Barack Obama is sick of the debates. Will he be accused of trying to limit TV time for others

[trayted]

like Edwards and Clinton were?

In the latest chess move of the highly competitive fight for the Democratic presidential nomination, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama has decided to unilaterally refuse to participate in additional fall debates and forums with his rivals.

In a posting on the campaign's website, Obama's campaign manager David Plouffe said that the eight additional debates to which his candidate has already agreed are sufficient, and that Obama wants to spend time talking to voters, rather than preparing for and participating in debates. "Unfortunately, we simply cannot run the kind of campaign we want and need to, engaging with voters in the early states and February 5, if our schedule is dictated by dozens of forums and debates," Plouffe said in his statement.

Like all the leading campaigns, Obama's team has felt some frustration at having their schedules tied up by the debates and forums already held. They have had to share the stage in those events with six or seven other candidates, allowing the candidates only a limited period to make an impression. The campaign of Obama's chief rival, Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York, has also been frustrated by the time-consuming, low-impact debates, but declined to comment publicly on the announcement. Democratic sources say that there have been long-running informal talks about the course of the debates between the Clinton and Obama camps, sometimes also including representatives of former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards, the other leading contender for the nomination. But these sources say that no unified position on the invitations emerged, and Obama's campaign decided to move unilaterally.

Obama's debate performances have been unsteady at times, adding to the impression in some quarters that his greatest political vulnerability — his relative lack of conventional experience — that he was revealing himself as not up to the job. Obama strategists insist that such reviews have nothing to do with their decision. It is, they say, simply the sheer number of invitations from interest groups and news organizations that make it impossible to accept any more offers and still keep effective control of the candidate's time...

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1654141,00.html

I'm interested in seeing what happens. If Clinton and Obama leave, Edwards will not stay there just to become a target for the rest of them.

Clinton could really care less about what Obama does. Her decision and Edwards' will be a calculated one. If they feel like they can gain from Obama or "the other two" not being there, they will not follow suit.

[David Dunham]

1. Now Clinton and Edwards will make a point to be at forums when Barack skips out

[madrchsod]

2. maybe this will be the last dog and pony show

these shows are not even debates they are q&a sessions that prove nothing.

[RaleighNCDUer]

4. Oh, I don't know.

I think that 'pro-labor' Hillary being the only candidate booed at the AFL-CIO debate proved something.

[dsc]

12. I watched that debate and you are misremembering

Biden also got booed.

[RaleighNCDUer]

29. Did he? Must have missed it. nt

[draft_mario_cuomo]

5. They are very flawed but serve a purpose. Obama knows this

If they meant nothing his poll numbers would not fall after each debate. Instead of running away from debates he should push to improve the format.

[TeamJordan23]

14. For who? Less than a million people watch them, many are not even aired on TV

Like some of the recent forums.

[trayted]

17. People might not watch the debates, but they watch television news and get indoctrinated after each

debate about how "Presidential Clinton was," even if she gets booed multiple times like she did at the AFL-CIO Forum. The subsequent news coverage, day after day is the problem.

Doesn't matter, the media will always say that she won, and even if people don't see the debate, the media indoctrinates them that "Hillary = Winner, Hillary = Winner, Hillary = Winner."

It's propaganda, subtle, but propaganda.

People see the word propaganda, and expect it to be overt. The most effective propaganda is covert.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

3. After every single debate Obama's poll numbers drop...

So this is actually a smart move on Obama's part as far as the primaries go. Of course, if he is not willing to answer questions from moderators what does that say about his ability to run a $3 trillion government? This will only further fuel the perception of him being too inexperienced to be president and may haunt him if he makes it to the GE.

[Tellurian]

13. Obama is well aware he does poorly in the debates..

and afraid further embarrassments will lower his numbers even more still. However, this is a huge red flag denoting his weakness for not wanting his policies to be contrasted and scrutinized against the more experienced candidates. IOW- He cannot hold his own against the field because his lack of experience is insurmountable.

Does Obama think that hiding out from public scrutiny will increase his polling numbers? Doe he think people are too oblivious to figure that out for themselves? I wouldn't be surprised if the American people see this as an act of cowardice...something resembling the Administrations strategy of refusing to submit to public accountability.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

20. The audacity of hoping a candidate for president is willing to answer questions about his views...

:(

[jefferson_dem]

25. You think since he's not said he will participate in some forums that have not yet been scheduled...

means he doesn't want to answer questions about his views?

That's just silly ... and you know it.

[venable]

6. a good man, but not ready for prime time

and i think the staff is beginning to figure that out.

granted the debates, for the most part, have been exercises in broadcaster's vanity, but they do serve a purpose.

I want to vote for him for president in a few years, but not now.

[bigdarryl]

8. He will NEVER be President if he can't get the nomination with 55 million he will never win

[Colobo]

9. It's now or never. The country needs him now.

[venable]

10. the country needs someone who he SEEMS like

but, in my opinion, he is not that guy, not by a long shot.

He is younger than his years, timid, vague, and not the startling transformative force that one assumes he might be, and that he claims to be.

The gaffes are nothing, in my book, it's the core - I don't see, or hear, or get any sense of what it is that makes you or anyone think we 'need' him. And please don't tell me I am just not seeing what's there. I want it to be there. I really, really do. I just don't see it. So many people I know who WANTED it to be there, are slowly drifting away, in disappointment.

What, really, has he said or done to make him seem like anything but a smart, centrist, young pol? Nothing at all.


As for 'younger than his years', this is what I mean: he had a sweet, breezy, tropical childhood, no matter how moving his family history is, he is gorgeous and smart and he has had pretty much anything he wants (including, VERY SIGNIFICANTLY, no obstacle at all to his senate seat).

