Skip to main content

How Much Did You Loathe ABC's Debate Coverage?

UPDATE: Clinton-Obama Debate -- ABC Slammed for Focus on 'Trivial' Issues

Hmm, trivial issues when both candidates admit that they agree on 90-95% of issues... Doesn't character and the trivial issues that people are concerned with matter to everyone? If not why didn't Obama take the anti-Washington way of doing things, politic playing stance when it was against Hillary? Wouldn't that be a true revolutionary to support someone who during a debate recognizes when his opponent is being attacked by the vary means you wish to change and point them out and say it's not fair to go that route let's stick to the issues... But that never happened till it happened to him, so why now?

So there seems to be a lot of flack about ABC and how the moderators of the most recent debate were "out" for Obama and this puzzles me...

Many people feel that this latest debate was the worst debate ever and the only reason I hear as to why is because of the precedence that Obama has set saying it took almost 45 minutes to get to any issues that any Americans are really concerned about.

Can't one argue that, that is an elitist point of view? How does he know what ALL Americans want to hear about? Ok, if not elitist it sure is presumptuous, isn't it? No? Really? I'm confused because once the field of candidates was narrowed down to Obama and Clinton both sides said numerous times that when it comes to the issues they agree for the most part on about 90 - 95% of the issues.

So what he is saying is that on the 23rd debate we wanted 45 minutes more of  having both candidates compliment each other? Hmmm... Not sure I agree but I will concede that concept and move on.

Obama's mannerisms appeared as though (and noted threw many pun dents) that he was at times agitated or irritated. Doesn't anyone see this as a clue as to how he will respond (if nominated) during debates in the fall; (if elected) conversing with high level dignitaries that he's openly admited that he'd meet with at any time? Does he expect that in either of those situations the person he's going to be debating / speaking with is going to want the same agenda as he does and that will make everything peachy? My concern is (IF IF IF) he is nominated and elected that he'll be talking to people that aren't seeking the same agenda and he'll get irritated and agitated just has he demonstrated during the debate. Is that how we really want the leader of the free world to approach debates and conversations that have such a vast impact on the daily lives of Americans and others citizens of the world?

To make things worse the day after this "unfair" debate he decided to begin an outrage against the moderators for asking him tough questions. I can't help but wonder if Hillary Clinton was thinking to herself, "join the club." Yes she may have articulated disappointment with past debates but she never went out on an all out blame the media for a poor performance and used any of the networks as a scape goat for anything she may have said wrong or issues of her past. When you think of CNN's debate and how Wolf Blitzer tried to act out what seemed to be a personal vendetta against Hillary she didn't show up on TV the next day brushing her shoulder off implying that the media was nothing and not worth time or effort. Since Iowa there has been a pretty reasonable case to be made on how the media has favored Obama more then Clinton. So now what sort of precedence is being set in a case that he and/or his administration doesn't care for the line of questioning a network news anchor is asking of him and his administration? Will his press secretary be on the networks brushing off his shoulder saying the reporters questions are insignfigant because they don't like them? Will C-Span show coverage of him meeting with leaders of whatever cause or even speaking to congress and if someone objects he'll just brush his shoulder again? What if the day after the state of the Union Republicans blast his agenda will he just dismiss there concerns just as easily because he doesn't think they are relevant?

Is any of that presidential? Is any of that going to Unite the country any better then Hillary would even though she has her negatives?

Can anyone explain to me why the media has given this candidate a free pass on everything including calling out a war from his supporters in the "Obama - Nation" against ABC for there line of questioning? How far will this blindness go? Please someone tell me!!! One of my biggest fears is that he's headed towards a democratic version of George W Bush's early years post 9/11.

Originally posted to revolutionary24 on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 01:21 PM PDT.


Shouldn't the moderators be responsible for the questions and not the candidates?

77%14 votes
22%4 votes
0%0 votes

| 18 votes | Vote | Results

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  What is this ABC you speak of? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I've already blocked ABC out of my memory. I do not even get ABC anymore. I seletively blocked out me selectively blocking the channel. Actually what really happen is all my basic channels are blocked out. All that comes up now is One Moment please on digital cable. I do not know how it happen.

    When we are together it isn't me who matters, but the other person

    by AHiddenSaint on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 01:24:38 PM PDT

  •  It would be fun if (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    opinionated, sovery

    H ask the questions to O
    O ask the questions to H

    That would be interesting.

    Help defend Reverend Jeremiah Wright!

    by Fairy Tale on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 01:25:16 PM PDT

  •  Barack Obama now needs to (0+ / 0-)

    start telling the truth about how he plans to change America! That can only be done if three things happens: First, by having him on top of the democratic ticket. Second, by voting all democrats down ticket so that he can have the kind of congress to work with. And lastly, we need to get the Republicans out of office since they will fight with him on making changes; so that they can continue to lie and say that Reagan was the best president.

  •  Mood-swings, agitation, and lies: Hillary. (0+ / 0-)
  •  He had good reasone (0+ / 0-)

    Perception of Sen. Clinton's unfair treatment in debates is very much overstated.  Analysis of last 4, (all 1v1) debates below.  

    Barack Obama has received the overwhelming majority of scandal questions over the course of the four debates, by a margin of 17 to 4

    'A Time Comes When Silence Is Betrayal"

    by Engaged Voter on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 01:48:46 PM PDT

    •  last 4 debates (0+ / 0-)

      Well I suppose if you want to limit this to the last four debates that'd be a great point but the campaigning hasn't been going on for only the last 4 debates.

      Hillary has endured large scrutiny as a candidate from long ago and dealt / fought every step of the way which became abundently clear after Iowa.

