- Daily Photo: Obama Jokes Around at G-20
- Blackwater gets replaced in Iraq
- Daily Photo: U.S. Marines Look Out for Taliban in Afghanistan
- Hillary Clinton the Tomboy and Her "Ah-Ha" Moment
- Obama Administration Sudan Envoy Headed to Region
- Daily Photo: Potential Flashpoint in Iraq
- Clinton Says New Afghanistan-Pakistan Plan Depends on Diplomacy
- Exclusive: Three Israeli Airstrikes Against Sudan
- Additional 4,000 Troops to Be Ordered to Afghanistan
- Daily Photo: Navy Submarine Trains in the Arctic
- Alarm Over North Korea Missile Prep
- Anti-Terror Stimulus? US Offers Rewards for Top Terrorists
- Daily Photo: Pakistani Women in Refugee Camp
- Condoleezza Rice Appears on "The Tonight Show"
- Diplomat and Aid Group Sound the Alarm on Darfur Camp Situation
- auto industry rescue
- Ballotwatch
- Biden, Joe
- Bush, George W.
- Clinton, Bill
- Clinton, Hillary
- Dodd, Chris
- Edwards, John
- Giuliani, Rudy
- Gravel, Mike
- Huckabee, Mike
- Hunter, Duncan
- Inauguration
- Iraq
- Kucinich, Dennis
- McCain, John
- Obama, Barack
- Palin, Sarah
- Paul, Ron
- Romney, Mitt
- Tancredo, Tom
- Thompson, Fred
- Veepstakes
- Vote 2008: Democrats
- Vote 2008: Republicans
- Washington
- White House
« Previous | Main | Next »
Obama Attempts to Brush Off Tough Debate
April 17, 2008 3:02 PM
ABC News' Sunlen Miller Reports: Senator Barack Obama, D-Ill., both literally and figuratively, tried to brush off a rough performance after Wednesday night's debate on ABC.
During a town hall in Raleigh, Obama said Democratic rival Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., "looked in her element" last night in Philadelphia.
"She was taking every opportunity to get a dig in there, that's her right to kind of twist the knife a little bit," Obama said before reiterating a point he made during the debate.
"That's how our politics has been taught to be played. That's the lesson that she learned when the republicans were doing that same thing to her back in the 1990s, so I understand it, and when you're running for the presidency then you've got to expect it."
Watch the video from the town hall meeting HERE.
Obama then paused, brushed both his shoulders, and then bent down and brushed off his knee amid thunderous applause from the audience.
"That's what you got to do," Obama laughed, "That is also precisely why I'm running for president to change that kind of politics."
The Illinois senator called the first half of the debate was "tit for tat silliness", and quickly added, "It took us 45 minutes before we even started talking about a single issue that matters to the American people . . . 45 minutes before we heard about healthcare, 45 minutes before we heard about Iraq, 45 minutes before we heard about jobs, 45 minutes before we heard about gas prices."
Obama said that the debate was a preview of how the Republicans will attack him if he were the nominee.
"That was the roll out of the Republicans campaign against me in November. It happened just a little early but that is what they will do. They will try to focus on all these issues that don't have anything to do with how you are paying you bills at the end of the month," Obama said.
Obama said he knows he will have to respond sharply and crisply to an attack like that, explaining he tried to "show some restraint" because he was debating a Democrat.
"Ill be honest with you –- it's a little harder to do with a fellow Democrat because you know I'm trying to you know be –- show some restraint. You know, I won't have this much restraint with the Republicans," he said before continuing, "If the Republicans come at me I will come right back at them."
Obama has not yet committed to a proposed April 27 debate in Raleigh –- while his opponent, Senator Clinton has.
"We've now had 21 (debates), and look, I mean the previous three, you know, we did very well, so it's not as if we don't know how to do these things."
Obama did say they are trying to work out time in the schedule for either a North Carolina or Indiana debate -- as both states hold primaries on May 6.
Addressing an overflow crowd before the event, Obama spoke about the importance of North Carolina, applying more pressure to Clinton in a state he's expected to fare well in.
"North Carolina is going to be critically important –- if we can win in North Carolina, I think we can wrap up this nomination," he said.
April 17, 2008 in Bush, George W., Hunter, Duncan, Kucinich, Dennis, Tancredo, Tom | Permalink | User Comments (976)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Last nights Debate was the worst.
