In an interesting turn of events, yesterday Hillary Clinton challenged Barack Obama to an old school debate. She challenged Obama to a Lincoln-Douglas debate without a moderator for 90 minutes. Her exact statement:
So here’s my proposal: I’m offering Senator Obama the chance to debate me one on one, no moderators. Just the two of us, going for 90 minutes, asking and answering questions.
A little background on the Lincoln-Douglas style of debate. It was basically a grueling and grinding series of direct Q & A between “Honest Abe” and Stephen Douglas to further their campaign for a U.S. Senate seat. Although Lincoln lost the election, the debates gave Lincoln enough exposure to win the Presidential Election three years later.
What makes Clinton’s challenge even more interesting is that Obama has already replied to the challenge stating “We’re not going to have debates between now and Indiana”. The next two primaries, in Indiana and North Carolina, will give the American people their Democratic nominee. Seeing what Obama is capable of, as a moving and captivating speaker, I am surprised to not see him taking this opportunity to further his campaign. Thus far, he has proven himself to be a composed and articulate candidate, reminding us of Bill Clinton. He has replied that he wants to spend more times going out and talking to the people, which is a nice reason, but ultimately I feel it’s an easy out for Obama to avoid confrontation. I would imagine that you would reach more people via televised debate. I personally think that Obama would crush Clinton, but perhaps he has the foresight to know that she would bait him into doing something stupid. However my respect for Clinton definitely improved a little bit (and I mean a little bit) by her latest proposal.
My proposal: They should hold the campaign on a wooden platform outside near Abe Lincoln’s old home.
7 Comments
I think Obama is smart to avoid the debate…
Hillary is sneaky as hell and seriously knows how to twist words to give the public the impression that she’s right. Not only that, but she seems to be of the mentality that if you can put someone on the defensive they will appear like they are losing the debate, even if what they are defending is actually the truth.
She’s so smart and manipulative its scary.
Lets not forget she’s married and gets coached by the guy who turned a sex scandal into a semantics debate over the actual definition of sex.
I agree that Hillary is “so smart and manipulative its scary”, but as far as Bill Clinton goes, he was a tremendous President for not only his oratory skills, but his diplomatic skills. Turning a sex scandal into a semantics debate on such a large stage is a skill that Obama most likely possesses.
I don’t know from what strange sources of information you two figure your statements. I don’t want a man in office who’s church gives Louis Farrakhan a lifetime achievement award for his so-called “commitment to truth, edjucation, and leadership.” Here is a glimpse of what Farrakhan believes to be “truth.” “Judaism is a gutter religion.” “Hitler was a very great man.” and finally “White people are potential humans, they haven’t evolved yet.” Should we honor a man with views like these? Well, Obama’s church does. Or the co-chairman of his campaign, Jesse Jackson Jr. who commented after the victory in Iowa “The natural reminder here is O.J.[Simpson], how does an African American candidate attack a white women?” Comparing the campaign to a racial murder?! People will vote blindly for Obama because they want “change.” People are stupid.
Hillary is desperate. She knows she has a very small chance and so know she is throwing hay makers. Obama has nothing to gain from this.
@ Nate
I’m sure you will tell us that you judge a man by the company he keeps but where do you draw the line. You seem like you are blaming him for a lot of things that others said or did. Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell (two Republican supporters) said this about September 11th “God may have allowed what the nation deserved because of moral decay and said Americans should have an attitude of repentance before God and asking for God’s protection.” He specifically listed the ACLU, abortionists, feminists, gays, and the People For the American way as sharing in the blame. Pat Robertson responded with agreement.
Maybe we should judge a man more on what he says and does. Just an idea.
Hey Nate I’m glad you were able to point out that you are not a person, since all people are stupid, and you obviously aren’t.
Besides that, who are you voting for?
Hillary is smart and manipulative, but that comes with the art of politics, especially the Presidency. I am not saying this is a good thing, but Obama needs to prove that he is more smart and more manipulative if he wants the office.
Bill Clinton bombed Iraq (1998) in the middle of his sex scandal with Monica, managed to get impeached, and still maintained a 70% approval rating. Such a major part of politics is about “manipulating” the public to say you are a good President.