The Debate
- Started
- Last post
- 53 Responses
- TheBlueOne0
It's just fucking hilarious, a media made up of elites grilling presidential candidates, themselves elites, over insulting the hoi polloi by telling them they are in fact poor, frustrated and bitter and no one in the elite gives a shit about them. Obama fucked up by letting the truth slip and they're all scrambling to cover it up.
- Dr_Rand0
"You may now officially stop worrying about last night's debate. Obama has stopped worrying about it, and has started using it as a weapon:
"I will tell you, it does not get much more fun than these debates. They are inspiring events," Mr. Obama quipped. "Last night, I think we set a new record because it took us 45 minutes before we even started talking about a single issue that matters to the American people. It took us 45 minutes!"
"Forty-five minutes before we heard about health care. Forty-five minutes before we heard about Iraq," he continued. "Forty-five — 45 — minutes before we heard about jobs. Forty-five minutes before we heard about gas prices."If he keeps this up, the powers that be won't know what hit them.
In sales, there's a technique known as the pivot. In involves using the customer's own language -- often negative -- and turning it into an advantage. I understand why you are concerned about the low gas mileage, ma'am; that relatively low number is a direct result of the power this baby has, power to get you out of trouble on the road. That's the classic example, of course; real pivoting is done so subtly that the recipient isn't aware that it's happening.
Obama just executed a perfect pivot. It involves: a recognition of what's just been done; a profession of unconcern about it, and a turn toward what's really important. Like this:
"That was the roll-out of the Republican campaign against me in November. That is what they will do," Mr. Obama said. "They will try to focus on all these issues that don’t have anything to do with how you pay your bills at the end of the month."
"Look, I understand that because that’s the text book Washington game. That’s how our politics has been taught to be played," Mr. Obama said. "That’s the lesson that she learned when the Republicans were doing that same thing to her back in the 1990s. So I understand it and when you’re running or the presidency than you’ve got to expect it."
He told the audience that he intended to let the criticism roll off of him. As he spoke, he made a dramatic gesture of wiping off his sleeves and dusting off his dark suit.
"That’s what you got to do," he said, drawing loud applause from the audience. "That’s what you’ve got to do. But understand this, that is also precisely why I’m running for president – to change that kind of politics."
Speaking as a sales person, it was masterful. If he keeps doing this, you can fuggedabout ABC, and Clinton, and McCain. Obama's got game, and if he keeps this up, there's no one who can stop him."
- acescence0
very satisfying that there are now over 15,000 mostly very negative comments on ABC's site aimed at chuck and george. what a joke that was.
- Iggyboo0
I am pretty annoyed by the media last night. They didn't let them debate, all they talked about was news stories that were irrellevent to both campaigns. NBC CBS, ABC, FOX all of them should be ashamed to publicly host campaign debates if they wont let the speakers get asked meaningful questions rather then their bloody hot press news article stories about whom knows whom and how whom mispoke about what.
- monkeyshine0
Mary Mapes: Okay, Now I'm Bitter
Mary Mapes, Apr 17, 2008 19:41:35 GMT
I sat down last night with a big fat glass of wine, all excited about watching the first Democratic debate in weeks, absolutely certain that I would get the chance to hear what Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama had to say about the latest headlines.
After all, it has been a quite a week for news.
In Iraq, we've seen a rebound in suicide bombings and gotten the disquieting information that Iraqi soldiers have been fleeing the battlefield in frightening numbers.
Americans learned that detailed discussions of torture techniques had been held in the White House -- our White House -- and President Bush revealed that he knew this and approved.
Foreclosure rates have spiked to frightening levels.
U.S. shoppers were told that food prices in this country are rising at a higher pace than at any time in the past 17 years.
The airline industry floundered through dreadful days of groundings, amidst safety concerns, economic ailments and passenger anger.
Oil prices are setting new records almost every day and $4 a gallon gas is coming soon to a service station near you.
The anguish over China's human rights record and its handling of Tibet turned the Olympic torch relay into a cross between Spain's Running of the Bulls and
3rd grade keep-away.
John McCain, acting like a mean old man trying to chase those pesky voters off his lawn, refused to endorse a new GI bill that would help those currently serving our country get a college education.
The Supreme Court issued a fractured opinion on the death penalty that for the first time in years raises the real possibility of a national debate on the value and morality of the ultimate punishment.
And we are in the middle of what is clearly the most important, most consequential election of my lifetime -- and I'm no spring chicken.
Instead, I sat in front of my TV open-mouthed, listening to a hodgepodge of juvenile questions about flag jewelry, the possibility of a "dream" ticket, elderly radicals, Charlie Gibson's personal tax concerns and ministers who emote too much. What, no time for a question about Cindy McCain's purloined pork chop recipe?
