Yesterday’s Democratic South Carolina debate was a tough one. I obviously missed it, but I watched as many clips as possible and I can draw only one conclusion: the gloves are off, and Hillary Clinton won. She confronted Obama with some of the things he said about Reagan and with some of his plans and the point was clear: the Democratic base shouldn’t be too happy with Obama.

Watch for instance this clip at CNN. It ain’t nice: they’re truly debating each other, which is something they haven’t done for months. Not only that, they’re going at each other full force. Looking at Obama’s facial expressions I get the idea that he hates this, that he doesn’t enjoy these fights, but… it has to be said: if you take on your opponents like he has done in the last weeks, well, they’re going to tell you what they think about you. Aside from that, the Clintons have a machine backing them up; it surprises me that Clinton didn’t read the actual transcript at the debate, but you know they’ve got this machine and I don’t think that Obama can beat it – at least, if he does, he has to fight for it.

One more comment on the Ronald Reagan quote: Obama said two things.

1. Reagan was a transforming leader, who has to be respected

2. Reagan pushed through necessary reforms. His supporters act as if he never said the second thing, which gives me a headache because it’s glaringly obvious that they’re lying to protect their man, but he most certainly did

Back to to the debate. Here’s a short YouTube video of one of the heated exchanges yesterday:

What you see is that both sides truly can’t stand each other. This goes for Clinton and Obama, but also for their supporters. It’s amazing to see these people having a go at each other. Instead of getting angry about it, as I did in the past, I find it now entertaining. Who’s right, who’s wrong? Well, I think that Hillary is right, but what’s more important right now is what voters think about it / whether it works.

Pamela Leavey summarizes it thusly: “There were elbows flying and I think there may have been some knee-capping.” She adds: “I’ve watched the clip again and read the transcript a couple of times and clearly Barack Obama is no match for Hillary.” She’s, indeed, clearly stronger, and in a one-on-one setting, he can’t win it.

Also watch this video of Clinton talking about universal health care:

You’ve got to admit (yes, even those who despise Clinton): she knows how to debate and how to appeal to the base, doesn’t she? She’s one heck of a debater. Sadly for Obama, he isn’t. As Joe Gandelman notes.

HILLARY CLINTON CONTINUES TO BLOSSOM AS A NATIONAL CANDIDATE and Republicans are underestimating her at their peril. Even if she didn’t have Bill Clinton running around playing hatchet man for her she would be formidable. Her way of speaking, grasp of material, ability to show passion, and penchant to go in for the swift and effective attack all underscore her claim that GOPers will find her a highly tough opponent. She had to show that she could take it to Obama in specifics and she did. She also had to show she could do it without Bill Clinton in the background coming to her defense or handing her notes — and she did.

A response such as the one above (whether you agree with it or not and whether it is accurate or not — and Obama disputed the way it was thrown out) shows a nimbleness that will serve her well if she gets the nomination.

Josh Marshall:

It’s hard for me to think of much good from this debate. If you view debates like a boxing match, I guess it was lively and perhaps entertaining, in the sense that a good boxing match can be, though the fighting was more intense than well executed. But that’s only if you have no investment in the outcome. If you’re watching this with a mind to wanting one of these three to be president in 2009, as I do, it wasn’t a great thing to watch.

One observation stands out to me from this debate. Hillary can be relentless and like a sledgehammer delivering tendentious but probably effective attacks. But whatever you think of those attacks, Obama isn’t very good at defending himself. And that’s hard for me to ignore when thinking of him as a general election candidate.

For what it’s worth: I looked at it as if it were a boxing match – and debates are like boxing matches, at least to a degree.

Ron Beasley:

The experience that is going to be needed in the general election is campaign experience and Obama doesn’t have it. He can’t defend himself and the Republicans will parse every word he says and the Swift Boat teams will be very busy. Hillary on the other hand has had nearly 16 years of experience.

Steve Clemons:

I have to go with my own filters, not those of others — and to me, regardless of who one supported tonight, it’s clear that each scored points but that Hillary Clinton performed with an authority, presence in that huge hall, and mastery of detail that was just second to none. She hammered Bush on the semi-secret deal he’s trying to rig with the Iraqi government to commit American troops and bases indefinitely — something the others did not mention. She had numbers and details flowing forth as if they were as natural as could be.

One thing that was weird for me in this debate is that Hillary Clinton is clearly not mimicking her husband in any way. John Edwards is. Bill Clinton is the master of anecdotes and “let me tell you all a story” moments. Hillary is dense with facts, details, experiences — but it’s not warm and fuzzy.