The Wall Street Journal transcript of the debate is here.
Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney, two of the frontrunners for the Republican nomination kept hitting her on health care, Iran, the economy, and more.
And if it wasn't Hillary Clinton, the target was former President Bill Clinton.
Giuliani, from the transcript -
...The line item veto was unconstitutional. I took Bill Clinton to the Supreme Court and beat Bill Clinton...
It should be noted here that Giuliani flip-flopped within a few moments -
So you can bang your head up against the stone wall all you want. I am in favor of a line item veto...
...He was against it before he was in favor of it? Or does he only favor the line-item veto when Republicans wield it?
Anyway, back to the real focus of this post - the Republicans did Hillary Clinton a huge favor yesterday.
Her biggest weakness, current frontrunner status notwithstanding, is that her candidacy has *not* been warmly embraced by the grassroots of the Democratic Party; she comes across as too much the candidate of the corporate establishment, not the candidate of the average American.
However, the fact that the Republicans are ganging up on her already only shores up her credibility with the likely primary voters, active Democrats.
Now the question is did they do that because they think that because she is the Great Boogeywoman that Republican parents tell stories about to scare their children and attacking her will bring Republican votes to them in the primaries?
Or do they realize that they strengthen her candidacy when they attack her and just think that she is the most beatable in the general election?
One other note on the debate: while I didn't see the entire debate, from what I did see, whenever new entrant Fred Thompson flubbed his lines, he looked like someone who was used to hearing a director yell "Cut! Do it again!" and was a little lost when he didn't hear those words.