« Here's How Fox News Covered Fred Thompson In Iowa | Main | The Debate: "Iowa Nice" »

Enough's Enough: Obama Will Limit Forum/Debate Participation

18 Aug 2007 10:52 am

Frustrated with the volume of interest group forums and non-party sponsored debates, Sen. Barack Obama's campaign manager has put his foot down: Obama won't attend any more debates that aren't sanctioned by the Democratic National Committee, and he won't accept any more invitations to speak at candidate forums.

In a memo the campaign will post on its website shortly, campaign manager David Plouffe writes that Obama has already spoken at 19 different candidate forums and has participated in seven full debates and is committed to attending a total of fifteen debates.

"Unfortunately, we simply cannot run the kind of campaign we want and need to, engaging with voters in the early states and February 5, if our schedule is dictated by dozens of forums and debates," Plouffe writes. "Ultimately, the one group left out of the current schedule is the voters and they are the ones who ask the toughest questions and most deserve to have those questions answered face to face."

Each forum requires the campaign to carve out hours of preparation time and yield its control over the schedule. Candidates refuse forum invitations at their peril, and Obama risks alienating some of his party's more potent interest groups, going forward.

In his memo, Plouffe acknowledges as much.

Many friends and terrific organizations are sponsoring or planning to sponsor debates and forums. So this is not an easy decision for us to execute. But it simply won’t work to navigate this one by one. We felt we needed to make our approach clear and consistent.

About Obama's decision today, there may well be some political charges lobbed by opponents, but it's true enough that Plouffe, Obama and Obama's chief stategist, David Axelrod, have been itching to announce this decision for a month or so. Plouffe makes sure to mention that Obama "was scored the clear winner by undecided voters in South Carolina and New Hampshire," a sentence that innoculates Obama from charges that he is afraid to debate or peforms poorly in them.

Plouffe's full memo is after the jump.

THE PLOUFFE MEMO

As we head into the fall, the campaign is entering a new more engaged phase that will give voters an even greater sense of Barack’s message of change and require the campaign to make decisions that balance the important role of debates and maximize time to run the kind of campaign we need to.

We have just been thru a period of three debates/forums in six days and the outlook for the future holds more of the same. And, because of likely calendar movement, once we get past Labor Day the Iowa caucuses are less than 120 days away.

So far, Barack has attended seven Democratic debates and nineteen candidate forums. There are five remaining sanctioned DNC debates, which we are committed to attend and two Iowa debates normally held in January, which are being held in December, which we are also committed to attend. We will also be attending the Univision debate in Florida on September 9. This means that by the end of this year, Obama will have participated in a total of 15 Democratic debates.

The debates have been important moments for our campaign, demonstrating clearly that Barack Obama is the candidate who will bring about the greatest change to our broken politics. Looking at the first sanctioned DNC debate in South Carolina, Obama was scored the clear winner by undecided voters in South Carolina and New Hampshire.

Unfortunately, we simply cannot run the kind of campaign we want and need to, engaging with voters in the early states and February 5, if our schedule is dictated by dozens of forums and debates. Ultimately, the one group left out of the current schedule is the voters and they are the ones who ask the toughest questions and most deserve to have those questions answered face to face.

Therefore, after this week, we will only be attending the five DNC debates through the sanctioning period of December 10, Univision, and the two Iowa debates previously mentioned. Candidate forums – where candidates appear sequentially will be considered, but we are unlikely to accept many of these. Instead, Barack will spend his time answering questions directly from voters in places like Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Nevada, and elsewhere. We simply cannot continue to hopscotch from forum to forum and run a campaign true to the bottom up movement for change that propelled Barack into this race.

After the sanctioning period, there will undoubtedly be a large number of debates scheduled in the early states and in February 5 states. We will make decisions on those as we get closer, but will clearly be doing a healthy number of debates after the sanctioning period.

Many friends and terrific organizations are sponsoring or planning to sponsor debates and forums. So this is not an easy decision for us to execute. But it simply won’t work to navigate this one by one. We felt we needed to make our approach clear and consistent.

I think this approach will be better for the voters and the campaign.

