The Debate: A Shameful Night for the U.S. Media

In perhaps the most embarrassing performance by the media in a major presidential debate in years, ABC News hosts Charles Gibson and George Stephanopolous focused mainly on trivial issues as Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama faced off in Philadelphia. They, and their network, should hang their collective heads in shame.

Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the health care and mortgage crises, the overall state of the economy and dozens of other pressing issues had to wait for their few moments in the sun as Obama was pressed to explain his recent “bitter” gaffe and relationship with Rev. Wright (seemingly a dead issue) and not wearing a flag pin — while Clinton had to answer again for her Bosnia trip exaggerations.

Then it was back to Obama to defend his slim association with a former ’60s radical — a question that came out of rightwing talk radio and Sean Hannity on TV, but was delivered by former Bill Clinton aide Stephanopolous. This approach led to a claim that Clinton’s husband pardoned two other ’60s radicals. And so on. The travesty continued.

More time was spent on all of this than segments on getting out of Iraq and keeping people from losing their homes and — you name it. Gibson only got excited complaining that someone might raise his capital gains tax. Yet neither candidate had the courage to ask the moderators to turn to those far more important issues. Talking heads on other networks followed up by not pressing that point either. The crowd booed Gibson near the end. Why didn’t every other responsible journalist on TV?

To top it off, here is David Brooks’ review at The New York Times: “I thought the questions were excellent.” He gives ABC an “A.” Of course, “A” can stand for many things.
*
Greg Mitchell is author of the new book, So Wrong for So Long: How the Press, the Pundits — and the President — Failed on Iraq. It has been hailed by Bill Moyers, Glenn Greenwald, Arianna and others and features a preface by Bruce Springsteen. He is editor of Editor & Publisher. Email: gmitchell@editorandpublisher.com.

Pennsylvania Debate Recap

ABC live-blogged their debate here.

The Campaigns React: From Obama:

“Tonight we saw a real choice between the old politics of point-scoring and distraction and a politics that focuses on bringing us together to actually solve the challenges we talk about every single election. Continuing the theme of her campaign, Senator Clinton used every single opportunity she had to launch misleading attack after misleading attack against Barack Obama, which is why polls show that most Americans think she’s running the most negative campaign and don’t believe she’s trustworthy. Barack Obama spoke about the issues that actually matter in people’s lives, like how he plans to end the war in Iraq, cut middle-class taxes, help people stay in their homes, and provide a secure retirement for our seniors. That’s why more Americans are putting their trust in Barack Obama to bring about the change we need in Washington,” said Obama campaign manager David Plouffe.

The Gotcha Debate: Sam Boyd at Tapped is angry about tonight’s questions:

Seriously “does rev. wright love america as much as you?” Really? REALLY?!!!

Also, “what will you do when clips” of Wright “play over an over” on TV? […]

A woman asks if Obama “believes in the American flag” because he doesn’t wear a flag pin.

Charlie Gibson says that questions about the flag are “all over the internet” — along with Pamela Anderson’s sex tape, cats with bad grammar, and Rick Astley. Journalism at it’s finest. […]

And now, we’re on to William Ayers. Gaaah. Obama says Ayer’s is someone Obama knows… says he’s also friendly with Tom Coburn who wants to give the death penalty to people who perform abortions. Attacks the whole idea of guilt by association, says “the American people are smarter than that.” […]

The debate is 46 minutes in, and nothing remotely meaningful has been discussed.

Ben Smith notes it took 63 minutes to get to the first issue question, on the economy.

Marc Ambinder summarizes:

Obama is receiving unprecedented political and associational scrutiny here from ABC. Has he gotten a pass for the first 21 debates? Or is ABC going to precipitate a backlash? I’m getting lots of e-mail feedback from usually temperate Obama supporters, like: “This is the craziest thing i have ever seen. Did they take money from the Clinton campaign?” On the other hand, I can envision Clinton supporters saying to themselves, “Yeah, baby, now you know what it feels like.”

