Should Obama accept debate challenege offered by Hillary?

Parent Cafe
1

<p>Hillary is asking Obama to come for Lincoln Douglas debate. She is aksing that a format should not involve any Moderator? Is it a tarp for Obamaor and he should be afraid to accept it. Or by not accaepting, he is showing a weakness that he can be hammered by clinton campaign. Or he is better off to ignore her try to cost to victroy without accepting any challenge which can harm her. What would be the voters perception for Hillary and Obama for this new debate.</p>

<p>Ultimately voter percpetion matters most and supporter may have issues. How voter will react to this new challenge?</p>

2

<p>I think he should decline. </p>

<p>A debate without a moderator basically becomes the two candidates yelling sound bites at each other and the supporters in the crowd seeing which side can clap the loudest. </p>

<p>The 2008 debates have sucked so far.</p>

3

<p>haha, well if its Lincoln Douglas, I guess Hill will take the negative ;)</p>

4

<p>First of all I don’t think Obama is the type of candidate to go negative…
Secondly, they’ve already have 21 debates…both of their thoughts on policies are everywhere, one more isn’t going to do anything.</p>

5

<p>i think there is such a thing as overexposure. Let’s wait and have some healthy debates between the Dem and Rep candidates.</p>

<p>I don’t know about you, but I wouldn’t waste my time listening to an argument between the two. We’ve had enough of that already.</p>

6

<p>Why debate with a candidate who’s already toast?</p>

<p>It would make more sense for him to debate Nader.</p>

7

<p>Is it awful that i am so bored with this election already? I feel guilty for being so sick of it when it is so important. I was enthralled in the early stages - now it is just like - “oh my God - just get on with it”.</p>

8

<p>mini: And why is she toast, exactly?</p>

9

<p>Because since she won PA by only single digits when she needed to by 20+, there is virtually no mathematical formula by which she can receive the most delegates. </p>

<p>Of course, it is still possible that Huckabee could be the Republican nominee (if McCain really messed up…)</p>

10

<br>

<br>

<p>Agree with you here ASAP. Let’s give the debate thing a rest until after the convention and then we can debate away interminably till the fall election.</p>

11

<p>he wouldn’t debate. He has nothing to offer - empty. His skill lies in singing jingles.</p>

<p>besides he is a yellow belly</p>

12

<p>I would say he should not debate; If people haven’t figured out the differences between the two by now, I doubt they would watch the debate anyways. I think the debate would be just fodder for the talking heads to use as they wish.</p>

13

<p>Quote: “His skill lies in singing jingles.”</p>

<p>…And she jingles constant Lies . :)</p>

14

<p>mini: Pledged delegate count is only a single one of many metrics for measuring success, some of which Obama leads in and some of which he does not. It’s not even a particularly useful measurement, since Obama can’t win with the number of pledged delegates he has, and supers must decide the nomination, meaning that other assessments of the candidates will be very important.</p>

15

<p>No, they won’t. Won’t matter in the least, though tv commentators need something to fill the airtime. If the superdelegates don’t support the winner of the pledged delegate count, they will lose the support of young people and African-Americans for a generation. (Frankly, I don’t think the Democratic Party would ever recover, and the superdelegates know it.)</p>

<p>She’s running for 2012.</p>

<p>But Huckabee could still be the Republican nominee. Really!</p>

16

<p>She may run in 2012 but she will never win.
It is now or never and the Clintons know it.</p>

17

<p>Maybe Hillary has her heart set on a White House wedding.</p>

18

<p>Her own?? After she gives Bill the boot?</p>

19

<p>lol!!! Hadn’t thought of that!</p>

20

<p>lol, ellemnope</p>

<p>Will they return the Air Force one china and the Ws for the keyboards?</p>