David

Share This

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/15856

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Enough's Enough: Obama Will Limit Forum/Debate Participation:

» Obama to Limit Debate/Candidate Forum Appearances from Election Geek: Currently Following the 2008 Presidential Elections
This one was tipped off by Marc Ambinder with a statement now appearing on Senator Obama’s campaign Web site from David Plouffe: We have just been thru a period of three debates/forums in six days and the outlook for the future holds more of the... [Read More]

Comments (147)

Its about time one of these candidates came to his or her senses about these millions of forum/debates. I'm guessing the others were waiting for someone to go first.

What a coward!

Good for you Obama, I agree

I see. So Obama is willing to consider forums where candidates appear sequentially, but not those where he is compared side by side with the experienced candidates.

OK. I think we can all figure that one out.

Clearly the Obama camp has realized that their candidate looks inexperienced compared to Biden and Clinton. Obama is a typical Hollywood production, good looks and glitz but vacuous of serious content.

And, releasing the memo on a Saturday afternoon. They surely weren't trying to slip this one through unnoticed, right?

So, he'll meet with Castro and Ahmandinejad, but Clinton is too much for him to handle?

National press corps members covering the California Democratic Convention told me that Obama was the only candidate who regularly refused to schedule press conferences at other places they've covered. Same was true at the convention in San Diego.

While in some ways I like Obama, I would be leery of supporting a candidate who is afraid to face the public and the media to answer off-the-cuff questions and to engage in debates with his opponents. This is a strong field of Democratic contenders and there are other good choices who have shown they can rise to the challenge instead of dodging appearances where hard questions may be asked.

Great. So let's nominate Hilary who every poll and pundit agree is intensely disliked by almost
half the country. Now there's a strategy to win
with! I'm fine with Obama, who is smart, and yes, attractive. We had 8 years of Reagan because he was so darn likeable. At least Obama
is a very intelligent man. In our country, being
liked and having people excited about you is the
path to the White House. Unless of course you are a war hero, in which case you get swiftboated.

This is the beginning of the end of Obama. The best he can hope for is to be Clinton's Vice-President. Hype can only take you so far and he has reached his limit. I guess the "kind of campaign" they are looking to wage is one in which Obama the candidate doesn't talk where cameras can catch his foot entering his mouth. Good luck with that! I'd say that Obama is not the only one out of his league but so is his campaign staff. Chicago-style politics might get you elected in Illinois but it won't translate well on the national scene. People in other parts of the country aren't as blindly loyal as the voters are in Illinois.

Afraid of debates? Give me a break, we have had more debates in the last month then all of the last election. Every debate asks the same questions, just trying a different format. How many more ways can you express your beliefs in 90 secs.

Besides, if you remember Clinton and Edwards were sayng the same thing a month or two ago. Once again it took Obama to show leadership and make a decision...

I wonder if "his schedule" would allow him to debate the Republican nominee?

Poor Obama, all these debates are just too much! :)

Plouffe is making a strategically necessary course correction here if he's to keep the candidate viable. Obama portrays an image of change in a moribund party system and he beefits from people having that image. The dilemma for him, however, is that the more he appears or speaks at public fora, the more this the image changes as people come to realize he's as light as a feather and wings a number of very sophomoric responses to serious questions. I hope this campaign does not destroy him or his ambitions and I believe that with a little seasoning, porhaps eight or nine years of it, he may be ready to get into the ring with the likes of Hillary or Mitt. Until then, all he can do is embarrass himself and Plouffe knows this all too well.

I've listened to alot of these debates that seem overly scripted. Obama, is a great debater but for someone who has experience is grassroots I think debates will not favor him. I agree these forums are a waste of time-he should concetrate on getting to reach the voters individually. I live in Wisconsin and we love Obama here.
Hillary might be very high in polls but stands to loose to the republicans later on-there's too much about hillary that conservatives are just itching to loose out..

There are too many clowns on stage and prevent a real debate from happening.

the nominee will be either Clinton, Edwards or Obama

can't someone tell the Elf, the angry man, the ancient senators and the groper/gaffer to leave so we can actually learn something from the debate

It would appear that the same blindly loyal type voters in Chicago exist throughout the nation; how else to explain Obama's attraction. I mean for real. Are we electing a life coach or a president? If I want to "feel good" I'll go to my doctor, priest of Disneyland! For God sakes wake up people! You are so easily manipulated.

Clinton knows she can't win, so her strategy
is to make the others 'lose.' This didn't
work well in grade school, but she obviouly
subscribes to the tactic still. No matter
how many dead people vote twice for her this
time, or how many of the 'constructed poor'
she panders to in effort to buy votes, she
can't cause mass amnesia in the rest of us.
Obama is the BEST, brightest, most appealing
candidate. And this comes from a middle-class,
white conservative woman, of a certain age.