In the words of a 80 year old lifetime NAACP principal player, a man I revere, and who actually knows and is fond of Obama: 'the kid needs to learn how little he knows'.

My old friend was shocked and disappointed when he chose to run. He wanted him to do some serious work for a decade or more. He aint nowhere ready. The Democrat Party does not need him as the nominee. He would lose. Not because he's an African-American, but because he doesn't know how little he knows. I think you or me or half the people on DU have as much legitimacy as a candidate, and, speaking for myself, I barely know how little I know. I would hope I have the courage that I don't see in him, but who knows?

I actually think he would probably be a decent president, and if he had two terms and grew some real fight and courage and had a vision that was truly forged in fire, then he could POSSIBLY become the person you seem to think he is.

He is not that person now.

The closest we have is Edwards, Kucinich, Dodd, and some verion of Richardson. Clark is an awful candidate, but would be a better President on Day One, and Day 1000.

HRC - no comment, just prayers that she doesn't get the nomination.

[Colobo]

11. We obviously have very different views of him, and I think his presidency

will surprise you positively.

[Yael]

15. You make a lot of good points there

His lack of experience is a bit troubling, but I think if he is tapped as the VP for whoever wins the nomination, he will be schooled and quickly and could be unbeatable in future elections. I agree though, I don't think he's ready for 2008.

[Ethelk2044]

16. He will be Prez. He should never accept a VP slot. He does not need anyone's baggage to hurt him.

[Colobo]

18. Those who say he's not ready now will say the same thing in 4 or 8 years.

They simply don't like the guy.

[Yael]

19. I disagree with you on that

I like him a lot! I think he is smart and he has a lot to offer. I really enjoyed Audacity of Hope -- it gave me a comfort level with Obama that I didn't have before (because I wan't exposed to him).

I would be thrilled to vote for him in the GE if the party sees fit to tag him as our candidate.

All of that said, I just don't think he is ready yet. Politics is a nasty game and I think in 4-8 years of being in it would prepare him greatly.

[venable]

34. I am not able to time travel to the future, but I think I would be wildly for him

sometime in the future. Again, assuming he buckles down to some hard, hard work, and sees some rough times, and comes out stronger for it. That's obviously just my take.

[venable]

40. really disagree -I like his promise very much.

I feel strongly that he is not a good candidate now, but I feel just as strongly that he has the chance to grow into a real leader. But I don't think he is even close right now. But he is smart enough, and deteremined enough.

He reminds me of people I knew from the anti-war movement in the 60's, but he reminds me of them back then. That's not a bad thing, it's a great thing. But it is also the reason I think he's too green right now. They all had promise. Most of them either went into quiet international aid work, or lost their ideals, or got felled by life.

Obama is going to have a chance for much more prominent leadership.

Meet you here in a decade, and I could be his most passionate supporter.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

7. Then why hasn't he taken up Ed Schultz's offer?

Big Eddie made the offer to all the candidates-they have control of the microphone for the full three hours of his show (except for commercials, of course). He even said he'd host a fundraiser to pay for the candidate's expenses for coming out to be on his show. The candidate gets to decide on the format--just talk for an hour, take questions from Big Eddie, take questions from callers--the candidates get complete control.

So far, Dennis Kucinich is the only one who has taken Big Eddie up on his offer. Since Obama doesn't like the debates, I'm surprised he hasn't.

[illinoisprogressive]

21. Clinton already sent out her usual no class comments on this.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

22. What did she say? nt

[jefferson_dem]

23. Really? What did Wolfson tell her to say?

:shrug:

[illinoisprogressive]

24. Here is a link to her comments and showing her utter lack of class

http://time-blog.com/swampland/

[jefferson_dem]

26. She lies.

Again.

[illinoisprogressive]

27. because she is so good at it and so use to it. Truth alludes her

[Colobo]

30. I bet that POS Wolfson is behind that comment.

[jefferson_dem]

31. Wolfson's presence could be reason enough for some to never vote for Hillary.

He's that offensive.

[Colobo]

35. He's Karl Rove's lost brother.

[jefferson_dem]

39. Karl Rove's evil twin.

:evilgrin:

[karynnj]

32. What a nasty comment - just when she was aiming for the "nice kind" Hillary.

She already made some of us sick at the thought that we will likely have to vote for her in the general election. If this is how she fights all her Democratic opponents, how does she expect to get their supporters' trust and affection?

[zulchzulu]

38. No wonder Bill sought comfort elsewhere

I'm beginning to understand the inner workings of his adulterous skills, no pun intended.

[collegegirl211]

28. Obama is getting his ass kicked by Hillary in the debates

that is the real reason he is only going to attend 5 debates if he was really winning and gaining on Clinton does anyone think he would be pulling out. he's in a lose/lose situation if he stays in his campaign will continue to bleed and if he leaves the debates he will be looked upon as a chicken who cant stand up against a woman. I kind feel bad for him i wouldn't want Hillary as my opponent she almost never makes mistakes.

[Yael]

36. Are you typing on a phone or something?

Really -- Punctuation and the shift key are your friends. :)

[zulchzulu]

37. You can't even get the number of debates Obama will be in correctly

It's 15...not 5.

As for Clinton, she has already made mistakes by attacking Obama. Specifically, she mow mowed about how it was naive for a President to meet other World leaders when she is on record saying that's what wrong with Bush. Then, she said it was naive for Obama to take nukes of the table when she is on record saying that she would as President. Then, she catcalled that Obama was careless about telling Musharraf to get off his ass when she is on record agreeing with him.

Clinton is just like her husband. A calculating liar with a compartmentalized brain. And not even a good one.

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v4.0
==================



This week is our third quarter 2007 fund drive. Democratic
Underground is a completely independent website. We depend on donations
from our members to cover our costs. Thank you so much for your support.