Democrats argue over who would be best cashier

Washington Post:

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton tried repeatedly to knock Sen. Barack Obama off his footing during a high-stakes debate here on Saturday night -- criticizing his health-care proposal and questioning his ability to bring about change and actually serve as president.

"Words are not action," she said, seeking to draw a distinction between the inspirational rhetoric that catapulted Obama into victory in the Iowa caucuses and what she said was her own long record of being an effective agent of change.

The debate came three days before a pivotal primary here, one that will set the course for the rest of the Democratic nomination battle. Obama's victory in Iowa put Clinton on the defensive and rattled her advisers, who know that a second loss on Tuesday could cripple her campaign. A pair of new polls showed the two front-runners even in New Hampshire, and one of them indicated that women are no longer breaking in favor of Clinton but are now divided between her and Obama.

In comparison with some past debates, Saturday's session produced a role reversal, with Clinton playing the scrappy underdog.

Obama repeatedly fired back at the senator from New York and found an aggressive ally in former senator John Edwards (N.C.), who portrayed Clinton as the "status quo" and himself and Obama as the two candidates promoting real change agendas, albeit with very different styles.

"I didn't hear these kinds of attacks from Senator Clinton when she was ahead," Edwards said. "Every time [Obama] speaks out for change, every time I fight for change, the forces of status quo are going to attack -- every single time."

Clinton has already made modifications on the campaign trail, and she used the debate to repeatedly drive home her message to New Hampshire voters: Don't be swayed by Iowa, and instead take a hard look at Obama before casting your ballots.

She was asked by WMUR's Scott Spradling, a co-moderator of the debate, about polls that show she is not as well liked as Obama. "Well, that hurts my feelings," she responded, to laughter from the audience. That set off a light-hearted moment as the other candidates rushed to say how much they liked her.

But Clinton quickly turned serious to make the argument that she hopes will arrest Obama's momentum before Tuesday: "I think if you want to know what change each of us will bring about, look at what we've done. And there are a lot of differences that I think need to be aired for the voters of New Hampshire."

...

Obama started emphasizing "change" when he was losing on the "experience" issue. Democrats are arguing about change vs. experience because there is no real difference between them on the real issues of the campaign. With the "change" theme in ascendancy they all sound like they want to be the head cashier instead of the President.

When they have to start facing an opponent who disagrees with them on the real issues they should be in trouble. Obama can be beaten on the specifics of the changes he wants to make, particularly in war strategy where he is weak and incredibly ignorant of warfare and the best way to fight this enemy. He can be beaten on the specifics of the liberalism he embraces as solutions to economic and tax issues. He can be beaten, but it is unlikely that his competitors in the primaries will raise the issues that will beat him.