Obama is from Chicago...right? And you have the nereve to talk about Clinton stealing elections? Wow! Earth to Patrice!

Barack, The magic negro - as christened by the la times- has my vote. hispanic guilt is rampant in our community. We call each other people of color to exclude the white dog - blue eyed devil? Well the last time I checked my crayola box white is a color too! We are as racist as they are - but couch it in code words
people of color
la raza - the race (to exclude others)
So I will vote for the magic negro - I can't vote for the gay ticket w/hillary!

Paul 2008

When the subject is Ron Paul, the comments (usually more interesting than the original article) are all about issues. When the subject is a Democratic candidate, the comments are all about the horse race and who can win.

"I can run the world better than you can" is not nearly as appealing a message as "I don't want to run the world".

As one of his Illinois constituents, Senator Obama doesn't like to appear at debates or press conferences he can't control. If you want a red carpet candidate who his suave, debonaire, and smooth, he is your man. However, if you want a candidate who has a command and knowledge of the issues he is not yet ready. He is still a novice as demonstrated by his two short years in the senate. His first year he spent promoting his books all over the country. His second year he spent running for president. His constituents in Illinois haven't seen or heard from him since he ran against a nothing candidate for the senate. I voted for him for our senator but I do not think he is ready for the presidency. Maybe in the future, but not yet. After two terms of George Bush I am not ready to hand the reins of this country to a novice. He needs to get more serious and become more dilligent in his job as a United States senator. The race for U.S. president is not a beauty pagent. Obama has the potential, but he needs to buckle down and do his homework.

It seems kind of early to say you are going to limit the number of debates. Primaries are right around the corner. Many average voters get their primary information from debates. Sounds like this should be handled by the DNC, not individual candidates!

Chaca, I live in Wisconsin and I don't love Obama, so save your comments on Wisconsin.

Obama is inexperienced and his debating shows it. Give him 15 years he may be worthwhile. I will take Newt Gingrich any time to be President.

While not a Democrat, I happen to agree with him on this. The seemingly endless run of debates by all sorts of special interest groups is not only tiring and dull, little in gained from them. The press just likes them because they're hoping for a "gotcha" moment.

One thing worth noting though, is how none of the Democratic candidates will appear in a FOX News debate (or even appear on their news programs), even though the Republican candidates are expected to show up on liberal CNN & MSNBC. What are the Democrats afraid of?

Bottom line is this guy is a sucker fish. He feeds on the scum the other politicians leave behind and somehow manages to turn it into something worse while dropping it out the other end. He is simply a trembling reactionary, willing to fake his way to the top yet too scared to do it by proving his mettle. Is there any better way to admit your getting crushed on the debate trail than refusing to debate each and every time you get a chance? The press release should have read: ... Refuses to debate as often as the others because of poor personal performance. His campaign manager feels that with more preparation between debates, he can possibly begin to compete with the more qualified candidates.

In other word's Obama can't handle the debates. He's making too many gaffes. Therefore, Obama will only read off the script put in front of him. Smart move!

After forcing some 40 candidates to campaign early because of his need to gain name identification BHO decides to withdraw from the constant embarassment of his idiotic answers to questions. The two minute roundly inflected pompous misdirection response to a simple "would you invite Barry Bonds to the Whitehouse" may be one of the all time greats and should certainly get into Bartletts Famous Quotations were he to be elected. The fact is he is polished, but stupid. He has a degree in International Relations, one step to the left of Black Studies and Femaleness as a Political Issue. They simply MUST restrict him to stump speeches until they can get him better trained. Right now, when the organ grinder stops the music he doesn't know what to do.

If you look at the debates. You will find out that the debates is set up to make Hillary look good and Obama to look bad. Just think about it. Everytime that they ask Obama a question that can go either way. They quickly ask Hillary to respond and she jumps all over Obama answer. The people that runs the debate has never ask Hillary a question that can go either way and have Obama to respond to her answer. If you don't believe me look at the last debates. The media is all for Hillary. This is a smart move by the Obama camp.

Bravo Senator Obama and Mr. Plouffe! This is just one of series of courageous stands the Senator has taken since he began his campaign on that cold day in Springfield, Illinois. Change the way politics is run? He's standing up and doing it. Again, Bravo to you, Senator, and to everyone on your campaign team.