Excuse me, but why are we spending this much time on topics that amount to little more than political lint?
Regarding Obama's longtime pastor, since when does making a personal choice to remain close to someone who has let you down become a permanent liability? Hmm, Hillary?
As for Clinton's refusal to be a good girl and give up, since when did continuing to fight for your political life become some kind of profound character flaw? That is simply what politicians do.
And ABC - God love you for breaking the torture debate in the White House story -- but why on earth didn't you ask the candidates about it -- or about much else that mattered?
What the heck has happened?
Just a few weeks ago, Democrats were all beaming with the belief that this election was really going to be different. Turnout was spectacular, the candidates were talking about issues that mattered and Americans were upbeat and believing in politics again.
Now it seems the unending Democratic campaign has descended into a nightmarish rolling rant about bitterness, beer, bowling and who is or isn't a bitch.
In fact, this whole thing has made me a little bitchy.
I want a rebate on the debate. I want to see someone ask a question of consequence. I want Pennsylvania to vote now. I want to turn on the TV and not see Pat Buchanan's head in a little box.
I want my life back.
This political junkie has just about had her fill of political junk food. I'll come back when there is something more substantial on the table. Until then, I guess I'll just cling to my guns, my religion and my long-ignored need to improve my bowling scores.
Because this whole presidential campaign thing has gone into the gutter.
- Dr_Rand0
"STEPHANOPOULOS: Senator, two questions. Number one, do you think Reverend Wright loves America as much as you do?
Not only is this a prime example of the facile, despicable questions asked at last night's assault on the whole idea of a presidential debate, it's really not fair.
Here's Daniel Schorr on NPR a couple of days ago.
Who is the real patriot, willing to service his country? One such man in 1963 served two years in the Marines, then volunteered to become a Navy medical corpsman. In that capacity, he helped to care for President Johnson after his surgery in 1966. ... And who was that patriot? A young, African-American man who went on to become the pastor of a church in Chicago. That's right, the Reverend Jeremiah Wright.
Who loves America? Jeremiah Wright loved it enough that while Dick Cheney was getting his string of five deferments, Wright voluntarily gave up his student deferment, left college and joined the United States Marine Corps. Wright was valedictorian of his class in Corpsman School. When asked about the sacrifices he'd made, Wright said he was inspired by the words of John Kennedy that he should "ask what he could do for his country."
And he did that at a time where there were many restaurants in this country that wouldn't serve him food, hotels where he could not get a room, neighborhoods where he could not hope to live, and whole states where he could not obtain justice. That, damn it, is how much Jeremiah Wright loves this country. What Stephanopoulos asked isn't fair, because there are very few people who have expressed their love for America as clearly as Reverend Wright, especially when America -- then and now -- rarely seems to appreciate their dedication.
How about you, Stephanopolus? Does Jeremiah Wright love America more than you? How about you, Charlie Gibson? It happens that you started college at the same time as Wright, and graduated while Wright was attending President Johnson. From what I can see, the two of you love your country so much, that you're willing to go to any lengths to demean both the candidates and your own profession."
- capsize0
Take the high road back Obama
- Dr_Rand0
"A lot is being made of the absolutely despicable performance turned in during tonight's debate by Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos. One only needs to visit ABC's own discussion board to get a taste of what people thought of their performance. The fact that two people who purport to call themselves journalists spent the first half of a 2-hour debate conducting what was effectively a right-wing hit job on Barack Obama was bad enough.
But what's not being highlighted is the fact that there were plenty of opportunities for Hillary Clinton to put her foot down and tell Gibson and Stephanopoulos that enough was enough - and to focus on the issues instead.
But she didn't do that. In fact, she goaded the moderators on to continue their birdshitting. She didn't stand up for her fellow Democrat; she chose to embrace those right-wing talking points to use against him.
When Gibson and Stephanopoulos continued to press Obama on the issue of his former pastor, Jeremiah Wright, to ridiculous levels - "Do you think Reverend Wright loves America as much as you do?" - Clinton was given the opportunity to move on from the issue. Did she?
No; instead, she sought to sink in even more inflammatory matters into the issue (quotes taken from this transcript):
SENATOR CLINTON: Well, I think, in addition to the questions about Reverend Wright and what he said and when he said it, and for whatever reason he might have said these things, there were so many different variations on the explanations that we heard. And it is something that I think deserves further exploration, because clearly what we've got to figure out is how we're going to bring people together in a way that overcomes the anger, overcomes the divisiveness and whatever bitterness there may be out there.