      And thinking about it more ... you actually kind of made my point... if they line up so much on policies and over the last 4 debates he's been asked more scandal related questions don't you think it's only fair to spend sometime finding out about the candidates and there character flaws? That has been the biggest disadvantage Hillary has endured is everyone already know's hers and NO I'm not sayint they aren't relevant to issues. I am just saying if we don't know much about Obama shouldn't we spend sometime investigating the one's we now about as of now before we throw him into the highest office in all the land?

  •  Debate Analysis: ABC Asked Most Scandal Questions (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Huffington Post

    Debate Analysis: ABC Asked Most Scandal Questions, Obama Was Clear Target:    This debate over debates had me curious. Was ABC's debate really in a lowly class of its own? Or were Obama backers (inside the press and out) just being overly-sensitive? So I went through each of the four one-on-one contests between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, starting with CNN's debate way back on January 31..

    That said, I found the results of applying this method surprising. Here are the notable takeaways:

    1. ABC's debate was in a class of its own, with more scandal and non-policy questions than any other. ABC asked the most scandal questions, and both ABC and NBC devoted only half of their questions to policy issues. The CNN debates were dramatically more policy-focused. Here's a breakdown:

                   Policy   Non-Policy   Scandal  
    CNN (1/31)     31      3             1
    CNN (2/21)     23      5             2
    NBC              24     17             5
    ABC              32     14            13

    1. Barack Obama has received the overwhelming majority of scandal questions over the course of the four debates, by a margin of 17 to 4. Obama has fielded questions about his "bitter" remarks, his connections to 60s-era radical William Ayres, two questions about flag lapels, two questions about his alleged plagiarism of speeches, three questions on Louis Farrakhan, and eight about Jeremiah Wright.

    There is more.  

    Plus check out Bob Scheiffer's comment on the flag lapel pin nonsense.

    A politician looks forward only to the next election. A statesman looks forward to the next generation. THOMAS JEFFERSON

    by Wanda517 on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 01:56:19 PM PDT

    •  stuck on stupid (0+ / 0-)

      Okay I know that's a jerk way of starting off but my approach wasn't about the specific questions but how he approached the questions and how he treated the questioning ... Just because you don't like the questions doesn't give you a free pass from having to answer them ....

      That's the same BS that had worked for Bush and Iraq for so long... Disagree with the questions, denounce them, say what you will but answer them because they weren't thought up just to cause problems but stemed because somewhere in the country people wanted to know. Just maybe not you or I...

      If he can't maintain himself under questions he disagrees with how will he respond when debating other leaders around the world ... I'm pondering his character from the debate not the questions... can we look at it from that angle?

  •  Dude or dudette (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    willb48, sovery

    No past diaries, no past comments, no tip jar, no comments in this diary...Georgie Steph, is that you?

    Here is the point that somehow gets lost in all this.  This was the FIRST debate that was on a major network in prime time.  This was the FIRST chance a lot of voters had tuned in.  THEY wanted to hear about the economy and the war.  THEY didn't give a flying f#*@ about flag pins.  In fact, the ONLY people who give a flying f@*# about flag pins are Rethug pols and pundits because THAT style of politicking is all they know (if they actually had to run on policy, they'd never get elected).

    Obama never said the questions were unfair and he never criticized the moderators for asking him tough questions.  There is nothing "tough" about f*#@ing flag-pin questions.  Obama criticized the moderators for asking questions about things no one cares about, that have no relevance in determining how good a president a person will be.  We have a president right now who is very adept at managing flag pin questions, of massaging symbolism to mask lack of substance.  How's that workin' out for ya?

    There are plenty of tough questions they could have asked Senator Obama that would not have resulted in a peep of complaint from any quarter.  

    Furthermore, the "war" against ABC is being spun as outrage from the Obama camp, when it was, in fact, pretty well universal.  Check the press articles.  Forget that, check Ed Rendell's remarks.  Check Chelsea Clinton's.  Or is Chelsea a secret member of Obamanation?

    Because you very deliberately miss the point, I feel fully justified in saying
    Go Cheney yourself, troll.

    •  Personally, when it gets to one on one (0+ / 0-)

      I'd like to see informal one issue debates--sort of a MTP format where, for one hour, you talk about nothing but the war in Iraq.  The following week, you do the same for health care.  Then tax policy.  Etc.

      It'd be great for democracy.  But since it would be bad for ratings, it'll never happen.

      •  Thank you... (0+ / 0-)

        I actually couldn't agree with you more and personally I think that the media in general has done all candidates the greatest injustice because I think much the same way Barbara Walters profiles celeberties in primetime they should do the same thing for each candidate showing true unbiased facts about each person introducing them to not just there constiuants but all of America!

    •  go cheny myself? (0+ / 0-)

      wow I can't believe that people have gotten so out of hand in there views that they don't allow resonable debate ...

      There is no prior history to hear because I'm new to this site and don't know why you and someone else assume that I'm someone else...

      I'm an average joe who works two jobs and follows politics whenever I can but have to admit I thought people on here were more open to exchange of ideas and views as to where you and the 3 other people who gave you a plus seemed to show me that there's more wrong with things today then the race for the white house.

  •  Obama Exposed Corporate Media (0+ / 0-)

    Obama has simultaneously fought the Republican Party, The Clinton wing of the Democratic Party, The corporate media,a patridge in a pear tree and he is winning!

    The author wants us to focus on him being agitated?

  •  Yawnnnnnnzzzzzz (0+ / 0-)

    Please, make like a tree and leave. Or, better yet, make like a fly and buzz off.

    Do not have the time or energy to deal with you.


Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site