Political Punch
Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper

« Previous | Main | Next »

Clinton Scoffed at Debates in 2006, Loves Them Now

February 07, 2008 4:25 PM

Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, has challenged Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, to debate five more times before March 4 -- on ABC News, WJLA (the DC ABC affiliate) Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC.

"One of the things I've always appreciated about the Democratic Party is its willingness to engage the toughest issues facing our country, even if we don't always agree on how best to solve them," Clinton campaign manager Patti Solis Doyle wrote today to Obama campaign manager David Plouffe. "I was disappointed to see that Senator Obama rejected the idea of having more debates given the fact that he and Senators Clinton have had only a single one-on-one debate. I think we can do better and so does Hillary."

"I'm sure we will accept at least one," Obama said. "I don't think anybody's clamoring for more debates. We've had — what — 18 debates so far. We are still trying to sort through our schedule, because it's very important for me to spend time with voters."

Clinton had a different attitude during her 2006 Senate primary race, refusing to face off against anti-war primary challenger Jonathan Tasini.

Seeking what happened to war supporter Sen. Joe Lieberman after he lost his primary battle to Ned Lamont, Clinton was not about to share a stage with Tasini.

Asked if she would debate him, Clinton said, "I am campaigning. I've been campaigning hard around the state, having a great time, getting out, seeing a lot of people and we'll have to see how the campaign develops," reported Newsday.

She never agreed to debate him. They never actually ever answered the question about why they wouldn't debate -- the campaign kind of just laughed it off.

Then when it came time to face off against a Republican, former Yonkers Mayor John Spencer, Clinton would only agree to two debates -- one hour each.

They were held on a Friday night at 7 pm in Rochester and a Sunday morning in New York City, which, the AP reported "appeared designed to attract small television audiences. Spencer had sought a series of debates all across the state."

No longer in the catbird's seat as she faces off against Obama, Clinton is now acting as if she's a student of Lincoln-Douglas.

- jpt

UPDATE: And...of course Mr. Obama, back when he was an underdog, was once as debate-hungry as Clinton is now.

In a June 2004 letter to then-GOP challenger Jack Ryan, Obama said "To do these issues justice, we owe the people of Illinois more than glib TV ads and rehearsed sound-bites. We owe them a serious, thoughtful discussion about where we would lead as their United States Senator."

Asking for six debates, Obama held a press conference saying "lengthy debates are needed so that such 'mischaracterizations' of his positions are clear to voters...I want to create a format in which we can have an open, free-flowing debate. But we've sort of given in to this Kabuki dance that we call campaign debates that really aren't debates at all."

The Obama campaign points out that that request was before he and the GOP nominee had held any debates, whereas the Democrats have already had maybe 20 so far. The Clinton campaign counters there has only been one one-on-one debate.

February 7, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (70)

User Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

P Hill,

Check out Obama's 'not voting' votes and tell me he is going to stand up against big business.

He doesn't even have spine enough to vote on the subjects you know he will support after the election if President.

Please...it's just another Obama fairy tale.

Even Edwards was nailing Obama on the subject of having big business at the table on health care.

Spineless, hypocritical Obama is supposed to protect us from big business.....when he can't even protect himself from a vote! LOL

Posted by: Spineless Obama | Feb 7, 2008 7:02:33 PM

"McCain represents PRECISELY the opposite of why Obama (and even Clinton) are attracting such large crowds."

Yeah, duty, honor, integrity.

Nobama NoWay!

Posted by: John Romano | Feb 7, 2008 6:52:37 PM

Michelle Obama was on the board of a private label US food company (Treehouse) that makes 16.1% of its 2006 sales to Walmart. Hardly the same as being on the Board at Walmart, sitting idly by while they actively fight unions. Or taking vacations on private jets with the owner of sleazy telemarketing firm InfoUSA (I was personally harassed by one of their reps just last week!). Or selling her campaign donor list as well as the Clinton library donor list to Walter Karl, a subsidiary of aforementioned sleazy marketing firm. Hillary's gonna fight back against the corporate machine. Right. And I have a nice bridge for sale.

