Her closing was perhaps Hillary's finest moment, emotional and seemingly genuine. Her worst, was when she raised Obama's use in his campaign speeches of words first used by Massachusetts Governor and Obama advisor Deval Patrick.
If your candidacy is going to be about words then they should be your own words. Lifting whole passages from someone else's speeches is not change you can believe in, it's change you can Xerox.
It was clearly a canned retort that was written by someone for her and it went over like a lead balloon; they were even some boos. Obama handled it well replying,
What we shouldn't be doing is tearing each other down, we should be lifting the country up.Hillary Clinton needed a knockout in Austin if she was to have even a small chance of recovering from eleven primary losses in a row. She didn't get it done.
Obama absolutely won this section of the debate. He has done a great job of staying above attack politics (for the most part), and I think it's one of the major reasons he has done so well during the primaries. I wonder, though, whether he will be able to do so during the general election (if he gets the nomination), and if so, will it be helpful? In general, attack politics is used because it works. Is Hillary bad at it, or is Obama just stellar at deflecting it?
Also, I like how Hillary repeats her talking point about how we need concrete goals to organize around right after Obama lists three of his own. I guess she wasn't paying attention.