Dem Iowa LiveBlog: PreGame Chatter

Welcome to yet another installment of HuffPost's Debate Liveblog Series ™ — where we watch the debates and critique the candidates in real time. Today we're joined by nonverbal communication specialist John Neffinger, Political Brain author and language expert Drew Westen, and HuffPost/Eat The Press contributor Glynnis MacNicol (with occasional piping up by me — your moderator, ETP editor Rachel Sklar). Here's our pre-game analysis of the candidates going into the debate, which is live now here.

John: So, here we are again. Another several days, another debate.
Rachel: I know! Did you hear that Obama said he's going to stop the insanity and pull out of the debates?
John: I did -- official, mandatory debates only from here on out.
Rachel: Apparently it's in a memo by Obama campaign manager David Plouffe. (Hee hee, "Plouffe.")
Glynnis: Yes - which will either give everyone else the opportunity to do the same...or give Hillary the opportunity to have way more face time
Drew: That's really interesting about Obama. I wonder if it has something to do, as well, with his poor performance in them.
John: Yes, I don't have any detailed polling in front of me, but I suspect a lot of the reason the initial excitement around Obama has tapered off has to do with his relatively uninspiring performance in these debates.
Drew: No question.
Rachel: It goes back to what Ryan Lizza said in his GQ profile - Obama is unwilling to bend from his cool, professor-like demeanor
John: Looking back over the debates so far, was this format necessarily favorable to Hillary for some reason, or did it just work out that way?
Rachel: Interesting. Well, it's certainly been favorable to her visually - the eye picks her out of the lineup instantly. That was driven home watching the GOP debate
John: She is the only candidate who can get away with wearing pink. Er, coral.
Drew: We're certainly getting a good picture of how he is or isn't being coached for the debates. It looks too much like it's from Shrum handbook and not enough from Obama's natural style.
John: That's right, very cerebral. Only in the most recent AFL-CIO debate did Obama regularly display any facial expression whatsoever.

John: Okay then, do we want to talk generally about interminable debates, or talk about each candidates position and what we're looking for from each, or just some general thoughts about why this debate may or may not matter?
Glynnis: I think it has to be said only a small slice of the pop is getting a fuller picture of things from these debates...I can't imagine a lot of people are tuning in at 9am on a Sunday in August. Which is why soundbites are smart i.e. "I'm your girl!"
Rachel: Ha, good point. Yet bizarrely ABC claimed that they had a great audience for this last week (even though it was still beaten by Meet Russert's Giant Head).
Glynnis: On a side note - Karl Rove is doing all the morning shows except "This Week."
Drew: I think he's signed on to be the new Pillsbury Doughboy, actually.
John: Oh no - we are competing with Rove? "Rove Speaks" vs. "Yet Another Premature Dem '08 Debate"?
Rachel: Oh! That's so interesting! A subtle undermining of the Dems even in retirement.
Glynnis: He's "retiring" the way Barbara Streisand gives final concerts.
Glynnis: I think everyone should take a lesson from Kucinich's Chicago performance -- had any of the top three candidates played to the crowd so well, I think it could have defined them better in the mainstream media, "I'm your girl!" notwithstanding.
John: Agreed.
Rachel: Bold words from the chick with the crazy hair!
John: You also mentioned earlier Glynn, given how few people are watching these debates closely, memorable moments (on the upside or downside) are what matter here.
Glynnis: That's really driven home to me when I'm out with intelligent friends who are next to clueless about the presidential race beyond the boldface names.
Glynnis: I think that Edwards is going to be the one under the gun tomorrow...he has some 'splaining to do regarding Katrina and mortgage foreclosures.
John: Help me with that one.
Glynnis: Short version: he has investments with a company that is currently foreclosing on poor people's houses in New Orleans.
Rachel: WHAT? Talk your way outta THAT one, Mr. War On Poverty!
John: Has he gotten out in front with a statement?
Glynnis: It was on the front page of the WSJ yesterday. He said he is going to "divest his portfolio."
Rachel: Ouch. So: What is the endless parade of debates doing to the dynamic of the race? At this point, it really is doing something:

1. Hurting Obama
   
2. Favoring Hillary
   
3. providing Macaca moments
   
4. Giving Gravel more face time than he could ever have dreamed of.
   
5. Keeping us from sleeping in on Sunday mornings.

Glynnis: I think it is going to force the candidates to come up with new talking points i.e.: Hillary is going to have to find something to replace "everything is GWB's fault."
John: How about "I'm your Girl!" That was the highlight of her campaign so far -- her warmest moment, with her warmest smile. It will be interesting to see if Hillary uses these appearances to do more of that to warm up her still generally chilly image.
Glynnis: I think that might be where she is heading, yes. And Obama is going to have to dig deeper than "I didn't vote for the war."
Rachel: I liked "I'm your girl," it was very natural and confident and jovial.
Drew: And very non-feminist.
Rachel: Why? I didnt' think so.
Glynnis: I don't agree either.
Rachel: It's just an expression, for goodness sakes. I didn't think it undermined her at all as a feminist.
Drew: I was taught in the '70s that you don't call women girls. I thought that was part of her point in using "girl," to win back some of the people who think she's a far-left feminist.
Rachel: Third wave, baby. Reclaiming femininity is in.
Drew: I'm behind the times.
Glynnis: Kate Phillips at the Caucus took issue with Hillary's "brooms and vacuum cleaners in Washington" statement.
Rachel: Yeah but I got that. That's about understanding who her base is. Andrea Mitchell pointed out on Meet the Press that she has a lot of working-class women on her side.
Glynnis: I'm not sure Hillary could be anti-feminist if she tried...She could stand up there in an apron and still emanate experience
John: Right, but what Drew is saying is she is identifying herself as a modern woman more than a first-wave Wellesley-minted bra-burner.
Rachel: Yeah, which makes sense, because those feminists aren't popular with the right OR the left.
Drew: I agree with John because he agrees with me. But I would have agreed with him if he was a woman, too.