This is something that should have happened a while ago. These Democratic candidates (not Repubs, who have had fewer than 1/3 of the Debates/Forums as Dems) have been through more D/Fs in the last 5 months than the last cycle did in the whole campaign. It's nuts. Ironically, they are actually GOOD for the front-runner (Clinton) because they keep the other candidates out of the field campaigning with those who will actually make the first votes. Normally the front-runner tries to limit the debates.

I'm sure the reason it's coming out today is because of the debate tomorrow morning - it would look reactionary on Monday. The non-Clinton candidates continue to go to every interest group cattle call at their peril.

Oh please.

Clinton is cleaning his clock in these debate formats because she has spent decades with her nose to the grindstone learning the issues. She's used her experience under the harsh glare of the national spotlight to learn how to think on her feet and master the art of giving a coherent answer in 60 seconds.

For example, when she hears "meeting with Castro", alarm bells about the Florida voters go off in her head...instinctively. When she hears a question about nukes, she knows, without having to think, that deterrence kept us out of a shooting war with the Russians for decades. It's called big league experience.

bucky, war hero? 4 months 3 self inflicted wounds?

Come on...we all know that the media are breathlessly awaiting Hillary's coronation. Some press folks have built up Obama as being above politics (good grief, he's running for office already!) and offering fresh ideas but mainly he's spouting more of the usual liberal tripe.

If he somehow manages hangs on Hillary & her army of private detectives & assasins will tear him up without losing a bit of sleep.

Good for you. My older son is an Ironworker in Las Vegas. He tells me his Union is encouraging their members to support you. My husband and our younger son have always voted Republican and will continue do to so. But I think this is a good decision, you should concentrate on your efforts on what you do best.
I personally think some of those debate questions are stupid. Good luck to you, your beautiful wife and girls. I won't vote for you but still wish you well.

I'm just curious as to whether Obama will get as raked through the coals for this "strategic move" as Edwards was last week when he moved campaign staff from NV to Iowa. Edwards' stratagem set off deathwatch notices throughout the chattering class, but it was motivated by the same desire Obama expresses here: to talk to actual voters in decisive early contests. We'll see if Obama gets a pass on stiffing not Nevada, but also all the Democratic interest groups. Wonder if Harry Reid or some equivalent Dem bigshot will fire off a "warning" for this, as he did for Edwards.


Obama has made a decision not to follow the pack. He knows he will be criticized, but his message is not as powerful when it is reduced to 30-second bytes (some candidates specialize in this unhelpful but apparently compelling exercise). It is a calculated move, a gutsy courageous decision, of which there are very few among any of the candidates of either party.

How many of the to-date showbiz debates have you watched?

Why is Marc Ambinder's blog the wingnut watering hole all of the sudden?

There used to be no one here but a few latte-sipping liberals and some crickets.

Now it's all mouth-breathing FOX NEWS types. In hoardes! With rightwing snark!

Who sent you? Did Drudge link here?

Maybe he needs the extra time to shut up his loud-mouthed wife. She is an idiot and that alone will cost him the nod.

Nancy R - "courageous stands"

cour·age (kûr'ĭj, kŭr'-)n.
The state or quality of mind or spirit that enables one to face danger, fear, or vicissitudes with self-possession, confidence, and resolution; bravery.

Seems to me he fits another definition - coward

cow·ard (kou'ərd)n.
One who shows ignoble fear in the face of danger or pain.

Danger is his poll numbers are dropping like a lead weight!

"Change the way politics is run" Hmmm..the name Rezko comes to mind.

People are already talking about debate fatigue. Obama' advisers are smart, and you can still count on seeing plenty of him.

i call him 1/2 black obama. how come nobody asks if he is white enough? oh yes being black is the only reason a 2 yr senator would even think about running for president. i have not decided who to support as it is way to early to even guess where we will be on nov. 7th.

Wow, the Obama haters are coming out of the woodwork I see. Stay classy, guys.

As an extreme left-wing Leninist with repugnance for our friends and love for our enemies, what more can he say. We don’t need to see him in any more debates.

Enough is enough; we should not base our votes this time on ads and 60 secs sound bites. If they say they are qualified to be president, they should have more town hall meeting and answers hard questions from ordinary voters.

What a luzr!