+++

Candidates Asked: Can Your Opponent Beat McCain? At tonight’s debate in Philadelphia, Senators Clinton and Obama were asked whether or not they thought their opponent was capable of beating John McCain. Senator Clinton responded by saying, “I think we have to beat John McCain,” which eventually prompted George Stephanopoulos to insist on a more direct answer, which she proferred, fairly offering, “Now, I think I can do a better job. I mean, obviously, that’s why I’m here.”

Obama, faced with the same question, answered directly, “Absolutely. and I’ve said so before,” but then very sharply went on the attack about being labelled an elitist. It was the first significant escalation between the two candidates. Up until that point, Senator Clinton had pressed her case in very diplomatic and conciliatory tones. Obama seemed to have been prepped to expect more aggressive attacks from Clinton.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Let me pick up on that. When these comments from Senator Obama broke on Friday, Senator McCain’s campaign said it would be a killer issue in November. Senator Clinton, when Bill Richardson called you, to say he was endorsing Barack Obama, you told him that Senator Obama can’t win. I’m not going to ask you about that conversation. I know you don’t want to talk about it. But a simple yes or no question. Do you think Senator Obama can beat John McCain or not?

CLINTON: I think we have to beat John McCain. And I have every reason do believe we’re going to have a democratic president. And it’s going to be either Barack or me. And we’re going to make that happen. And what is important is that we understand exactly the challenges facing us in order to defeat Senator McCain. He will be a formidable candidate. There isn’t any doubt about that. He has a great American story to tell. He is a man who has served our country with distinction over many years. But he has the wrong ideas about America. And those ideas will be tested in the caldron of this campaign. But I also know, having now gone through 16 years of being on the receiving end of what the Republican party dishes out, how important it is that we try to go after every, single vote, everywhere we possibly can to get to those electoral votes that we’re going to need to have the next President elected.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But the question is, do you think Senator Obama can do that? Can he win?

CLINTON: Yes, yes, yes. Now, I think I can do a better job. I mean, obviously, that’s why I’m here. I think I am better able and better prepared, in large mess measure, because of what i’ve been through, and the work that i’ve done. And the results I’ve produced for people.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Senator Obama, do you think Senator Clinton can win?

OBAMA: Absolutely. and I’ve said so before. but I, too, think I’m the better candidate. And I don’t think that surprises anybody. Let me pick up on a couple of things that Senator Clinton said, though. during the course of the last few days, you know, she’s said I’m elitist, out of touch, condescending. Let me be absolutely clear. It would be pretty hard for me to be condescending to people of faith because I’m a person of faith. And have done more than most other campaigns in reaching out specifically to people of faith and have written about how democrats make an error when they don’t show up and speak directly to people’s faith because I think we can get those votes and I have in the past. The same is true with respect to gun owners. I have large numbers of sportsmen and gun owners in my home state. And they have supported me, precisely because I have listened to them. And I know them well. So, the problem that we have in our politics, which is fairly typical, is that you take one person’s statement, if it’s not properly phrased, and you just beat it to death. And that’s what Senator Clinton’s been doing over the last four days. And I understand that. That’s politics. And I expect to have to go through this process. But I do think it’s important to recognize that it’s not helping that person who is sitting at the kitchen table, who is trying to figure out how to pay the bills at the end of the month. And Senator Clinton’s right. She has gone through this. I recall when, back in 1992, when she made a statement about how — what do you expect? Should I be at home baking cookies? And people attacked her for being elitist and this and that. And I remember watching that on tv and saying, well, that’s not who she is. That’s not what she believes. That’s not what she meant. And I’m sure that’s how she felt, as well. But the problem is that that’s the kind of politics that we’ve been accustomed to. And I think Senator Clinton learned the wrong lesson from it because she’s adopting the same tactics.

+++

Obama Raises Clinton’s ‘Cookies’ Remark: NYT’s The Caucus notes:

Mr. Obama turns the tables on Mrs. Clinton, bringing up comments that she made, back in 1992, that seemed to be an insult to stay-at-home moms, “that I suppose I could have stayed home and baked cookies and had teas.”

Mr. Obama said he was watching TV at the time, and when she was attacked as an elitist — as she is attacking him now — he thought, “that’s not who she is.” But, he says, “she learned the wrong lesson because she’s adopting the same tactics.”

