Should Obama debate his Democratic primary opponent in New Hampshire?

[Cali_Democrat]

As you may know, Darcy Richardson has challenged Obama in the New Hampshire Democratic primary.

I think it would be interesting to see Obama defend some of policies in a Democratic debate...very interesting indeed. I think a debate would be in the best interests of the Democratic voters. It would be a win for the American people IMO.

What say you?

[MannyGoldstein]

1. Candidate Obama should debate President Obama

That would be epic.

[teddy51]

4. Great Point. I don't want to see President Obama for another term, I want

to see Candidate Obama... (As in "CHANGE YOU CAN REALLY BELIEVE").

[creon]

25. who told you

who told you that 'change' is easy?
It, most certainly, is not. never has been, never will be.

[frylock]

7. seen it on TDL..

it ain't pretty. CO mops the floor with PO.

[MannyGoldstein]

8. Isn't that impossible?

I'm regularly reminded that Obama is doing precisely what he said as a candidate - we just weren't listening.

[Cali_Democrat]

12. Candidate Obama FOR THE WIN

easily.

[jefferson_dem]

2. If Richardson is able to demonstrate he is electorally viable (i.e. plausibly able to win something

other than the desperate hearts of 2-3 DU posters), then we'll talk. As of now, he's nothing more than a joke, if that.

[Number23]

5. Agreed. And we've all seen that getting the love of 2-3 DU posters is not that hard

It's getting the votes of the rest of America that's proven difficult for so many that are the darlings of DU.

The OP asks the sort of question that makes it hard to take people seriously around here.

[Cali_Democrat]

14. Why do you think he's nothing more than a joke already? Isn't that a bit harsh?

This man has a lot of good ideas.

Darcy in his own words:

http://www.battlegroundblog.com/2011/10/26/darcy-richardson-why-im-running-for-president/

[jefferson_dem]

27. Cause he is. Nope.

:hi:

[frazzled]

3. There are 14 Democratic candidates in NH

And by the way, that's the lowest number of Dem candidates there since 1980.

There will be 30 Republican candidates on the ballot there.

No, the president does not need to debate any of these 13 local yokels. The only debates that should take place are between nationally viable candidates, and those who are gleaning at least 15% support in pre-primary polls. In other words, with regard to this question, the response should be: you gotta be kidding.

For confirmation of NH candidate numbers: http://www.ballot-access.org/2011/10/29/new-hampshire-republican-presidential-primary-will-list-30-candidates/

[Number23]

6. "with regard to this question, the response should be: you gotta be kidding."

:thumbsup:

[MjolnirTime]

9. Obama is the Nominee. There is no debating that.

[Tx4obama]

10. President Obama is the ONLY nationally declared democratic candidate, so far

List is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_us_presidential_election#Democratic_Party

[pnwmom]

11. It wouldn't do him anything but harm in terms of the general election,

so I vote NO, absolutely not.

[krawhitham]

13. I would rather have him doing something productive

[demosincebirth]

15. and who would that be?

[Bobbie Jo]

16. WTF is Darcy Richardson?

:rofl:

For the record, I voted no because you didn't have a "WTF is Darcy Richardson" option.

[Tarheel_Dem]

17. I think they should completely ignore his ass, as I fully intend to do.

;)

[Hart2008]

33. Only you have not! NT

[ProSense]

18. .

:rofl:

[CakeGrrl]

19. WHO? No. -nt

[great white snark]

20. Oh my.

:rofl:

[paulk]

21. Obama will completely ignore this opponent

much like he has completely ignored the progressive left during his term.

the progressive left and mr. richardson are not his constituency or, increasingly, the constituency of the Democratic Party.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Tx4obama]

37. There is NO democrat other than Obama that has declared nationally.

As of now Obama has NO opponent that is going up against him on a national level.

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[creon]

24. no

This person is merely a vanity candidate.

[Tarheel_Dem]

26. And a "Financial Services" Consultant. This is who OWS has been waiting for?

:rofl:

[Robb]

30. Annuities specialist for Merrill Lynch. What a peach.

He'll have to explain how much money he gave to 3rd party candidates over the years, too.

[Hart2008]

Self delete-dupe.

[Hart2008]

31. Better than derivatives specialist for Goldman-Sachs, and uh Uncle Sam bail me out! NT

[Tarheel_Dem]

36. Let's hope "progressives" get the nuances. These days, all anyone needs to hear is "financial".

Good luck with that! Explain away! :rofl:

[SidDithers]

28. I think Darcy Richardson, Lee Mercer Jr, and Randall Terry should debate each other...

:rofl:

Sid

[Hart2008]

29. Instead of modeling his economic policy agenda after Herbert Hoover, Pres Obama..should (follow) FDR

"Instead of modeling his economic policy agenda after Herbert Hoover, President Obama and his advisers should have instead studied FDR and the New Deal."
http://www.battlegroundblog.com/2011/10/26/darcy-richardson-why-im-running-for-president/

If he keeps talking like this, Obama may have to engage him.

