Obama is not afraid of debating. Here's why

[antiimperialist]

There is a misconception among some, that Barack Obama is running scared and wants to cut and run from Democratic debates; but the evidence is little, if any, to support that claim. I cite two facts against this conclusion:

1) Obama won yesterday's debate.
Obama's participation in yesterday's debate was splendid. I have heard no major criticism of his performance, plus he won an ABC online poll asking who had the upper hand. Why would a candidate who has the ability to dominate a debate in such a way be scared of similar events?

2) Obama will participate in 8 more debates, and no more than 8.
To those that aren't lazy, Obama's campaign is committed to 8 more debates, and none beyond that point.
question: If you are scared of a big strong dude, would you vow to "fight him just 8 more times"? I don't think so. In my particular case, I'd run away forever. CNN summarized Obama's campaign's decision as follows:

The Illinois Democrat will participate in the five remaining Democratic National Committee sanctioned debates, a September debate sponsored by Univision in Florida and two Iowa debates in December. Obama will also consider participating in forums — events where candidates are not on the stage at the same time — but Plouffe noted "we are unlikely to accept many of these."

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/

[draft_mario_cuomo]

1. BO fans say he wins every debate. The polls tell a different story

He is simply being rational. If he drops in the polls after debates why not skip a few debates in the future, especially the ones right before voting begins?

==plus he won an ABC online poll asking who had the upper hand. Why would a candidate who has the ability to dominate a debate in such a way be scared of similar events?==

That is a false meme BO fans have been pushing. Kucinich won. Does that mean Kucinich will go up in the polls? Does that mean he won? Or are online polls only valid barometers of success when Obama wins? ;)

[antiimperialist]

2. Critical thinking entails ignoring polls

You are not being critical. If polls dictated the truth, we would be convinced that ghosts exist.

Did you watch the debate? If you did, explain why you think Obama did not win the debate.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

3. I am looking at the same thing the Obama campaign is looking at

Why do you think only the BO campaign is taking this action? People forget that before the debates began Obama was at 30-33% in the polls (with a Faux outlier placing him at 20%) and took the lead in the Rassmussen. He also led in the Gallup poll prior to the second debate. You look at the numbers and tell me how great the debates have been for Obama. Show us the poll numbers immediately before the debate and after the debate. After the first debate he suffered a lost of over 6 points on average. After the second he has never come close to the lead in any national poll.

It is not so much the debates, since few people watch them, that matter. What really counts is the media's coverage of the debate. What was the big story out of the first debate? Obama fumbled a question about how he would respond to a terrorist attack. In the second debate he was attacked by Edwards for being silent on Iraq funding, not leading, until the last minute. That also made the news and probably explains his decline after that debate. CNN/Youtube debate? Obama will meet with Ahmedinijad and Kim Jung Il without preconditions. You really can't see how these things help explain what happens to Obama in the polls after a debate?

I don't think anyone won yesterday's debate. No one really stood out. Obama supporters also said he won the first debate and the Youtube debate and look at what happened to him after those debates...

Edit:

Do you see the high water mark for the orange dots? They were right before the debates began...The dot at 30%, the last time he reached the 30's, was right before the June CNN debate. Look at where the dots have been since then. Pollster.com has great graphs for state polls but their national graphs are not that good because they go by years, not months. It is harder to see recent trends in them so you have to look at the dots.

[Capn Sunshine]

6. Look at it this way, dmc

Obama's lack of participation in the next few debates will only HELP John Edwards chances.
I think he deserves more air time, and most certainly he'll get it without Obama participating.

Is this a good idea? I said no, but the others want to keep BO in his comfort zone. he honestly prefers one on one personal appearances because this is where he excels. So, we'll se after Iowa if this strategy works; I have every faith in his ability to send his message without a rigid debate format.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

10. I agree. The other candidates will be capitalizing on Obama's absences

And Edwards will benefit the most. Obama supporters like to dismiss Edwards but he has been gradually reeling in Obama. If Obama skips a debate and Edwards is there that could be what costs Obama second place, which is vital to him since his campaign largely revolves around being the anti-HRC. On the other hand, if the Obama camp concludes, as past polling suggests, that Obama gets hurt in the debates why not skip a few? It should be interesting to see what happens in the polls after this debate. Obama did not stumble and the media coverage of his performance has been glowing. There was no negative story about him out of this debate. If he still declines after this debate then perhaps the problem is very fundamental and he should skip a few debates. If he improves, or even holds station, then perhaps the campaign should consider letting him attend all the debates and forums.

[Capn Sunshine]

7. Look at it this way, dmc

Obama's lack of participation in the next few debates will only HELP John Edwards chances.
I think he deserves more air time, and most certainly he'll get it without Obama participating.