Drew:I think Obama one of these days is going to need to show that he can be connected in this format.
John: It would be nice. The rumors from the campaign trail suggest he sometimes connects strongly with his audiences there as per his initial billing... but the big magazine profiles stress he is still pretty cerebral overall.
Glynnis: I thought that was interesting... In the profile it almost seems like he's using his great 2004 speech as an excuse not to have to do it again.
John: Where is the guy who introduced the Monday Night Football game for the Bears? Where is that great smile? Last time in Chicago Obama tried out a stern frown for the first time. Maybe we can get a smile tomorrow..? Drew, you think the ghost of Shrum is haunting the Obama campaign?
Drew: I think the worst thing that could have happened to Obama was to have had such a good last quarter with fund raising. It could readily give his campaign the impression that what he's doing right now is working. What he does on the stump is great. What he does in the forums and debates is vintage Kerry.
Rachel: I think that's Team Obama's problem. Early success, early accidental success.
Drew: I think the early success reflects the early excitement, and there's probably a lag time here. I haven't talked to anyone who thought he's done well in any of the debates. He was the hometown favorite in Chicago at Yearly Kos and didn't end up that way, and he didn't end up the favorite at Howard, either.
John: A giant pile of money would tend to make them feel less worried. It is true that poll numbers this early are questionable, but it's striking how the early excitement he brought has dissipated. He has answered some of the questions about him being a lightweight, but when he entered the race he checked his charisma at the door.
Glynnis: I really feel like at this point this discussion is happening in a bit of a bubble. Obama's wider image, I think, is still one of inspiration and change. I think it's not such a terrible idea for Obama to be spending time establishing the foundation...If he pulls out 2004 Obama in time for the primaries that would be enough.

Drew: I think for Edwards the biggest issue remains how to get the media to cover this as a three-way race. He seems like he's trying to avoid using the material he used from the last election cycle that almost got him the nomination--and would have if there had been some more Southern primaries early on.
John: Visually, this recurring debate format works against Edwards: there is a woman, a black man, and then he is just one of the other dudes in suits.
Glynnis: I think Edwards needs to really step up tomorrow...I thought he was such a no-show in Chicago
John: Chicago was tough on Edwards - when he played a liberal card to win the Union crowd, Kucinich one-upped him.
Drew: Chicago was clearly Edwards' worst showing. I thought he was pretty strong earlier. My guess is that his team's frustration at the "white woman vs. black man" frame by the media is part of why he took on more of the "angry young man" posture in Chicago, which doesn't play to his natural strengths.
Glynnis: In 2004 Edwards was the exciting new candidate...but that spot is being owned by Obama.
John: That's right Glynn -- last time Edwards was the fresh-faced charismatic guy who may or may not have enough experience to pull it off. That is 100% Obama this time, and Edwards has not given us a similarly coherent storyline to frame his appeal this time around. Obama is hope for transcendence, maybe. Hillary is grindingly efficient and experienced leadership... Who is Edwards this time? Why him?
Drew: I think Edwards needs to stay with his own game plan and try not to be reactive to today's poll numbers. It's a long season. That means starting with his life story, which answers most of the attacks on him about wealth. He'd do well to be the same candidate who ran last time.
Rachel: He can't be, unfortunately. That guy was new, fresh, the young shining face. This time that guy is Obama. Edwards is the guy who was on the losing ticket last time. And what has he done since?
Drew: He's been working on poverty ever since, but so far that isn't getting much traction--except some snarky stories from the NY Times. It's an interesting thing this year that the VP candidate from the last time wasn't considered the presumptive favorite this time.
John: So maybe Edwards is the guy focused on poverty. I think last time was such a bitter disappointment Edwards is lucky that's not a strike against him.
Glynnis: I think if Edwards can hang in there he could still be around in a year, and when push comes to shove, people want less radical, and he's not polarizing but also not establishment...
Glynnis: What about Hillary? people seem to be assuming she is going to alienate all the swing voters. I think that the great success of these debates for her has been to diminish her cold-ish image.
Drew: That's her biggest challenge, and will remain her biggest challenge if she wins the nomination. No major party, to my knowledge, has nominated anyone before with such high negatives going in.
Rachel: Raise that bar high!
John: The polling on her is amazing: everyone who doesn't actively despise her seems willing to vote for her. There are about as many people in each camp though.
Glynnis: Right, and what if Giuliani gets the GOP nod...Isn't he just as polarizing?
John: Okay, so... Maybe Obama will smile..? Maybe Hillary will thaw a little further..? Maybe Edwards, or someone else viable, will distinguish themselves..? Let's see...
Glynnis: Maybe Gravel will finally go right over the edge...