Posted by: P. Hill | Feb 7, 2008 6:52:31 PM

If Barack refuses to debate Hillary,
she'll be forced to debate Bill on
nationwide TV. They can argue which
end of their personal ideological dipole should be the real force in
a Democrat administration. If she
"wins" we will never know.....if HE
"wins" she'll cry.

Posted by: interferon | Feb 7, 2008 6:51:09 PM

Nobama Noway!

Go McCain!

Posted by: John Romano | Feb 7, 2008 6:50:28 PM

former granite stater - were you aware that Mc Cain refused to accept the early release offered him by his captors? Yup. He could have gone home FOUR YEARS earlier. But he didn't. He wouldn't leave his boys and refused to hand the enemy a propaganda victory. He endured FOUR ADDITIONAL YEARS of beatings and deprivation. I'll follow a leader like that. He understands, aspires to and mostly achieves the highest leadership ideals.

Posted by: Kevin | Feb 7, 2008 6:45:13 PM

You are obviously all Obama lovers. You have nothing good to say about Hillary so why don't you just shut it! I relish the chance to get to see another debate so that I can see Obama stutter and stammer. He's not so great when you take away his chance to orate. So he can give a good speech,big deal. I can give a good speech about hope and peace etc. I sure as heck am not qualified to be president and neither is he!

Posted by: lani bing | Feb 7, 2008 4:47:27 PM

Hillary CERTAINLY isn't qualified. She needs to come clean about so many things, there just is not enough time to do it.

My Dad is a pilot. Does that mean I am qualified to fly?

I am not a Mc Cain fan, but I think in a McCain/Obama match up, Obama will get his hat and his ass handed to him at the same time and he will never know what happened. Obama has loads of dirt that will come out in the first shake of the carpet....If McCain learned nothing else in the Hanoi Hilton, it is how to hold up himself and be ruthless against someone who is trying to defeat you.

Even Hillary would have to "Vince" McCain to assure a victory.

Posted by: Winston O'Boogie | Feb 7, 2008 6:38:44 PM

To Katherine, there is a difference on taking a stand and misleading the American voter. When we all watch the debates and listen to his stand on the Iraq War he intentionally leaves out the fact that he was not in a position to vote. Instead he misleads thousands of Americans into thinking Hillary voted "yes" and I VOTED "no"

Posted by: mona | Feb 7, 2008 6:38:41 PM

Muchas gracias, Cortez, for reminding us of the FACTS on the Clinton White House. You are very up on the specifics, as well - tho I recall most of what you have chronicled was in the major newspapers. This is what we will hear this fall w a Clinton nomination! It will be totally over for the Dems -- worse ever than Gore & Kerry. The Dems will lose the supposedly "unloseable" election. I'm also happy that you hearkened back to the drug use in the White House. I know SS agents who confirmed that at the time --- it's clear that the Clintons were aware (and possibly participants??) There was so much dirt swept under those heavy Oriental rugs. It will all be aired again by the non-McCain associated Republicans who will do everything in their power to prevent HRC from returning to 1600 Penn. Ave. They'll give Barack Obama a hard time, too - no doubt about it. But, he at least gave up drugs when he grew up, loves his wife, and attends church regularly. He's actually a regular guy, and a lot of people (including Clinton campaign principals) took money from Tony Rezko - if that's his worst sin, he will be a choirboy compared to HRC. McCain also has a pretty clean past, best we know of it. Thanks again for reminding the millions of Americans who have forgotten a short 10 years ago!!

Posted by: former Granite Stater | Feb 7, 2008 6:24:33 PM

Yes, nailed by old man McCain. You don't think a man scorched by the amnesty debate isn't going to be able to pick apart Obama's contradictions on that topic? LOL

You also forget he is a 'Maverick' candidate that democrats could see themselves voting for in past elections. He has made several attempts to work with Democrats since then.

He can also go after Obama and his ethics issues on his house, while poor folk froze, his 'not voting' votes, and the funding the war while being against it, isn't really being against the war, and neither is threatening Iran in debates.