:kick:

[apocalypsehow]

32. "I think a debate would be in the best interests of Democratic voters" - Nope: it would be in the

best interests of the GOP, and that tiny minority of disaffected Democrats who dislike President Obama because he does not spend every waking hour of every single day working solely on their one issue.

[SidDithers]

34. Darcy Richardson and 12 others filed papers and paid the $1000...

to run in the New Hampshire Democratic primary.

Darcy Richardson is no less of a fringe candidate than the other 12. Tim Kaine was right, the only primary challengers to Obama will come from the fringe. No Democratic challenger of note, with any national name recognition at all, stepped up to the plate.

Sid

[Douglas Carpenter]

35. I really don't think anyone can actually claim that Obama has any primary opponents

Darcy Richardson is no more a challenger to President Obama than I am or anyone else on this forum. To suggest that he is in any meaningful sense of the term a challenger to the President is ludicrous to the point of comical and comical to the point that it invites ridicule. This is not even remotely comparable to the situation of Eugene McCarthy in 1968 who was after all a sitting U.S. Senator of respectable stature and was urged to run by a whole group of figures as well as a rapidly growing political movement outraged over LBJ's escalation of the Vietnam War.

One can no more expect President Obama to debate Mr. Richardson than one can expect the general election debates to include the the Communist Party candidate, the Constitutional Party candidate, the Workers World Party candidate and the Libertarian Party candidate.
In virtually every primary and general election that has reasonably liberal ballot requirements - there will be any number of obscure figures like Mr. Richardson. Some of them may very well be noble people with good intentions who raise valid points. But they are not in any meaningful sense of the term contenders for the Presidency except in the land of fantasy and make believe.

I am not an Obama apologist. I do not think he has done his best to advance a progressive agenda. I do believe he is a center-right. third-way Democrat. This is not what I would prefer to be leading the Democratic Party and the country. But the fact is - he will be the Democratic nominee. He will not have any real opponents for the nomination. And the only other political force capable of mounting a credible Presidential campaign and winning the White House is a force well to the right of George W. Bush. If President Obama is not reelected in November 2012 - it will be for one reason and one reason only - the election of a Fox News, Rush Limbaugh approved radical right-wing Republican who will most likely appoint at least three of the next Supreme Court justices who will tip the U.S. Supreme court to the extreme far-right for at least the next thirty or forty years to come.

[Lil Missy]

38. No, because that would be stupid.

[Lil Missy]

39. " I think a debate would be in the best interests of the Democratic voters"

Bullshit. It's only in the best interests of those who love a circus show.

[CakeGrrl]

40. Exactly.

It shouldn't be about putting Obama on the hot seat, which is what I think some want more than anything. It should be about what Richardson intends to do to succeed where some think the President has not. What will he offer to convince people that he's going to fight for them, since there's no record or anything comparable to having to deal with the U.S. Congress?

In the meantime, the reality is that this person whom no one has heard of outside the state of FL will not mount the grassroots support to have an impact, and it will serve as a distraction and erode unity against the GOP.

Once again: Where are the Dems with more name recognition? Why aren't they challenging (other than Nader's lame-ass excuse for having the filing deadline moved)?

[struggle4progress]

41. Darcy came in third in the 1988 Pennsylvania Senate race! He beat Libertarians' Haller 2:1,

Populists' Cross 4:1, and New Alliances' Blancato 5:1 in that race!

I guess it's also true the Democrats' Vignola beat Richardson 55:1 in that race, and the Republicans' Heinz beat him 115:1 -- but that was decades ago, and I expect Richardson's got more political experience today!

[Hart2008]

42. A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far, away. NT

[SidDithers]

43. Save us Darcy Richardson, you're our only hope...nt

Sid

[struggle4progress]

45. And today -- he's still in a galaxy far far away!

[Tarheel_Dem]

48. !

:spray:

[mkultra]

44. no way.

He is way ahead of the pukes at this point. Debates are tearing affairs, not civil discourse and debate. If they were actually going to sit around and talk reasonably about issues, then it would be valuable. That is never how debates go.

[Bluenorthwest]

46. What about the other dozen or so on the ballot? Richardson is

just one of them. The Republicans have about 50 people running. Odd question, singling out one from a group of candidates none of whom have a national base at this time.
But debates are a waste of time, in the last Primary, Obama said many things in debates he later tossed aside, including the hot debate issue of personal mandates, oh Hillary was a bad person for supporting those mandates, Obama said trying to fix health care by mandating purchase was like trying to solve homelessness by passing a law that everybody had to buy a house. It was a cute verbal ploy, but without meaning, as he took up support for mandates the moment the need to 'debate' had passed. So a debate that is dishonest and composed of talking points that sound good rather than actual principles being discussed is a worthless thing no matter who is participating.

[WI_DEM]

47. Richardson isn't a serious candidate, so no he shouldn't.

[Renew Deal]

49. Who is Darcy Richardson and why should I care?

[fishwax]

50. no

Darcy Richardson isn't a viable candidate, as even he acknowledges.