THis is a smart move. Why run around to a host of second tier forums/debates when all he needs to do is confront Hilary at the nationally televised biggies? Unless HC sees this as a way to trash Barack, I'm sure she'll join in soon.

http://political-buzz.com/

Nixon was savaged for being inaccessible in '72. Bush has been attacked for it as well. Why do some now applaud Obama for the same thing?

Nick Kasoff
The Thug Report

You Dems keep mentioning Edwards. As of today he is out. Read the details of his investment of 16 mil. in the Fortress Investment Group. For you unimformed, this is a company that forclosed on 34 New Orlean homeowners struggling to overcome Katrins's aftermath. "Yesterday the red-faced Democratic candidate vowed to remove from his portfolio any Fortress funds that have a stake in those lender units." So much for his sticking up for the POOR PEOPLE Stick a fork in him, he's done

This time we the voters should decide who will our president and not the main street media. If the candidates say they are qualified to be president and want our vote, they should come to us and answer our questions.

They should have more town hall meetings and we will be there with our questions.

This is fake reporting. This is propaganda smearing either by HRC party or republicans.

This is a smart move on his part. Even with all the preparation he says he puts into the debates, he still comes off as unprepared. He needs to spend these hours getting ready for prime time, if he can.

How do you guys expect him to keep on appearing in a debate that hillary will get booed and still be decleared ther winner ofthe debates?

For those who say he's a coward: his participation in the DLC sanctioned events disproves this. He will still debate in five more primary debates! If he were a coward, he wouldn't refuse, he'd pander to whoever sets up the debate.

This shows he is doing what he thinks is right, not pandering to every group that wants to hear him say what they want to hear.

Obama's memo does not say "no debates." It very clearly states he'll attend 7 more debates between now and the primaries. It says no more forums, which are a joke, and no more non-sanctioned debates (the sanctioned debates have rules about how much support you must have to be included, I believe). After the last debate, where Biden and Dodd ganged up on Obama with Clinton, this seems like a decent strategic move.

I love how people talk about a lack of experience with Obama -- Hillary has what, one term in the Senate and one she wants to cut short? Edwards, similarly has one term in the Senate. Barack's been in government far longer than either of them. He's painted as "inexperienced" because he's not a fossil.

And from all the commenters who spout that line, what exactly is your evidence of his "inexperience?" That Hillary's team attacks their closest competitor? That's awful insightful. Hillary at least doesn't need sockpuppets. She's got an army of uninformed armchair pundits to spout her press releases (almost verbatim) that she can just rely on that.

But hey, if you wanna push your candidate with 50%+ negative ratings in many polls, more power to you. I agree with many of her policy proposals; however, the best proposals in the world mean nothing if you can't win. Hillary would be a continuation of the last 16 years of polarization and nonsense in Washington--and most likely would not get elected. If you want Giuliani as President, vote for Clinton for the Democratic nod.

Thsi will give Osamma Bamma more time to bomb other nations..waht a joke

James Hare: I have in front of me a request for a donation from the Giuliani campaign folks and until I read your very cogent analysis, I was afraid to donate anything for fear of backing a loser. Obama has gone from a rock-star to a rock and is sinking quickly. He had no choice but to stop the bleeding. And you are correct, Hillary will move in like a shark knowing that there's blood in the water. The winner of this fiasco, as you rightfully state, will be Rudy. Personally, I think Mitt may slip by Rudy. A Mitt-Hillary campaign would have far less dirt tossed by and to either side but if you're correct and it's Rudy, then the rest of the campaign will look like a Michael Vick dogfight!

I think this is an intelligent move, for everyone. Candidates and voters alike. I hope more of the candidates follow suit.

I take the presidential elections very seriously and in past elections have watched every debate. But enough is enough, this is getting out of hand.

Our country is fighting a war. Soldiers and civilians are dying. Children in this country are going hungry. I, for one, will not miss hearing any more questions about whether Obama is black enough or Hillary is female enough or whether Barry Bonds will be invited to the White House.

The media should report the news, not try to tell people what to think or control the outcome of the election.

Maybe he has run out of things to say.

Now we'll see how many real voters give a crap about whether or not he'll invite Barry Bonds to the white house or whether he's black enough.

Great decision by the campaign! We've realized the we must take our campaign directly to the people. The debates that he has committed to are plenty enough for the media to try and destort the results.

Loser move by Obama. He's clearly afraid of going head to head against Hillary except in his chosen forums. That's because she cleans his clock every time they square off.

