Do you want more debates between Clinton and Obama?

[Onlooker]

[ursi]

1. What more can be said? Let's put them on TMZ.com and see who doesn't shake whose hand

that what Clinton wants, isn't it?

[SoFlaJet]

2. The Obama Campaign

doesn't think they should-since the Clinton campaign is going broke it would be free advertising-I voted no...for EXACTLY that reason. I want MY guy to win-I'm sure if the shoe were on the other foot THEY (Bilklary) wouldn't do it for us either

[Dogmudgeon]

5. Bilklary? Don't you men "Hitlery KKKlintoon"?

If you're going to use a FR line, use a good one.

--p!

[SoFlaJet]

15. I'll try and do better next time for ya

K?

[rinsd]

3. I think 1 or two more could be beneficial to the electorate.

Sure Duers have likely watched all 18 debates or at least most of them but many people have not.

[Onlooker]

4. It is so disingenuous not to want more debates

I support Obama and, it's true, Clinton does well in debates, but he's no slouch. Look at the last debate. I think a lot of people felt that it was a tie. Clinton did a little better in the beginning, but Obama was better in the second half and Clinton really screwed up her answer on Iraq.

Debates are so important for seeing how the candidates think on their feet and for seeing them in a way that's relatively free of MSM manipulation or political campaign manipulation. Debates are important to get an honest look at the candidates. Otherwise, it's all filtered.

[MrCoffee]

25. I don't support either, and I voted for no more debates

[Onlooker]

26. Well, that makes sense

If you don't like either of them, I suppose you wish they would both shut up!

[MrCoffee]

32. lol. I'll vote for the nominee, but I won't shill for either candidate

And I have zero interest in watching them "debate" each other ad nauseum.

[stranger_with_candy]

6. There have been so many

Are they really going to say anything new?

[MadBadger]

7. Lets do a few debates, but not the 1 per week that the Clinton campaign wants.

Especially not the one on Faux.

[MadBadger]

8. Lets do a few debates, but not the 1 per week that the Clinton campaign wants.

Especially not the one on Faux.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

9. Sure, but not on Fox News.

And I'd also like Clinton's campaign to run further into the money hole.

:shrug:

[TexasObserver]

10. No more debates.

Why help her get out of the hole she and Bubba have dug themselves?

His venue is giving speeches. She's terrible at giving speeches.

[Alexander]

11. Obama already agreed to more debates.

He just doesn't want the one debate a week that HRC wants.

She knows her fundraising is drying up and she needs all the free media exposure she can get.

I say let's have 3 more debates. That will be plenty.

[Apollo11]

12. Good call by Barack!

He is obviously more fair-minded and voter-oriented than most of his supporters here on DU.

If the early results of this little poll are to be believed.

[Barack_America]

17. Why do you assume those not in favor of more debates are Obama supporters? n/t

[Barack_America]

16. I read him quoted as saying "one debate". Singular.

Not plural.

[DFLforever]

13. Why should he?

That's the format in which HRC shines. He'd be foolish to agree.
She's just trying to tilt the race again to her advantage.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

29. That's A Pretty Cowardly Sentiment, Is It Not?

So what you're saying is, when it comes down to talking about issues in a direct and straightforward manner, in front of the american public, he's best to avoid it because he can't come off as well as he does when he just putting on his surface level political act on a stage in front of fans?

[DFLforever]

37. No, that's not what I'm saying.

I said what I meant above.

Excepting issues of Iraq (and Iran), Sens. Clinton and Obama are about 1/8 inch apart on other policies.

What I'd like to see each of them do is prepare an address to the nation, something presidents actually have to do when in office.

I'd like to measure them side by side - just how persuasive would each of them be with the American people and how able to get the public on their side of proposals and legislation.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

14. It depends - I don't want any more debate questions written by Russert or Williams

I'd like to see pro-Obama and pro-Clinton proponents asking questions of the other side. I'd like to see no fluff questions such as what your biggest weakness is or whether you would pick the other as VP. I'd like to see the hardest hitting questions on the issues from actual supporters of the other candidate, directed to each one. I want to see some actual answers to tough, specific, and detailed questions for a change and not vague and general questions that allow each side to give vague and general answers.

[McCamy Taylor]

18. If Obama doesn't want to debate, it means that he has peaked. He knows that with

any more exposure, he will begin to lose support. He wants to keep some "mystery" and limit himself to messianic advertising, because he can only tarnish his image by discussing the issues.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

31. It Would Be A Sign Of Cowardice, In My Opinion.

I can't respect a position of "no more real tv. It could hurt our image. We've already pulled off the msytique about us that we want, so we don't need to be real".

Debates are as real as it gets.

[HeraldSquare212]

19. If the format could be different, or maybe different formats

one real debate, pro and con a proposition...another with the candidates questioning each other...another with audience members asking questions...another with, say, each candidate doing a presentation on their health care proposals (and not tons of data about the problem, which they are all so good at spouting - lots of specifics about the solution).

Basically, I'm sick of the moderators and sick of candidates cramming their entire campaign pitch into the minute or so that they're alloted to answer questions about specific topics instead of addressing those topics. If they each had more time to answer, maybe we'd get more substance from each. In fact, it would be interesting to see if they could fill, say, ten minutes, with substance on a specific topic.

[Lucinda]

20. Absolutely. Take a couple issues and discuss them in depth.

[BuyingThyme]

21. Would I be correct in assuming that the Clinton supporters are

generally against more debates and the Obama supporters are generally for?

Why does it seem that Clinton supporters consistently stand against the basics of democracy?

[Auntie Bush]

22. That poll isn't fair or meaningful. You brake up the "yes" votes.

You should only have 2 choices...yes or no.

[tammywammy]

23. One more debate is fine

Not one a week.

[Whisp]

24. No. Let her pay for her air time.

the one debate he agreed to is fine.
no way should he kowtow to the Queens wishes on any more.

phfffft! the nerve.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

27. Of Course. You Can Never Have Too Many.

The process should revolve far more around their debates than any other form of media coverage, ads, etc.

[ShadowLiberal]

28. We already had like 20+ debates, how many is enough for you?

[Meshuga]

30. Yes but...

I would like to see them keep the Fox News boycott.

[smalll]

33. HOW can people in good conscience vote for none?

So yeah, we had 18 or so debates beginning way back at the beginning of 2007 when there were like 8 people up on stage. But we've just had ONE debate so far between the two finalists, been through Tsunami Tuedsay, and still HALF the states haven't voted yet: voting only started just over ONE SHORT MONTH ago, and we have until May or even further to go with the actual primaries!

Why in hell shouldn't debates between the two surviving viable candidates happen? With three-quarters of the primary voting season still ahead of us? As "real" people (not campaign junkies like us here in GDP) have JUST started to tune in and actually maybe WATCH a debate???

:wtf:

[JTFrog]

34. Can't imagine why she'd call for more debates on Fox News.

So many backs to be scratched, so many pledges to break.

[depakid]

35. Not on Fox or CNN

How about PBS?

[gravity]

36. The candidates are virtually the same on the issues

Both candidates want the same thing, and the debates become bickering about the details on each persons plan. These little differences will get worked out in congress anyways so it is pretty much irrelevant.

These debates between Hillary and Obama will just become a contest of who will suck up the most.

On the otherhand, a debate between McCain with the one of the Democrats will be interesting, since there are actually differences with the values of the candidates.