Democrats Face Voter Questions in New Format

FORMER SEN. JOHN EDWARDS (D), Presidential Candidate: Here was the problem. It was fixed when he was 50 years old. For five decades, James Lowe lived in the richest nation on the planet, not able to talk because he couldn't afford the procedure that would've allowed him to talk. When are we going to stand up and do something about this? We have talked about it too long. We have got to stand up to the insurance companies and the drug companies that Barack just spoke about. It is the only way we're ever going to bring about real change. We should be outraged by these stories!

GWEN IFILL: There was also more than one question about gay marriage.

YOUTUBE QUESTIONER: Hi. My name is Mary.

YOUTUBE QUESTIONER: And my name is Jen.

YOUTUBE QUESTIONER: And we're from Brooklyn, New York. If you were elected president of the United States, would you allow us to be married to each other?

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN Debate Moderator: Congressman Kucinich?

REP. DENNIS KUCINICH (D), Ohio: Mary and Jen, the answer to your question is yes, and let me tell you why.

Because if our Constitution really means what it says, that all are created equal, if it really means what it says, that there should be equality of opportunity before the law, then our brothers and sisters who happen to be gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender should have the same rights accorded to them as anyone else, and that includes the ability to have a civil marriage ceremony.

GWEN IFILL: Because these candidates have now met in a series of forums, some were asked to defend past statements.

YOUTUBE QUESTIONER: In one of the previous debates, you said something along the lines of, "The entire deaths of Vietnam died in vain." How do you expect to win in a country where probably a pretty large chunk of the people voting disagree with that statement and might very well be offended by it?

FORMER SEN. MIKE GRAVEL (D), Presidential Candidate: What did all these people die for? What are they dying for right now in Iraq every single day? Let me tell you: There's only one thing worse than a soldier dying in vain; it's more soldiers dying in vain.

GWEN IFILL: And in one novel twist, the candidates were each asked to provide their own YouTube-style videos. Most went for humor.

ACTOR: Senator, I have to ask, what's with the white hair?

SEN. CHRIS DODD (D), Connecticut: I don't know why you bring that up. Bill Richardson, Hillary, Joe Biden and I, we're all about the same age. I don't think the white hair is an issue.

ACTOR: Well, how did you get the white hair?

SEN. CHRIS DODD: Hard work, I suppose.

So how different was this debate? And is it a sign of things to come? For that, we turn to: Chris Cillizza of WashingtonPost.com; and Julie Barko Germany, deputy director of the Institute for Politics, Democracy and the Internet at George Washington University.

Chris, how different was this, or was it different at all?

CHRIS CILLIZZA, The Washington Post: Well, the format, Gwen, was different, as you guys have pointed out. I mean, I think we saw a little bit more openness, maybe a little bit more candor from the candidates.

The one thing I will say is, I thought there was some really good pointed questions that I had been hoping were going to be asked. The one that jumped out to me was asking about Hillary Clinton and her gender and Barack Obama and his race and how big an impediment those were going to be for their chances at the nomination. I've been wondering that. I know a lot of political insiders have been wondering that. I was glad it was asked.

But remember, Iraq, education, health care, those are the things that are always going to come up. It doesn't matter what format you choose. And those were the things that wound up dominating the debate last night.

GWEN IFILL: I'm curious, Chris. The questions that were asked that you hadn't heard before, do you think they were answered?

CHRIS CILLIZZA: Not really. You know, the unfortunate thing here is that these politicians practice long and hard for these debates to not make news, so I think we tended to not see them directly answer the questions. So Anderson Cooper, the moderator, again and again said, "Can we stay on topic? Can you answer the question?"

But these are politicians who spend a lot of time in the national public eye. They're going to sort of say their piece and that's it. So I'm not sure any format could get them to give absolutely straight answers to every question. But as I said before, I did think they were a bit more candid than they might have been in previous debates.

GWEN IFILL: Julie, how different did you think it was?

JULIE BARKO GERMANY, George Washington University: Well, you know, the interesting thing about this debate is that it was billed as a direct dialogue with the constituents. And Web video, we say, is a more intimate form of communication. We feel a little bit closer to each other when we communicate via Web video. I felt a lot closer to my fellow American voters who submitted questions during the debate. I didn't feel as close to the candidates.

GWEN IFILL: Why not?

JULIE BARKO GERMANY: It's a new medium. It requires a different type of response. Instead of hitting the talking points one after the other, a YouTube-style debate to me appears to require a little bit more communication with the people asking the questions, responding to the questioners and less to, say, the host.

GWEN IFILL: So the question that I just asked Chris, which was whether the answers were any different just because the questions seemed a little different, not necessarily?

JULIE BARKO GERMANY: Not necessarily, but, then again, presidential candidates are always going to want to get their issues across.

Is that because that question last night spurred this to happen today, or was this a fight that was waiting to break out anyway?

CHRIS CILLIZZA: I think it's a fight that's waiting to break out, you know, depending on the issue, but it was going to come up. I think it gets back to the fundamental premise of this race, which is Clinton's experience versus Obama's fresh face and sort of idea as a change agent.

All of the debate, if you watch it through that lens, it all came through that way. Clinton time and time again saying, "I've been there," whether it's as first lady or as a senator from New York, "I've been there, I've seen how these things work. I'm not going to offer myself up to visit with these leaders because they might be using me."

Obama saying, "We need to change the way we do this. We need to just change the process. This isn't a Democrat problem; it's not a Republican problem." Again, you just had experience versus change, experience versus change. And I really think that, unless something drastic happens between now and the Iowa caucuses, that's going to be the fundamental dynamic of this race going forward.

GWEN IFILL: Julie, we heard Mike Gravel, Senator Gravel, complain last night repeatedly that he didn't feel like he was getting enough time. We've also heard that, since the last debate, Senator Edwards and Senator Clinton talk a little bit about finding a way to shrink the stage so there weren't so many people. Does that format in any way advantage or disadvantage lesser-known candidates?

JULIE BARKO GERMANY: You know, I don't think it's so much a matter of advantaging or disadvantaging candidates. I think it's a matter of using the forum differently. Instead of saving all of your energy for the debates, why not translate some of that energy into your Web presence, where you can go in depth on the issues that matter to you and talk a little bit more one-on-one with the American voters?

GWEN IFILL: So you're saying there should have been a way last night to steer people back to the Web and away from television?

JULIE BARKO GERMANY: If I had been a candidate up there, and I had been talking about an issue, let's say the war in Iraq, one of the first things I probably would have done would be to direct people back to my Web site for more information on what I feel. And then I might have opened the Web site up to the American voters. Why don't you give me your suggestions? How do you feel about it? Submit them by video; submit them by e-mail. We'll post them on the site and discuss them later on.

GWEN IFILL: And which voters -- I'm just curious about that -- which voters would they be reaching who they wouldn't be reaching by television if they did it that way?

JULIE BARKO GERMANY: They tend to reach voters who are a little bit younger, but not necessarily. They're people with Internet access, so that leaves out some of the American population. But they tend to be people who go online for news and information about current events and politics.