Also, Obama falsely claimed that his campaign only addressed the Bosnia sniper issue because it was asked. Politico and the Clinton campaign find evidence to the contrary.

+++

Hillary Clinton, The New Rudy Giuliani? Ben Smith: “A reader notes that Hillary has brought up 9/11, more or less unprompted, three times so far in the debate, a level not seen since Rudy Giuliani dropped out in January.” More here.

+++

Neither Candidate Will Commit To ‘Dream Ticket’: Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama both declined Wednesday night to pledge a spot on their ticket this fall to the loser of their epic battle for the Democratic presidential nomination.

“I think very highly of Senator Clinton’s record, but I think it is premature at this point to talk about who the vice presidential candidates will be because we’re still trying to determine who the nominee will be,” Obama said in the opening moments of a debate six days before the pivotal Pennsylvania primary.

“I’m going to do everything I possibly can to make sure that one of us takes the oath of office next January. I think that has to be the overriding goal,” said Clinton.

+++

HuffPost’s Jason Linkins writes on the expectations setting for tonight’s debate:

Campaign surrogates from both camps in the Democratic primary were out in force this morning, and the big takeaway is expectations management. A flurry of “bitter” controversy hasn’t seemed to have impacted the polling in any significant way: Clinton still looks like a winner overall, and Obama’s numbers continue to suggest that he’s made up ground. With a potentially game-changing debate tonight, and a long string of primary results that have defied the pre-game polling, both sides are working in advance to set up the anticipated results in the most positive way possible.

The Clinton campaign have aggressively pressed their case this week, armed with a new stockpile of ammunition from Barack Obama’s “bitter” comments. On today’s Morning Joe, Clinton communications director Howard Wolfson went on the offensive, accusing Obama of “playing the politics of division” with “rather insulting” remarks. He pressed the case well, without going overboard, by declining to agree with the notion that Obama was calling the people of “small-town America” bigots, and offering a dollop of diplomacy, saying: “I think Barack Obama is a good person…This is not about what’s in Barack Obama’s heart, it’s about what he said.”

While this was the bulk of the conversation, it’s notable that this is not how Wolfson chose to lead off. He began his remarks with an eye on expectations:

SCARBOROUGH: Howard, how are things going in Pennsylvania? Any evidence that Pennsylvania voters have been repelled by Barack Obama statements that you all have termed “elitist”?

WOLFSON: Well, I think we will find out on Tuesday. Senator Obama is doing everything he can to aggressively compete and win in Pennsylvania. He is outspending us this week on television two-to-one. I think he is spending more money on TV this week than anyone in the history of Pennsylvania politics. He outspent us last week on TV two-to-one. He outspent us the week before that and overall about three-to-one. So he’s doing everything he can to win.

Wolfson is smart to point out the degree to which Obama has invested money in Pennsylvania - the campaign has disputed some of the figures that have been floated, but his campaign’s outlay can properly be termed historic, if not unprecedented.

Given a similar opportunity, Obama communications director Robert Gibbs cast their expectations for Pennsylvania as a certain second-place finish, emphasizing Clinton’s considerable support from Pennsylvania’s political establishment:

SCARBOROUGH: A couple quick predictions before we leave, how many percentage points are you going to beat Hillary Clinton in Pennsylvania?

GIBBS: Look, we are the underdog in Pennsylvania. You have talked about it today and every day for a number of weeks - about the Ed Rendell machine in Pennsylvania. We are just hoping to do well here.

As always, nobody knows anything! But spinning a big win (or a manageable loss) is crucial when you consider how little could be at stake in Pennsylvania - at least in practical terms:

…a CQ Politics analysis of the political circumstances in Pennsylvania’s congressional districts, detailed below, projects an edge to Clinton — but by just 53 district-level delegates to 50 for Obama under the Democratic Party’s proportional distribution rules.

These numbers suggest that Clinton, even with a victory in Pennsylvania, would make only a small incremental gain against Obama’s overall lead in the delegate race.

Of the state’s remaining 84 slots, only 55 pledged delegates will be distributed based on the statewide popular vote, with the state’s remaining 29 seats going to unpledged “superdelegates.”

