-- people seem so disgusted with the bush administration that it's time for a change. I think this is evidenced, at least in Iowa and NH with independents siding with democrats vs. republicans this go around. We have a loooong way until November though and a lot can change. The dems best not count their chickens before they're hatched.

Naniam · January 2008

Gore in 2000 he chose someone else - Edwards after that never stopped running.

Bush has made mistakes and there are things I don't agree with - I am also not one that feels he should have gotten all that has been leveled at him either. Why anyone would even want this office is beyond my pea brain - look how they all age while in office. I'm older than some and never liked Johnson but never liked Nixon either.

Neither party has all the answers - it is up to us to listen carefully and in our own hearts and mind - feel who can do the best job. I am trying but so far there is just a thud and no "ping"

saluki · January 2008

It is early in this political season. Really, the gloves have not yet come off.

Whether these candidates can take close scrutiny remains to be seen.

Probably before most of your times but there was an interesting reminder in the NYT magazine section this weekend of how rough things can get----

The sad sad story of a former vice presidential candidate --Senator Thomas Eagleton-very badly handled all around. Senator George McGovern was the Presidential candidate at the time.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

December 30, 2007
Thomas F. Eagleton | b. 1929
The Running Mate Who Wasn’t
By FRANCIS WILKINSON

The federal courthouse in St. Louis is named for him. Accomplished men and women have recounted how they were awed by his intellect, influenced by his humanity, inspired and enlisted by his passion. Thomas Eagleton was a giant of Missouri politics. But he was a giant bound by ties of his own peculiar design. He spent the first part of his career in the grip of a secret. Later, he was fettered to a question he answered countless times but never resolved.

“He was a man of decency, honor, humor, integrity,” George McGovern told me recently, rattling off Eagleton’s virtues until they veered abruptly off a rhetorical cliff, “with an incredible cover-up.”

Thomas Francis Eagleton grew up in St. Louis, the second son of a successful lawyer whose own political ambitions were thwarted. As a boy, Eagleton accompanied his father on political rounds. After college at Amherst, Eagleton attended Harvard Law School, where he surrendered a coveted post on the law review in order to return home and help manage his father’s campaign for mayor of St. Louis. The senior Eagleton lost. The son never did. After law school, he initiated an unbroken string of political victories. Eagleton was elected circuit attorney of St. Louis at age 27, Missouri’s youngest attorney general at 31 and, in 1964, the state’s youngest lieutenant governor at 35. Four years later, he claimed a Senate seat.

Yet Eagleton was an unlikely running mate for McGovern, the 1972 Democratic presidential nominee. He supported a McGovern rival in the primaries, and according to the columnist Robert Novak, he spoke damagingly of McGovern off the record. But after Edward M. Kennedy and others refused McGovern’s entreaties, the call went out to Eagleton.

In a room with staff members, friends and even reporters present, Eagleton spoke on the phone with McGovern for less than a minute. McGovern’s aide Frank Mankiewicz subsequently asked Eagleton if he had any skeletons rattling around his closet. A terse denial inaugurated a latter-day industry of vice-presidential vetting.

Eagleton’s occasional hand tremors and tendency to perspire heavily were somehow overlooked in Washington. At a meeting before Eagleton’s official nomination, the McGovern campaign manager, Gary Hart was surprised, he told me recently, to see Eagleton “pouring with sweat” in the air-conditioned room.

In the 1960s, Eagleton and his family had taken great pains to hide his hospitalizations for mental illness, even diverting reporters with a tale about a stomach ailment. But after his nomination, an anonymous caller tipped off the McGovern campaign and the Knight news organization. The unraveling began.

With reporters rapidly closing in, Eagleton divulged at a news conference in South Dakota on July 25, 1972, that he had been hospitalized in 1960, 1964 and 1966 for what he first called “nervous exhaustion and fatigue” and later qualified as “depression.” He also said he had received electric-shock therapy. Many Democratic politicians and donors, sensing disaster, were irate. Nixon aides reveled in the Democrats’ misfortune.