And yeah, McCain is a lot more ruthless than you probably know, while Obama has a lot to exploit. You seem to forget McCain was swiftboated by Bush and then towed the party line just for this chance at the White House. A man who fought to leave other POW in Vietnam, to tow the party line back then, is still a ruthless man. Obama won't know what hit him if the Republican machine and McCain get ahold of him. And psst....have you noticed how quiet it has been for Obama from the Republicans? Not a good sign.... ;)

Posted by: The Dems have been nice to Obama | Feb 7, 2008 6:11:29 PM

Hillary loves how Democrats take on the toughest issue facing our country unfortunately the Democrat solution is always implement a socialism solution. Big government program followed by massive tax increases. Socialism is not what this country was founded on and Democrats are Socialists.

Posted by: kmpk | Feb 7, 2008 6:08:31 PM

Mona, if Iraq were a non issue, it would not have been raised as a question in the debates.

HRC could have made it a non issue by stating why she supported invasion, when a third of Americans viewed it as a mistake, and now does not.

There is nothing wrong with changing a position. There is something wrong with trying to play both sides to the middle by stating it by parsing words to create a position that never existed.

And to those who say Obama was not in the Senate at the time of the vote - that is correct. However, Obama took a public stand, which he did not have to do.

Posted by: Katherine | Feb 7, 2008 6:04:55 PM

Mona
Welcome to the life that we on the right face every day. Clinton got all the great press and the media covered for him. Bush has been getting beaten to death for doing many of the same things that Clinton did (warrantless wiretaps, military use without UN approval etc.) Hell, it was Clinton's EO that declared regime change in Iraq as our policy.

Anyway, now the Clintons are getting a feel for what it is like EVERY DAY to be on the right.

Posted by: Big Dog | Feb 7, 2008 5:57:12 PM

I would agree to a debate if she would agree to release some of those white house records about her experience she has been bragging about but never showing any proof and blaming her husband for not releasing them!

Posted by: frank | Feb 7, 2008 5:53:31 PM

Where do these politicians get all their millions, I wonder. Hilary wasn't a millionaire just a few years ago, I know that for sure.

Posted by: David | Feb 7, 2008 5:49:48 PM

With all due respect Obama isn't a breath of fresh air. He had to sue candidates off of the rolls to win.

His house and the Rezko's land next door reek of stench of 'politics as usual'.....and worse. He knew Rezko was being looked at, yet his first call when his family found their home is to Rezko. That means you are calling the $$$ man.

Most men have enough honor to buy their children's homes.

Obama doesn't.

He doesn't even have enough honor to say anything past....'we dotted all the 'i's and crossed all the 't's...'

Sorry, but I really see nothing that has changed in Illinois. Nothing.

Not even the influence peddling that bought his children their home or the poor who froze, changed. Thanks to Obama and Rezko.


Posted by: Family man who can't buy his own home | Feb 7, 2008 5:43:19 PM

NEWSLASH: Obama has debated Clinton 18 times. Sheesh.

Posted by: Kelly | Feb 7, 2008 5:35:08 PM

Obama's going to get nailed by old white McCain? What a joke.

McCain represents PRECISELY the opposite of why Obama (and even Clinton) are attracting such large crowds.

Posted by: Kelly | Feb 7, 2008 5:33:02 PM

The only policy issue that isn't clear for me - despite the question being asked at the last debate and about 5 times by Stephanopolous - is how Clinton plans to enforce her health mandate.

All you who want 5 more debates: I challenge you to name some other issue that isn't already crystal clear for both candidates.

Posted by: Debate This | Feb 7, 2008 5:32:57 PM

NObama doesn't want to debate because that's where his weaknesses are exposed. He has to keep up the image to the easliy fooled Obama zombies that he will give them something new and different in the White House. The truth is, he IS the establishment candidate and sold out on his democratic party by touting the republican ideals. A vote for him is a vote for more of the same. America, wake up...

Posted by: deja vu | Feb 7, 2008 5:30:57 PM

Post a comment





 

POLITICAL VIDEOS