Clinton’s most sizable gains in the state may come from the coterie of superdelegates, but there’s a good chance that when the dust settles the night of the primary, the gains made in the pledged delegate column will be minimal. Good thing we’ve spent seven weeks building up this primary to ridiculous proportions, right?

—

The Philadelphia Inquirer previews tonight’s Democratic debate:

Looks like it’s time to rumble, not ramble.

Tonight’s Democratic presidential debate at the National Constitution Center comes at the most contentious point in the Pennsylvania primary campaign, with both candidates running TV ads attacking each other by name.

U.S. Sen. Barack Obama is struggling to recapture momentum after his widely criticized remarks about “bitter” Pennsylvanians, and U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton is seizing on the gaffe to make a decisive move before time runs out on her efforts to capture the nomination.

“After this past week, this debate is a much bigger deal,” said veteran media consultant Neil Oxman. “Everybody knows this race was getting close, and something happened to change the dynamic. This is Obama’s chance to set this aside and get back to his ‘change’ conversation, or not.”

Clinton and Obama have appeared together more than 20 times, but tonight will be their first debate in front of a live, prime-time, major-network audience.

ABC News, which is co-sponsoring the event with the Constitution Center, will broadcast the 90-minute debate beginning at 8 p.m.

“It’s been two months since they’ve debated and there’s plenty to talk about,” said ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, who will co-host with ABC anchor Charles Gibson.

Popularity: 4% [?]

All I can say after the latest Clinton-Obama debate in Pennsylvania is I’m woefully turned off by American media. If Hillary Clinton wins the Democratic nomination for US President, I am an independent voter registered as a Democratic who will not vote at all. She seems to embody the ages-old sly hatefulness of such notable American women as Susan B. Anthony, and John McCain seems to be the classic kind of man that such women raise to further complicate the lives of men like Barack Obama who are willing to tell the truth - no matter how painful, to America. US policy at home and abroad needs Barack Obama. The US news media needs a reminder of what news actually is. They should try informing public opinion instead of gossiping and acting as informants. They are so Yellow to me right not I’m seeing red.

What a waste of time! No wonder our economy is doing so bad. If that was journalism, then we need a new word for tabloid.

watch full debate and read transcript:

http://www.jabberwonk.com/flinker.cfm?cliid=1br7z7

ABC PERFORMED AS TRIAL JUDGES CONVENING ON A SENTENCE.wHAT A RICULOUS USE OF THAT ESTATE OF INFORMATION.tHE CLINTONIAN/BUSH SPECTACLE CONTINUES.

The Huffington Post, is oh so indignant about the the way their poor little Obama got treated last night. Poor little Obama had to face criticism. Oh my God! The Huffington Post has been abusing, slandering, humiliating Cliton, mercilessly, endlessly since she announced her intention to run for the presidency. If ABC has acted so shamefully, how much more shamefully has the Huffington Post been to Hillary.
I don’t know which is worse, the stunning hypocrisy of the Huff Post, or it’s unending and despicable mistreatment of Senator Clinton.

The Huff Post is OH! so full of indignation at the way their poor Saint Obama was treated by the big bad media last night. But media has treated Hillary a thousand times worse than they’ll ever have a chance to do, against Obama. The Huffington Post, has directed an unending barrage of the most hateful, humiliating, and demeaning posts imaginable against Hillary since she first announced her intention to run for the presidency. If the Huffington Post reveals such anger and contempt for ABC, what should it think of its own behavior against Hillary? I don’t know what is worse, the stunning hypocrisy of Huff. Post’s position against ABC, or it’s merciless and persistent savaging of Sen.Clinton.

Help me here - this was the first debate I’ve watched. Who devises the questioning and who selects the event hosts? From the first minutes, it appeared to me that the network and hosts were in an undisguised support of Ms Clinton. As a non-voter, a Canadian, I felt somewhat detached from the spectacle. As a PR professional, I felt appalled that this event could be billed as a DEBATE, with such overt and blatent bias on the part of the moderators. Not only was the American public the loser, but so was the advertiser: I tuned-out early!