Eagleton later explained that he had never considered his health history “sinister” — no closet, no skeleton. Years after, in his own narrative housed at the University of Missouri archives, Eagleton said that he had a “brief and random” exchange with his wife, Barbara, before he was asked to join the ticket. “If you should get [the nomination], won’t your health history come out?” she asked. Eagleton responded, “It could, I suppose.”

In two interviews, McGovern told me Eagleton related a longer version when they met just before Eagleton’s startling news conference. “We had a meeting with Tom and his wife and Eleanor and me in Sylvan Lake in the Black Hills of South Dakota,” he said. It was Eleanor McGovern who asked the question that dogged Eagleton then and ever after. “Why didn’t you tell George about this illness?”

According to McGovern, now 85, Eagleton responded that he and his wife had had a lengthy discussion “back and forth, back and forth” and concluded that McGovern would reject him if the truth were known. “ ‘We decided you wouldn’t ask me [to join the ticket] if I told you,’ ” McGovern said Eagleton explained.

The political consultant Robert Shrum, a McGovern friend who worked on the ’72 campaign, said that in the mid-1970s McGovern told him the same story and that he heard it a second time from Eleanor McGovern many years later.

But Barbara Eagleton, the only other surviving member of the meeting’s discordant quartet, flatly denied McGovern’s assertion. “It never happened,” she told me. “Can you imagine asking that question? I think there would have been total animosity on the part of McGovern if that had happened.”

When I spoke with him, McGovern also characterized his private telephone conversations with two of Eagleton’s doctors, which took place immediately before Eagleton’s withdrawal from the race. “They both said we think he can do fine in the Senate,” McGovern told me. “But when it comes to trusting the whole country to one man, that’s different.” McGovern said Eagleton had bipolar disorder — manic depression. Barbara Eagleton said: “It was not manic depression. It was depression.”

To leave the ticket, Eagleton demanded a statement from McGovern that his health was not a factor. He got it. In a measure of the public’s ambivalence, Gary Hart said calls to the campaign, which had been overwhelmingly negative about Eagleton after the revelations, suddenly switched to overwhelmingly positive after his departure.

The public trial enhanced Eagleton’s stature. He resumed telling jokes in the Senate cloakroom, led debate on a war-powers resolution and passionately argued for an end to the Vietnam War. He was particularly proud of his successful amendment to stop funds for the bombing of Cambodia.

For years, friends in Washington sensed tension between the McGoverns and Eagletons. Eleanor’s anger barely softened. Eventually, George’s did. “I know a little about political ambition,” he told me.

Eagleton retired from the Senate in 1987, undefeated. The Eagletons returned to St. Louis, where he took up law, teaching and a hefty civic load. Though he gradually lost his health and hearing, Eagleton remained passionate about public affairs, firing off letters to protégés, friends and political leaders. He was outraged by the Iraq war, pleading with Bill Clinton in a 2006 letter to forgo “the traditional silence of an ex-president in wartime.”

Late in life, Eagleton began collecting art. He was particularly fond of the German photographer Candida Höfer, whose work features public architecture of uncluttered environs and clear boundaries. Her photographs convey the scale of the public sphere. But her libraries, theaters and government halls are containers devoid of people, empty of the struggle and striving of human affairs. In a singular political life, Eagleton had experience enough to fill the void.

ADK · January 2008

I do remember Eagleton. Who took his place on the McGovern ticket? I don't remember that - strange, huh?

I just want to make a quick comment - I live in MA and I have to tell you that Romney did absolutely nothing for this state. He only served one term and spent most of that term traveling out of the state to test the waters for a presidential bid. He will say whatever he needs to say to get a vote. He is actually pretty reviled in this state and it doesn't surprise me in the least that NH has little interest in him. The primary in NH actually is in the hands of the Independents. Independents can vote in the primary and 44% of the state is Independent (30% Republican and 27% Democrat). This might just be a true test of how the nation will go in November. Obama's entire campaign of hope is the same campaign run by Duval Patrick, the Governor of MA elected last year. It worked here, let's see what happens nationally.

Anonymous · January 2008

I think it's unfair to claim that Obama is "black." His mother was "white." So, that makes him 50/50, right? Just a thought.

Presidential debates on ABC right now-both parties

Comments

Categories