Thank goodness someone is finally taking a smart position. The debates are ridiculous. There is no time for thoughful responses and all it is about is making the best rehearsed remark. They do not serve the public well at all. it would be better if each debate focused on one issue, rather then jumping all over the board. Again, Obama has shown leadership and good judgement.

I think this was an excellent decision. You folks that think it has to do with inexperience and his ability to do well in debates are really not even listening to his responses. You rely on the so-called unbiased political pundits (who in reality are former Clinton advisors) who disregard follow up focus group comments on Barack being the clear winner or Hillary getting booed will continue to say she won the debate. For all of you who say he lacks experience to lead, just watch Hillary follow just like she follows him on everything else!

Obama is a coward? No, Obama is making more time for voters. He'll talk to real people instead of giving a 90 second summary of his views on something. What a foolish format. And this is how the most powerful person in the world is chosen?

As for the person talking about accessibility, Bush's people kept out anyone who was in any way critical of him in 04. So he never faced challenging questions. Obama is going out there to talk to voters and answer their questions directly. That way, if they don't like his answer, they can call him on it, and he has all the time he needs to explain himself. He's making himself the most accessible candidate in the race, actually.

Dear Mr. Ambinder,

Who can blame Obama for not wanting to participate in further debates?

After all, if people are going to keep quoting him, he'll never get elected.

Sincerely,
Jim Anderson

Steve: Let's accept what you say as for real and then, as they say on ESPN, let's do the math. To win, Barack needs about 55 million votes out of maybe 100 million cast. If, according to your theory, he opts to talk to voters one-on-one rather than through the media, and if he spends 2 minutes with each of the voters that vote for him, that would take him 110 million minutes, assuming he never takes a break for a snooze, snack, or whatever. Barack just turned 46 a couple of weeks ago. Assuming his strategy is what you hypothesize it is, and assuming he were to win as a result, he would be just a few months over 255 years of age. You're right, his opponents would not be able to say he's too young. Nonetheless, I think there's something very unusal about such a strategy but I just can't put my finger on it.

maybe obama can show up for his job every now and then. quit taking a salary not earned and cheating IL people who have only one senator.

try not showing up for work and ecpecting a paycheck. all the rest of the scoundrels too.

Again, the talk of HRC's experience - yes that experience and lack of judgement is getting our young men and women killed in Iraq - with no good way to get out. She voted for the war because it was popular and is now against the war because it is not popular. She is a bobble-head doll, whose head nods in the direction of the polls. Her "experience" is in manipulating the weak-minded public into believing her soundbites.

The debates are joke. With the media owned by the corporations that Clinton will help to make wealthier (just like Bush) there is no way that the debates have any real meaning or substance. Real-people focus groups and the booing crowd showing what they think of Hillary and the applause and cheers showing what the people think of Barack are treated as if they never happened.

Senator Obama puts himself in front of huge crowds, tells everyone about himself, and takes non-rehearsed questions. How is that not wanting to face people and answer tough questions. And unlike the bobble-head, he allows people who disagree with him in these get togethers and does not screen the questions like HRC.

Theresa: You're close to being right but need some help here. Let me see if I can help. I believe the public discounts how folks voted for the "war" back in 2002 or whenever. Based on the facts as they were back then, she was not alone in thinking what she voted for was the correct way to go. She won't be judged on this, at least not by thinking people. We all make mistakes in judgement. That's why there's divorce court! But, Hillary will be judged on her honesty and here she has a good deal to be judged on (can you say, Rose Law Firm Billing Records, White House Personnel Files, $100k Cattle Futures, etc.?) Hillary and the "Clinton Secret Police" (Google Terry Lenzner) have a dosier on Barack that will make him look like the reincarnation of Richard Nixon. It would never come at him directly but through surrogates in blogs and hired guns, aka reporters. Barack knows this and needs to take time off to try to find ways to counter what he sees as a game-ending attack by the Clinton Secret Police. Barack is a nice guy, but so's my former spouse. Neither should be president.

It is now clear that Obama does not want to keep showing the world of his naivety and inexperience in the field of serious politics.

Barry Bonds at the White House? I'd guess that depends on whether he was wearing boxers or briefs, eh?

Good Lord, how utterly stupid is the voting populace? We're talking about choosing the person that will become the single most powerful person on the face of the earth and these mental midgets are wasting time with Barney the Purple Dino preschool garbage.