It was so apparent that George and Gibson were extremely biased and continued to attack Obama. Why would that be allowed.
ABC news is a huge disappointment
Posted by: Tina S | Apr 17, 2008 3:26:53 PM
AS A LONG TIME POLITICAL ANALYST I CAN SAFELY SAY THAT it is quite clear that the media wants a protracted Democratic campaign, simply because this means more months of work and of not so news-worthy back and forth between the two Democratic rivals. It is clear from the shift in the media position that the only way to ensure this is by helping Hilary Clinton to win Pennsylvania. The notion of the Democratic contest being a dramatic cliff-hanger is a game of make-believe. The real question is why so many people are playing. The answer has more to do with media psychology than with practical politics. Journalists have become partners with the Clinton campaign in pretending that the contest is closer than it really is. Most coverage breathlessly portrays the race as a down-to-the-wire sprint between two well-matched candidates, one only slightly better situated than the other to win in August at the national convention in Denver. The media are also enamored of the almost mystical ability of the Clintons to work their way out of tight jams, as they have done for 16 years at the national level. That explains why some reporters are inclined to believe the Clinton campaign when it talks about how she’s going to win on the third ballot at the Democratic National Convention in August.
Posted by: maturity | Apr 17, 2008 3:27:10 PM
How many delegates Hillary got yesterday by attacking Obama? - Nothing. Did her rate of being the nominee overtake that of Obama? - Not at all. So what all that attacks were for?
Posted by: Peace | Apr 17, 2008 3:28:03 PM
He whines to much for my liking...for cripes sakes, this is the big leagues and he is vying for the Presidency of the US..if this is the best he can do with his answers from someone within his own party, and should he get the nomination for our party, then God help us, we are in deep trouble.
He is not ready for prime time and no matter how you cut it, that isn't going to change. So, pick yourself up, brush yourself off and maybe in another (8) years, you MIGHT be ready for prime time.
A freshman in college on a debating team could have done better...Sorry Barack, you got a D l
Posted by: Mechan8 | Apr 17, 2008 3:28:13 PM
You guys are ridicolous. You do realize that Clinton bawled her eyes out in New Hampshire, to end up winning that primary? Dont deny it, she won by 2 points, when down prior. But once she launced the waterworks, the votes came.
You guys got lucky. We could of had a muckfest, and Obama could of hit on Penn, Columbia, the "screw-em" remarks, 100 million dollars, the false Nafta story, your connection with certain Chinese groups, connection with certain members of Chinese military, etc.
But we have the lead, and you lose points whenever you go negative....So thanks for that.
Posted by: Rob | Apr 17, 2008 3:28:25 PM
Juvenile debate, pompous Charlie, comical Georgie, made for a rediculous facade of a debate. ABC should be ashamed of what their station portrayed as a debate which could affect the future of this country.
Question: How much was paid to Georgie? He should be fired. Free TV? If this is an example of free TV debates, going to Comedy Central would be preferred. Sticking with Cable is the route I will chose to get my political fix.
Shame on ABC, Charlie and Georgie.
Posted by: elliott | Apr 17, 2008 3:28:49 PM
I watch, admire, and enjoy Charles Gibson every night, making ABC news my network of choice at 6:30. So what happened that he wasted almost an hour on rehashd triva? And what was the relevance of showing Chelsea Clinton seven times during the overtime evening? This was the worst conducted primary date of all 19 I have watched.
Posted by: Ed Reilly | Apr 17, 2008 3:28:57 PM
I love this: "Obama tried to brush off a rough performance after Wednesday night's debate on ABC." Nice attempt to take attention off what the rest of the U.S. is saying: That was the worst moderated debate in history. The performance issue wasn't with Hillary or Barack, it was with ABC. If you are going to ask "controversial" questions, at least spread them out. Obama answered five of such rehashed questions, Hillary got one. Nothing about Penn, or Columbia Trade agreements, or her attacks against Obama. Then a bunch of talk about capital gains taxes, just so Charlie and George could ensure his millions stays protected next year. Nice Republican station ABC is. And listen: Nobody other than Republicans gives a crap about Wright or Rezko or Ayers. Obama's answers are more than satisfactory on it. We've been hearing them for months. Let's talk about Iraq, the economy, and health care. Or is that a conversation the Republicans/ABC don't want to have?