Is this a good idea? I said no, but the others want to keep BO in his comfort zone. he honestly prefers one on one personal appearances because this is where he excels. He feels disconnected in a debate format. So, we'll see after Iowa if this strategy works; I have every faith in his ability to send his message without a rigid debate format.

[DURHAM D]

14. Frankly - I think they should all slow down.

The candidates should all slow down on the non-stop debate schedule. We have months and months to go. They may already be over-exposed in this format. The candidates should be out pressing the flesh and making stump speeches - not prepping for another style show.

Someone (anyone) needs to come to my town. But why bother, we are too far down in the primary pecking order.

[Superman Returns]

4. I was honest

Obama performed decent at the debates but Clinton always had the upper edge. But Obama definitely won the ABC morning debate, and I would also say he did really strong at the AFL-CIO forum along with Kucinich.

[bigdarryl]

13. Maybe i am watching a differant debate than everybody else but nagging me..

Is this notion Hillary has won all these debates. I don't see it and in fact she lacks charisma and talks in riddles.

[pwb]

5. I agree with Obama. Politics started too early.

The neocons and the media are trying to make elections continuous.
The neocons get a diversion from their failing war.
The media gets year round money from politicians adds.
Everybody wins, except the people.

Obama is a great man. If he is not selected as our candidate then i am sure he will be offered a very high position in our party.

[youngdem]

8. Simple logic here.

If Obama was benefiting from the debates, he wouldn't reduce his participation. He is reducing his participation though. So, simple logic tells you he is doing so because it is to his benefit NOT to participate.

The two debates I saw him participate in were PAINFUL. He just isn't up to it. His policies have not been vetted enough, he stumbles a lot, and for the guy with the most impressive academic pedigree in the group, he just didn't shine.

I know he is a smart, nice, charismatic, well intended guy, but this isn't his year. He ran too soon. He needs to go back to Congress and accomplish something he can point to. All he has done so far is say NO to an illegal war.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

11. Exactly. Does anyone buy the official reason for him skipping debates?

He isn't going to give up a chance to be seen by millions of viewers in all 50 states so he can speak to 400 people in New Hampshire...

==If Obama was benefiting from the debates, he wouldn't reduce his participation. He is reducing his participation though. So, simple logic tells you he is doing so because it is to his benefit NOT to participate.==

[RaleighNCDUer]

23. I think it is more that while he could benefit from the debates,

he can see more benefit by participating in forums where he has control of the debate. Let the others tear each other apart - Hillary is a highly reactive type, and if she is attacked in debate she attacks in return, so let her attack the other guys.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

24. Yes, forums where he does not have to stand toe-to-toe with Hillary, Edwards, Biden, and co.

He can make his 5 minute "hope" spiel and leave untouched. During debates he will be criticized and more importantly he is directly compared to his competitors who are on the same stage at the same time as him.

[RaleighNCDUer]

30. It's not a matter of not wanting to go 'toe to toe' -

it's a matter of having ideas and a message, and the debates are distractions from those ideas. Instead of getting his own ideas out there he has to comment on what the place of prayer is in government, and how would he respond if Castro invaded Miami. Every single debate is 90% fluff, and a waste of everyones' time.

Now if we were to see REAL debates, where the candidates could go at each others' positions, rather than resond to inane hosts' hypotheticals, I think he'd be more interested in participating. He could lay out his healt care plan, and compare it to Hillary's -- oh, she doesn't HAVE a plan. Compare it to Edwards' plan. See where the differences are, and defend their own positions. WHY does Hillary want to keep the insurance companies in it? Why does Kucinich like single-payer?

We don't need any more crap about being black enough, or being religious enough. I want to know what peoples' positions are, and how they arrived at them.

[rinsd]

9. I thought Howard Dean was going to throw his weight around on this one?

Anyone know anything more? :shrug:

[draft_mario_cuomo]

12. What do you mean? Is there talk of Dean pressuring Obama to show up? nt

[BeyondGeography]

15. Of course not; Obama IS showing up at DNC-sanctioned debates

He has also cleared the way for other candidates to build more flexibility into their schedules. For this they are privately thankful.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

16. A debate is a debate. When there is a debate and everyone else is there...

...the others will be chomping at the bit to take their hits against Obama for not being there. They are privately thankful. Obama presented them with a big opportunity, especially Edwards, Richardson, and Clinton by default. If anyone was thinking about skipping a debate before they are definitely going to attend every debate now that we know Obama will almost certainly skip some. This alone could allow Richardson to leapfrog Obama for 3rd in Iowa if he plays his cards right and also allow Edwards and Richardson, both gaining ground in Nevada while Obama has stagnated, to overtake Obama in Nevada as well. If Obama finishes 4th in the first two states he is toast. This is unlikely but Obama is really rolling the dice here.