The available handbasket America is swiftly being stuffed into isn't nearly big enough for the trip to hell we will be taking.

Mental midgets arguing about what pandering mental midgets they want to represent them.

America dseserves what it gets....

Don: Barney and the Purple Dino? Is this where YOU get your info? If so, YOU deserve (note the correct spelling of the word) what you get, which probably is not much!

I think Obama is making a mistake by not following suit of the other candidates. Without being at the same forums as the top tier front runners, he won't have a chance to respond to any attacks on his ideas or policies, only after the fact. He needs to shadow Hillary and Edwards at all the forums, as they seems to be his most vocal critics.

We will see how many debates the others go to WITHOUT him being there or how many additional ones that he does not go to take place. Should prove very interesting.


By the way nothing is stoping your guys( whoever you are supporting) from being there. If he is such a loser it shouldn't matter. The debates will go on.

This will be very interesting...to see who leads

Good For Obama! All these stupid interest group
forums (They are not debates) are pretty much a total waste of time. Most voters arent even paying attention to all this incredibly early campaign crap being forced down our throats incessantly by the major media outlets.
While I will not be voting for Obama, I applaud his taking the lead in stepping out of these utterly useless forums.

If the Democratic debates had produced anything of substance thus far, I would agree with Obama.

However, they've been run like game shows by their accomplices in the drive-by media producing pander festivals with 2 dimensional platitudes.

Obama, in his pandering, has fared the worse; his reason for quitting is to stop the bleeding. He does not want to be called out for his statements about our troops simply bombing civilians in Afghanistan to be thrown in his face by hillary.

I'm sure this has nothing to do with the fact that he keeps LOSING said debates.


Go Hillary!

SURE, the debates are poorly-moderated and they SHOULD be improved, but for most people this is the ONLY opportunity to hear your voice.

Since a grand majority of people will end up seeing less of you, it will look weak. INSTEAD, take an active role in improving the debates. Perhaps just put everyone in a room with cameras -- MTV's REAL WORLD-style. I can guarantee you it would get a great response, and we'd learn a lot more about the candidates.

But dipping out just looks weak.

This is a great move.OBAMA should have started out like this.By publicly stating his campain is about changing the way politics works,it makes common sense to change the way politicians are screened for the positions they aspire.The CORPORATE MEDIA is not about trying to insure the best candidate is nominated or elected,but rather that the designated candidate is propped up to insure more of the same ole-same ole.What is most distressing about this entire scenario is that so many AMERICAN citizens buy into this sham year after year.Why in the world would any intelligent person want this great country to go more than 20 years being led by,( BUSH -TO BUSH)-TO( BILL-TO HILL-ERY).The people that founded this country saw what this would lead to.Well,we are there,exactly where the FOUNDES did not wamt us to go.A country of the rich elite,by the rich elite and for the rich elite.Can anyone out there tell me why HILL-ERY wants to be THE PRESIDENT.With all of her so-called experience,why has she not gotten any of the things she talks about done yet.What this country needs is real change,HILL-ERY does not offer that.What she does offer is MORE OF THE SAME OLE- SAME OLE.Shame on the AMERICAN PEOPLE for buying into this foolishness.

Wow, these comment sections are destroying my faith in democracy, and maybe humanity. There are some folks here who really should step back and reexamine.

This is a Rorschach test, looking at the comments. Everyone's reading whatever they thought of Obama into this... The average joe on the ground won't care a bit.

All the Obama-Haters are out in full force today!!!

Obama will still be participating in EIGHT debates/forums before the end of the year...that's roughly a debate every TWO weeks from this point on. Senator Obama doesn't seem to be running from anyone!!

As for Hillary "capitalizing" on Obama's mistakes in debates, her two biggest criticisms of Obama's "Nuclear" answer and his "Meeting leaders without precondition" answer have both been rebuked by her OWN comments that she herself has given within the last two years. Whether his answers are the best course of action remain to be seen. But at least he hasn't been a textbook "Politician" like Hillary and "FLIP-FLOPPING" whenever the situation suits her.

I guess her campaign is banking on voters having very short-term memory and the media having a high turnover rate concerning recycling old videotapes and digital storage medium!!!

I'm not exactly sure who I'm voting for, but textbook "Politicians" definitely rub me the wrong way!!! If Hillary wants my vote, she better get real very quickly...cause right about now, I'm looking for Honesty and Character alot more than "Experience"!!