It is clear that, as leaders, we have a choice who we associate with and who we apparently give some kind of seal of approval to. And I think that it wasn't only the specific remarks, but some of the relationships with Reverend Farrakhan, with giving the church bulletin over to the leader of Hamas to put a message in. You know, these are problems, and they raise questions in people's minds.
And so this is a legitimate area, as everything is when we run for office, for people to be exploring and trying to find answers.
The Farrakhan remark is particularly disturbing, given that Obama already denounced him in the last debate, held way back in late February. The Hamas mention, which is an obscure reference to this right-wing hit job, was even worse. There was absolutely no previous instigation for bringing it up; by doing so, Clinton was making something of a dog-whistle appeal to Jewish voters.
In short, instead of using her surplus time to tell the moderators to shove it, Clinton decided to try and stoke the embers of a nearly-dead controversy.
But that wasn't all. When Stephanopoulos asked a question of Obama that was suggested to him by Sean Hannity, Obama dismissed it out of hand in the proper fashion. Again, Clinton had the opportunity to simply dismiss the matter and focus the debate back on relevant matters. But, as is her wont these days, she saw an opportunity to go on the attack once more:
Well, I think that is a fair general statement, but I also believe that Senator Obama served on a board with Mr. Ayers for a period of time, the Woods Foundation, which was a paid directorship position.
And if I'm not mistaken, that relationship with Mr. Ayers on this board continued after 9/11 and after his reported comments, which were deeply hurtful to people in New York, and I would hope to every American, because they were published on 9/11 and he said that he was just sorry they hadn't done more. And what they did was set bombs and in some instances people died. So it is -- you know, I think it is, again, an issue that people will be asking about. And I have no doubt -- I know Senator Obama's a good man and I respect him greatly but I think that this is an issue that certainly the Republicans will be raising.
First of all, Clinton decides to go about and smear the good name of a foundation that provides services for those in need in Chicago. Next, she tries to exploit 9/11 shamelessly - in a style Rudy Giuliani would be proud of - to score more political points. Never mind that Ayers had actually made the above statements before 9/11; the publication they were printed in just happened to be released that day. Lastly, she justifies any further discussion of Ayers by saying that the Republicans will bring it up.
One thing should be abundantly clear: Hillary Clinton is arguably doing a better impression of a cutthroat Republican than John McCain will do in the general election. And while tonight's debate was an unmitigated public relations disaster for ABC, it could've been staunched had the two Democrats on stage taken a stand against the petty politics that the moderators were engaging in.
But one of them didn't - and decided to engage in reinforcing the same right-wing frames that were being thrown out there. It let Gibson and Stephanopoulos continue the train wreck of a debate that ensued.
Hillary Clinton could have stopped it before it began.
But she didn't.
Remember that."
- ukit0
Isn't it interesting that
(a) If the campaign was fought over the issues, the Dems would win every time
(b) The press won't let it be about the issues, they are WAAAY too interested in whether Obama ever lived in the same neighborhood as a hippie anarchist from the 70s, or whether he hates America because he doesn't wear a flag pin (even though Clinton and McCain don't).
Also shouldn't there be some kind of rule against a former campaign operative setting up and moderating a debate - ie Stephanapolous who was the go to guy for the Clintons throughout the 90s. The whole thing had the feel of a staged, joyless Clinton informercial/ Obama passion play.
- Dr_Rand0
"Philadelphia Daily News Endorses ObamaThursday, April 17th,
Paper’s ed board picks Obama, who has been trailing Clinton in the statewide polls but is expected to do well in Philly.
“The choice in Tuesday’s Democratic presidential primary is not only the one between a white woman and a black man. It’s a choice between the past and the future.”
Also discounts Clinton’s experience. “We are frankly troubled by her assumption that her husband’s administration and accomplishments were her own.”
Plus: The Obama campaign tells Stephanopoulos that “prominent Pennsylvania supporters” will switch their support from Clinton to Obama Thursday morning due to Clinton’s negativity."
- mrdobolina0
it is all about selling ads for the networks.
- ukit0
- Iggyboo0
Oh and that question on iran is irrelevent too, why? Because you're pre emptively planning a war with iran when you're asking how your going to deal with an attack on isreal. You're giving the american people too much credit for deciding things if you think american people decide whether or not we're going to go to war with iran. If its in our national security's interest I am sure we will. If it isn't we wont. But that's pretty much not a reason to hire the next president. I also really question the motives of hillary why is she always trying to smile on stage. it's one thing to have stage presence but why is it so important to smile and be cheery. We're in a messed up time, atleast some of the cynicism from Barrack is in line with most people's cynicism. I really think Mccain has it in the bag after last night though, the american public won't have a chance to vote for either of these candidates due to an implosion of the democratic party.