Obama faces another risk with respect to forums. When, say, "Iowa veterans" have a forum and he doesn't show up how do you think that sponsoring group will look at him?

[rinsd]

17. I thought some of the candiodates were prevailing on Dean to make it DNC sanctioned debates only.

I should ask madfloridian, she should know.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

18. Oh yes they were. I don't think they will be now, though

;)

[rinsd]

19. Well I would be careful before bashing Obama too hard on this.

Even though there were a few members of Team Smear 4 Obama that beat the shit out of our gal & guy when that "smaller" debate kerfuffle broke out.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

20. I agree. This is a rational, albeit risky, move on Obama's part

Last week it also came out, along with this news, that it was the Clinton and Obama campaigns who were doing most of the "debate" work. Edwards was only sometimes included. Remember the faux outrage from Obama fans when Clinton and Edwards were talking about improving debates? It turns out it was Obama who was playing as big a role as Clinton and more of a role than Edwards. It did not work so he decided he will skip some debates.

[BeyondGeography]

21. They all want to do it; at least he had the guts to go first and go public

kind of like that Pakistan thing. Leadership, anyone?

[rinsd]

22. Pakistan is leadership. This is politics.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

25. Exactly. There are 8 candidates and the one who declines in the polls after debates is the one...

...announcing he will almost certainly skip some debates and forums. There also were 10 Republican candidates, now 8 with one waiting in the wings. According to Obama supporters here it is just a coincidence that Obama is the only one of the 18 people who have run for president this year to shy away from debates. Does anyone really believe if Obama consistently rose in the polls after a debate, or at least stayed even, that he would be doing this?

[antiimperialist]

26. Then you think Obama wants to slip in the polls 8 more times?

That makes no sense. If debates were as disastrous as you say to him, he would just retire from them.
Plus some of his mistakes have come during interviews or speeches that took place outside debates, such as the Pakistan nuke words.
And I didn't even mention that you have no proof that
1) Obama's numbers have slippped after each of the debates, or
2) the reason for his decline has been the debates.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

27. 18 candidates, the only one who will skip debates is the one who suffers from them

Do you think that is a coincidence? Do you really believe he would be doing this if he rose in the polls after debates, or stayed stable? Do you think he is going to give up chances to speak to millions of voters in 50 states so he can talk to 400 people in New Hampshire? That is the official reason.

He can't completely quit debates. That would make him look horrible. He found a great out by hiding behind the current DNC sanctioned debates so he can skip new debates. Did you think he would cherry pick some of the DNC debates?

==And I didn't even mention that you have no proof that
1) Obama's numbers have slippped after each of the debates, o==

I have the proof. So does the Obama campaign. I posted it just yesterday. How about you present evidence showing that debates do not hurt Obama? Here you go http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/democratic_presidential_nomination-191.html#polls

I am not going to look through all of that again, calculate the averages and repost it but here is a prime example from the first debate. Since it was the first one it naturally had the most impact. Here are the five polls prior to that debate: Obama 32% (1st), 31%, 24%, 32% (T-1st), 20%. Here are the five polls right after the debate: 24%, 18%, 17%, 26% (lost lead, trails by 8), 23%. Many Obama supporters do not realize the decline Obama has suffered since the debates began (not completely because of the debates but they have been the chief reason) because they have forgotten that he once led in the Rassmussen and Gallup polls and was right on HRC's heels in other polls. He was not always 20 points behind her.

==2) the reason for his decline has been the debates.==

The reason for his sudden decline following a debate is logically the debate. Nothing else has happened to him right after a debate that I know of that was unrelated to a debate that could explain his sudden decline. If you can point to something, go ahead.

[antiimperialist]

28. Your argument crumbles if you read that he will participate in debates up to December 2007

1 month before the Iowa primaries.

Your premises are weak. If quitting debates now would make him look horrible, why not just participate in 2 more? Why 8 debates leading up to just before the crucial Iowa and New Hampshire primaries?
When a candidate declines in a poll, many factors are involved. There are news about Obama not related to debates every day. Obama has declined in polls in days that do not follow a debate. You have not shown a strong correlation between debates and declining numbers. You are being oversimplistic.

[antiimperialist]

29. And your title implies that only one candidate can suffer from a debate

Edwards' numbers have not exactly climbed since he's been participating in debates, which according to you are the only factor that moves poll numbers.

[Raine1988]

31. Youtube

He also demonstrated he can debate at the cnn youtube debates