Bravo! Excellent! This a voter-focussed or people-focussed approach. In line with Obama's message. Voters ask the real questions. That's why CNN/YouTube was the best.

Those who criticize the decision are people who're quietly saying "damn, that was a smart move."

These debate only make the media look good. The viewrship is low. You will be astounded by data that suggests most people in key primariy states didn't watch previous debates. All they learnt about it was what the media told them the next morning.
IT"S IMPORTANT TO HEAR DIRECTLY FROM THE CANDIDATE!

Actually, Illinois like a lot of
senatorial representation states, does not have representation. Our Chicago style once again gave us nothing.

I'm not clear as to why people are attacking Obama for his decision. I mean...you can say you disagree with it, and even lay out an intelligent scenario why, but to attack him personally and call him a coward etc is beyond absurd. I wonder if some of you even read the actual article, because some of you are posting comments that seem to indicate Obama has pulled out of all debates.
He has 8 more debates to go before the end of the year, and he feels that 2 debates a month is quite ok. How does that translate to cowardice?

Another thing, the perception that Hillary has been winning the debates is put out there by the media. All the focus groups of undecided South Carolina voters agreed that Obama won the Youtube debate...hell...even the focus group on FOX NEWS agreed. The same thing applies to the AFL-CIO debate...Obama was seen as the clear winner by the focus group on CNN and CSPAN, yet the first thing out of Chris Matthews' mouth in the post-debate program was "Hillary was majectic!!", never mind that she got booed the most and Obama got the most cheers.

Funny enough...John Edwards today announced that as president his first move would be to engage directly with Iran's president...I wonder if Hillary will put out a statement calling Edwards "naive"....somehow I doubt it.

The man wants to debate less and talk to voters directly more...if you disagree and feel there should be more debates, then please say so but leave out the personal attacks.

Chima:"John Edwards today announced that as president his first move would be to engage directly with Iran's president...I wonder if Hillary will put out a statement calling Edwards "naive"....somehow I doubt it."

Great post, Chima.

Wait until the R's start working Obama's Nation of Islam ties.

Esp. Tony Rezko.

Do you know why Obama didn't suggest bombing Saudi Arabia?

Biden already had that territory staked out.

So Libby, if you "would be leery of supporting a candidate who is afraid to face the public and the media to answer off-the-cuff questions and to engage in debates with his opponents," why do you say this is a strong field of Democratic contenders? They won't even debate on Fox News.

The same people expressing the same objections, the same hatred, the same anger, the same bias everyday and on every blog.

It doesn't matter what you or the media say. Folks in the country who are going to vote for Obama don't need the debates to understand that he's the best candidate to unite our nation and end the partisan bitterness. If you disagree, ask Jim Webb, Caroline Guilianni, Mathew Dowd, John Martin, Steve Archipoll and a host of others.

Good move Obama!!!

Does anybody really care until february 08? Obama and Clinton and all the candidates need to stop these NON Debates(infomercials) until February 2008.
It looks like its all about $$$ plus they should only be broadcasted within a 5 state radius as long as it is in the Primary. Read a newspaper or read the internet and listen to talk radio. This is some joke.

Its my belief that Obama is just there to be a wingman for Hillary. Suck up all the votes that would go to the others and position her for a win.

In every debate Clinton looks worse and worse as who she really is and wha she is about becomes more obvious.

All this does is take heat of Hillary and allow her to just appear in scripted controlled environments.

A.B.H. - Anything But Hillary!

the jews' pet nigger....wouldnt america be best off without jews and blacks?.....let's talk about it

Everyone is overreacting about this. I may be wrong, but as far as I know, there arent very many non-DNC sponsored debates left before the primary elections. He's not really shying away from debating, as there are still 5 major debates that we WILL be seeing him at in the coming months. This is just a preemptive move against any other special interest groups who decide they want their own special forum. With the primary season starting so early, and with such an UNUSUALLY LARGE volume of debates so far, I can hardly blame him. If you go through the various debates so far, they all pretty much repeat the same fairly safe and expected questions at each one. Do we REALLY need to hear Obama's stance on the war for the 9th time?

The fact is, the debates should be extremely helpful in picking a candidate, but they aren't, and will never be until someone attempts some major reworking of the whole process.

Wake me up when the leading candidates for both parties haven't been picked 'for us' by the mainstrea