- utopian0
I personally want 100 to 1000 more years in Iraq, so do the Iraqi's.
Thank you America!!!
- that's right "Leave the troops there!!!" I don't want them coming home anyway and becoming local cops.robotron3k
- Dr_Rand0
*vomits
*washes hands of whole affair
- OSFA0
have they mentioned the McCain 'family recipes' yet???
- mg330
I started yelling when i saw the flag pin question. The woman who asked the question, it was obvious that the flag pin issue alone would be what she voted on.
"Obama doesn't wear the pin, so I'm not voting for him" is probably spot-on for her mentality.
I wish Obama would have just stated the obvious: where was Clinton's flag pin? where was it?
Absolutely retarded that the questions was allowed to be asked.
- capsize0
Obama should not waste any more time on "debates" a shop-worn format days of early TV that have devolved into recycling fake news and fake controversy based on celebritrannymetrics.
- TheBlueOne0
Just watching some of the (non) highlights of this fiasco on the interwebs and how our great "liberal media" is...
I am reminded of that moment in the the Muhammed Ali pic "When We Were Kings" when George Plimpton leans over to Norman Mailer and says "The fix is in..."
- He shoulda punched Mailer to prove it.capsize
- Mailer woulda bit his ear off...TheBlueOne
- Dr_Rand0
"The response to the awful ABC debate from various internet blogs and commenters has been overwhelmingly negative. Now, the MSM is getting in on the act.
From Tom Shales at Washington Post.
When Barack Obama met Hillary Clinton for another televised Democratic candidates' debate last night, it was more than a step forward in the 2008 presidential election. It was another step downward for network news -- in particular ABC News, which hosted the debate from Philadelphia and whose usually dependable anchors, Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos, turned in shoddy, despicable performances.
Wow, you can't really go anywhere from there, can you? Oh yes you can.
For the first 52 minutes of the two-hour, commercial-crammed show, Gibson and Stephanopoulos dwelled entirely on specious and gossipy trivia that already has been hashed and rehashed, in the hope of getting the candidates to claw at one another over disputes that are no longer news. Some were barely news to begin with.
Case in point, Ayers and Rev. Wright.
The boyish Stephanopoulos, who has done wonders with the network's Sunday morning hour, "This Week" (as, indeed, has Gibson with the nightly "World News"), looked like an overly ambitious intern helping out at a subcommittee hearing, digging through notes for something smart-alecky and slimy. He came up with such tired tripe as a charge that Obama once associated with a nutty bomb-throwing anarchist. That was "40 years ago, when I was 8 years old," Obama said with exasperation.
Obama was right on the money when he complained about the campaign being bogged down in media-driven inanities and obsessiveness over any misstatement a candidate might make along the way, whether in a speech or while being eavesdropped upon by the opposition. The tactic has been to "take one statement and beat it to death," he said.
No sooner was that said than Gibson brought up, yet again, the controversial ravings of the pastor at a church attended by Obama. "Charlie, I've discussed this," he said, and indeed he has, ad infinitum. If he tried to avoid repeating himself when clarifying his position, the networks would accuse him of changing his story, or changing his tune, or some other baloney.
Preach it, Brother Shales! He makes no bones about the bias of the moderators.
To this observer, ABC's coverage seemed slanted against Obama. The director cut several times to reaction shots of such Clinton supporters as her daughter, Chelsea, who sat in the audience at the Kimmel Theater in Philly's National Constitution Center. Obama supporters did not get equal screen time, giving the impression that there weren't any in the hall. The director also clumsily chose to pan the audience at the very start of the debate, when the candidates made their opening statements, so Obama and Clinton were barely seen before the first commercial break.
At the end, Gibson pompously thanked the candidates -- or was he really patting himself on the back? -- for "what I think has been a fascinating debate." He's entitled to his opinion, but the most fascinating aspect was waiting to see how low he and Stephanopoulos would go, and then being appalled at the answer.
Couldn't have put it any better myself.
Update: Will Bunch get in on the action.
With your performance tonight -- your focus on issues that were at best trivial wastes of valuable airtime and at worst restatements of right-wing falsehoods, punctuated by inane "issue" questions that in no way resembled the real world concerns of American voters -- you disgraced my profession of journalism, and, by association, me and a lot of hard-working colleagues who do still try to ferret out the truth, rather than worry about who can give us the best deal on our capital gains taxes. But it's even worse than that. By so badly botching arguably the most critical debate of such an important election, in a time of both war and economic misery, you disgraced the American voters, and in fact even disgraced democracy itself. Indeed, if I were a citizen of one of those nations where America is seeking to "export democracy," and I had watched the debate, I probably would have said, "no thank you." Because that was no way to promote democracy.