Posted by: workmonkey | Apr 17, 2008 3:29:03 PM
Bishop - Senator Obama did not have to admit that he told a lie, either. Unfortunately, Senator Clinton had to stand up and say, regarding her remarks about Bosnia, that she said something that she "knew not to be true." Yikes -I'd hate to be in the position of having to defend a candidate who admitted to lying. Oh wait - her last name is Clinton. Looked up in the dictionary, the defenition is "liar".
Posted by: babs101 | Apr 17, 2008 3:29:07 PM
Obama's recent elitist comments are fair game in a debate--especially when they came from a man who's stock-in-trade is his effective speaking abilities. Brushing off his past comments spoken at a time and place when he thought they wouldn't be repeated back in PA, won't help him win in Pennsylvania or nationally.
Posted by: Tom B | Apr 17, 2008 3:29:12 PM
I want to commend ABC News on the excellent debate last night. This is one of the best to date because tough questions were asked. These were questions I think that the public wanted to be asked so we can learn more about the candidates.
Posted by: janette | Apr 17, 2008 3:29:59 PM
"Journalists" Gibson and Stephanopoulos have falled below Geraldo Rivera to about the same level as Perez Hilton. But since ratings are up, I'm sure neither one cares.
Posted by: alberto | Apr 17, 2008 3:30:01 PM
ABC should hang its head low for this one. I thought I was watching Fox News! Disgusting BS. I wish Peter Jennings were still alive, he was a class act!
Posted by: MATTHEW | Apr 17, 2008 3:30:05 PM
Sandy
Bet you make that judgment based on Obama's inability to retain his composure. Now be honest, exactly what questions were more pointed for Obama than for Clinton. Or, isn't Obama just not used to explain his questionable background. When an eloquent speaker stammers and stutters, it's because he's embarrassed to participate in the discussion.
Posted by: Aston | Apr 17, 2008 3:30:53 PM
Stephanopoulos and Gibson ought to be ashamed at the inane level of their questions. So often it is the press that lowers the level of public debate. Our democracy will not long be sustainable with this behavior of our press which has a public duty to enlighten so that democracy can thrive.
Posted by: Harold Goldstein | Apr 17, 2008 3:30:56 PM
Shame on you ABC. That was not a debate. It was an ambush!!How come questions weren't asked about Nafta and
Hilary's advisor's role in the CC Columbian trade deal? I thought I was watching Fox News!!!
Posted by: hilma | Apr 17, 2008 3:31:01 PM
Hillary's past will continue to be thrown in her face for years to come, no matter what she has done, she has been called out for things that happened years before she ever became the first lady, and Obama cries when he is asked tough questons? Neither one in my book is fit to run this country, they are both liars as far as I am concerned, and McCain is not a much better choice. The debate last night did nothing for me as far as having to pick a suitable President.
Posted by: tiredofpolitics | Apr 17, 2008 3:31:28 PM
the first thing I did after watching the debate was cancel abc nightly news on my tivo.
Who lit chelsea clinton and directed the camera to cut to her all night? Someone preparing for a dynasty? And apart from the rehash of old controversies Obama has proven he's past, the barbed questions thrown only at him- one after the other, without letting him answer-- and the softball lobbed "You told a story about bosnia-- how can I get your vote back??" please!! I have never seen such biased MSM coverage in my life. And such disrespect towards a candidate. She had less time because they were on the attack, and doing her campaign's work, as well as McCain's and Karl Rove's, I hope the American public prove more intelligent than their so-called journalists on ABC. I think they will, and show out of touch the Clinton's and their surrogates on ABC via Fox news were last night. I have never been more demoralized in my life.
Posted by: lynda obst | Apr 17, 2008 3:31:41 PM
WORST DEBATE EVER. SHAME ON ABC.
Posted by: ADAM | Apr 17, 2008 3:31:49 PM
I can't believe that a major news organization delivered what they did to the American people last night and we are not outraged? How did a lapel pin question and answer going to help me when I have to take my son to the Doctor next week without insurance? I am so sick of all this petty garbage when people like me get up everyday and cringe at the difficult times we are experiencing. My issues are REAL, what we saw last night was soap opera drama.
Posted by: nerakami | Apr 17, 2008 3:31:55 PM
Post a comment