What a bunch of garbage this article in Huffington Post is. If you think the Republicans won’t lambast Obama with ads about these things that Charlie Gibson asked, you are terribly naive. Just wait and see. He needs to be questioned about these things so he can come up with good responses. Obama was lousy acting like he was too superior to be asked questions about such menial (to him) things. You people do not understand the American electorate. In my opinion Obama is probably another John Kerry, Michael Dukakis, etc. If he can’t handle himself in a debate with Hillary, wait until John McCain and the Republicans get hold of him.

DON’T BE DUPED !!!

Large numbers of Republicans have been voting for Barack Obama in the DEMOCRATIC primaries, and caucuses from early on. Because they feel he would be a weaker opponent against John McCain. With Hillary Clinton you are almost 100% certain to get quality, affordable universal health care very soon.

But first, all of you have to make certain that Hillary Clinton takes the democratic nomination and then the Whitehouse. NOW! is the time. THIS! is the moment you have all been working, and waiting for. You can do this America. “Carpe diem” (harvest the day).

I think Hillary Clinton see’s a beautiful world of plenty for all. She’s a woman, and a mother. And it’s time America. Do this for your-selves, and your children’s future. You will have to work together on this and be aggressive, relentless, and creative. Americans face an even worse catastrophe ahead than the one you are living through now.

You see, the medical and insurance industry mostly support the republicans with the money they ripped off from you. And they don’t want you to have quality, affordable universal health care. They want to be able to continue to rip you off, and kill you and your children by continuing to deny you life saving medical care that you have already paid for. So they can continue to make more immoral profits for them-selves.

Hillary Clinton has actually won by much larger margins than the vote totals showed. And lost by much smaller vote margins than the vote totals showed. Her delegate count is actually much higher than it shows. And higher than Obama’s. She also leads in the electoral college numbers that you must win to become President in the November national election. HILLARY CLINTON IS ALREADY THE TRUE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE!

As much as 30% of Obama’s primary, and caucus votes are Republicans trying to choose the weakest democratic candidate for McCain to run against. These Republicans have been gaming the caucuses where it is easier to vote cheat. This is why Obama has not been able to win the BIG! states primaries. Even with Republican vote cheating help.

Hillary Clinton has been OUT MANNED! OUT GUNNED! and OUT SPENT! 4 and 5 to 1. Yet Obama has only been able to manage a very tenuous, and questionable tie with Hillary Clinton.

If Obama is the democratic nominee for the national election in November he will be slaughtered. Because the Republican vote cheating help will suddenly evaporate. All of this vote fraud and republican manipulation has made Obama falsely look like a much stronger candidate than he really is. YOUNG PEOPLE. DON’T BE DUPED! Think about it. You have the most to lose.

The democratic party needs to fix this outrage. Everyone needs to throw all your support to Hillary Clinton NOW! So you can end this outrage against YOU the voter, and against democracy.

The democratic party, and the super-delegates have a decision to make. Are the democrats, and the democratic party going to choose the DEMOCRATIC party nominee to fight for the American people. Or are the republicans going to choose the DEMOCRATIC party nominee through vote fraud, and gaming the DEMOCRATIC party primaries, and caucuses.

Fortunately the Clinton’s have been able to hold on against this fraudulent outrage with those repeated dramatic comebacks of Hillary Clinton’s. Only the Clinton’s are that resourceful, and strong. Hillary Clinton is your NOMINEE. They are the best I have ever seen.

“This is not a game” (Hillary Clinton)

Sincerely

jacksmith… Working Class :-)

It’s time we remind our news media (that is, if we can still call it “our news media) of its noble mission as the Fourth Estate: to inform, educate, and provide a forum for for a meaningful debate of the most critical issues of our day. The recent debate was a low point of many lows to which our news media have sunk.

The debate last night was great, FINALLY Obama had to answer a few questions!! He is such a phony. Hllary won the debate, she is the only one who can beat McCain in the general election, and the only one qualified to be president. Obama looked like a loser, while Hillary looked and sounded presidential.

Hurray for ABC! At last a fair debate.