Democrat candidates duel over positions on Iraq

US: Within minutes of the start of Sunday's debate between the eight Democratic presidential candidates, John Edwards went on…

US:Within minutes of the start of Sunday's debate between the eight Democratic presidential candidates, John Edwards went on the attack, seeking to differentiate his own position on the Iraq war from that of frontrunners Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

"I think it's the difference between leading and following," he said.

Once one of the loudest supporters of the invasion of Iraq, Mr Edwards is now among the strongest advocates of an early withdrawal. Mrs Clinton and Mr Obama last month voted against authorising more funds for the war but Mr Edwards complained that the two senators were too quiet about it.

"Senator Clinton and Senator Obama did not say anything about how they were going to vote until they appeared on the floor of the Senate and voted. They were among the last people to vote. And I think that the importance of this is - they cast the right vote, and I applaud them for that. But the importance of this is, they're asking to be president of the United States," he said.

READ MORE

The candidates were lined up on stage in a hockey rink at St Anselm's College on the outskirts of Manchester, the largest city in New Hampshire for their second debate of the primary season.

Manchester has a population of just 107,000 and New Hampshire is the ninth least populous state in the US. But as home to the first primary next year, the Granite State could hold the key to winning the entire contest.

In national polls, Mrs Clinton has a clear lead with 42 per cent, well ahead of Mr Obama's 27 per cent and Mr Edwards' 11 per cent. For Mr Edwards, Sunday's debate offered an opportunity to jumpstart his campaign in the hope of avoiding relegation into the invisible second tier of candidates.

Mr Obama, whose consistent opposition to the war has helped to win him the support of many affluent, liberal Democrats, was in no mood to give Mr Edwards a free pass. "I think it is important to lead," he said.

"And the fact is that I opposed this war from the start. So you're about 4½ years late on leadership on this issue."

Mrs Clinton responded by taking a leaf out of the playbook that proved so successful for her husband, former president Bill Clinton, stressing the points of agreement among Democrats against Republicans.

"This is George Bush's war. He is responsible for this war. He started the war. He mismanaged the war. He escalated the war. And he refuses to end the war," she said.

"The differences among us are minor. The differences between us and the Republicans are major. And I don't want anybody in America to be confused," she said.

Among the other candidates, Delaware senator Joe Biden had a good night, taking a no-nonsense approach to tough issues and issuing a passionate call for action to stop the slaughter in Darfur. But the three leading candidates, grouped together in the centre of the stage throughout the two-hour debate, did most of the talking and dominated the evening.

Mr Obama received the loudest applause when he criticised a question directed to all candidates about whether English should be the official language of the US.

"This is the kind of question that is designed precisely to divide us," he said.

"You know, you're right. Everybody is going to learn to speak English if they live in this country. The issue is not whether or not future generations of immigrants are going to learn English. The question is: How can we come up with both a legal, sensible immigration policy? And when we get distracted by those kinds of questions, I think we do a disservice to the American people," he said.

Afterwards, in a gym hall converted for the night into a "spin room", campaign officials gave an instant analysis of the debate, each claiming victory for their own candidate.

Mark Penn, Mrs Clinton's chief pollster, claimed that the former first lady appeared more presidential by remaining above the fray rather than responding to attacks from other candidates.

"I think what you're seeing is a gap opening up between herself and Obama and Edwards. They both went after each other and she was able to stay above it," he said.

Mr Edwards' wife, Elizabeth, who is living with incurable breast cancer, defended her husband against criticism that he has become more radical on issues such as healthcare in an effort to woo primary voters.

"The circumstances have changed since 2004 and he realises that you need a more comprehensive approach," she said.

Mr Obama's chief strategist, David Axelrod, expressed satisfaction with his candidate's performance but urged against attaching too much weight to debates or polls at this stage of the campaign.

"We in the political world are interested in analysing who won or who lost this evening but average voters are living their lives and dealing with real concerns. Until the spring of 2004, nobody thought that John Kerry would be the Democratic nominee. This thing will change radically over time," he said.