Why should he? Clinton wouldn’t accept at least two requests for debates when she was running for senator. Obama has the same right to refuse as she did.

Anne
Texas

No, absoultely not! Clinton is loosing just like Mike Huckabee was when he suggested a Lincoln-Douglas type of debate. The Obama camp should just ignore her rantings she will be sent home after May 6. See ya!

Jack Obama is right to reject this debate. I mean it is a little late for Hillary to say lets debate like old when she has used the other 20 somethings debates to debate in old school style. Plus i cant take anymore of her saying she is more electable when she is losing every aspect. Good for Obama i think he is tired or hearing her say that when she is in second place.

Jack,

The candidate in the lead is never really looking to do a debate because they don’t need it. Were the shoe on the other foot she would not touch this either.

For the voters it could have benefits, except that with no moderator if one of them doesn’t follow the rules and format who is going to stop it? I ask this question only because she seems to like ignoring the rules when it benefits her…she wants to seat delegates who didn’t even have the option of voting for Obama because it helps her.

Given that one fact I am not surprised he is a little wary of getting on a stage with her.

Jack,

I think he should consider that type of debate against John McCain. Hillary would only suggest such a forum in an intra-party contest to taint her opponent for November. I am so ashamed of the Clintons!

No, he does’t need to. They had 21 debates. The media and the public has had time to ask question. If it hasn’t been asked, must not have been important. He also has Q & A after t\his rallys.

Of course he should accept the offer to debate. He would have a chance to answer all the questions that revolve around him and his candidacey. With Clinton we all know what we are getting. Obama is still a major question mark. There is too much unknown about him. I can not get comfortable with Obama and the countless issues that keep coming to the surface. You want my vote; explain yourself!

No, Hillary is a devious woman, she is looking for another opportunity to exploit the fear factor into Americans, She is a real fighter, she will even get into the gutter to win, what a classy lady. And she wants to represent America around the globe for us.

Jack,obviously,all the question and answer meetings have only been dog and pony shows to this point. I have been waiting for a real debate where a moderator only gives the question and gets out of the way and lets the candidates go at it. No time limit,no gamesmanship,no phoniness. I want to know what their real opinions are and how they really differ from each other. I want real meat,not sound bites!

No way, Jack! He has precious little to gain, and would simply be providing Clinton the opportunity to score more points.

The undeniable fact is that Clinton IS far better known, and he needs to get out there and give the voting public a chance to better know him. A debate is arguably the poorest medium for achieving this goal.

I would love to see such a debate. I personally think Barack would absolutely trounce her in such a duel. But, his response is appropriate… right now the Indiana/North Carolina contests are right around the corner. With such little time, I think it’s wise to maximize time spent on the ground, talking to voters, and discussing issues first-hand. If there is some breathing room after that, debate away. But I personally hope Hillary has the sense to drop out after that, as her continued delusional bid is doing nothing short of helping McBush.

No. And what’s the big deal anyway? When Clinton was ahead she declined to debate and no one made a federal case of it. When she ran for the Senate she declined to debate. All of a sudden Obama decides 21 debates is enough and he’s portrayed as causing democracy to split apart at the seams. The Clinton campaign is short of funds and a debate equals free advertising and a chance to say Reverend Wright in every other sentence. It’s not rocket science.

Definitely not. It’s just another grand-standing tactic for Hillary and God only knows what she has concocted in her divisive little head this time. Obama needs to get out among the people and leave Hillary standing in the lurch. We can only hope that if he ignores her long enough she will go away, but don’t bet the farm on it.

Why should Barack do anything to aid Hillary’s campaign?! He has participated in 21 debates, 4 of which were one-on-one with Hillary. He wants to get and campaign directly with the public, which is what his campaign wants to do. Hillary is so broke that she is seeking free media anyway posible and you are playing right into her hands!!!

Why should he accept another debate? She is running behind, trying to get more free airtime and trying to call the shots for both campaigns. That is pretty “elitist” from someone who is in second place.

No. This is yet another attempt by the Clinton campaign to muddy the waters and cause trouble. After twenty some debates both candidates have answered every possible question imaginable. Unless hell freezes over Obama will be the Democratic Party nominee anyway. The Clinton’s continue to try and do as much damage to Obama, and by extension to the party’s chances in the fall, as they possibly can. The Clinton campaigns actions are unprincipled and shameful. They should start their own party because all they really care about is themselves anyway. They are a detriment to the Democratic Party. Ken Mattheis - Seattle

ABSOLUTELY NOT! Debate what????? We’ve seen enough of Sen. Clinton’s tactics; the kitchen sink, say anything- do anything method, mudslinging, repeated personal attacks. ENOUGH already! She hasn’t said anything different since Iowa.

Absolutely not! Senator Obama tried weeks ago to get Senator Clinton to commit to a debate in NC, but after 3 weeks, the plan had to be scrapped. I’m dismayed (though not surprised) that the media didn’t seem to think that situation was newsworthy, however has run this bit over and over and over…without ever mentioning the fact that he initially proposed it to her and she refused to commit.
Moberly MO

While I will not be voting for either of these two candidates, I see this as a last ditch effort by Mrs. Clinton to try and differentiate herself from Mr. Obama. I would think at this point in time most voters know what the candidates are about.

No, I do not think Senator Obama should accept another debate with Senator Clinton. After the last debate who would? Senator Clinton is too busy trying to ruin Senator Obama with with her same old dirty tactics and couldn’t talk about the real issues people want to hear. It was quite obvious as she went on about the old issues (Rev. Wright, small towns in PA being bitter and clinging to guns and religion) Now she goes on condemning Barack Obama for not agreeing to another debate. Maybe if she would have stuck to the important issues he would have agreed to 1 more. I believe Hillary Clinton just wants the free publicity since she’s running out of money.

The problem with Sen. Obama debating Sen. Clinton is that Sen. Obama can’t debate worth spit Jack. Sen. Obama needs someone with excellent debating skills to help. John Edwards is an excellent debator & I would suggest that the Obama campaign ask for John Edwards for help.
Patricia
Palmdale, Ca.

No need to accept a debate at this point. There have been four 1:1 debates with Senator Clinton with little real differences being shown. Spending his time talking to people is the best use of the remaining time. Although I would bet Senator Obama would gladly debate Senator McCain at this point in time. That would be worth seeing.

Why should he Jack. History shows only the loser wants the debate. Obama is ahead in popular, delegate, number of states, and likability.
Why should he waste his time with Hillary. She’s the desparate one.

No, they have had enough debates. Besides the last one wasn’t a debate it was beat up on Obama night. She is trying to do any and everything she can to win. To bad it’s not going to work.

Obama ‘08

Of course he should not agree. Next she will challenge him to a wrestling match! If the American people do not know where they stand on the issues by this time they shouldn’t vote anyway.

She is hoping to get him up there and jump on his pastor, any acquaintances he has had in the past, etc because she knows he does not want to do that kind of politics! He will hold his own with John McCain but I think he hates to criticize another democrat. Good for him!

Carol
Knoxville, TN

No, enough already. There have been 21 debates and there is very little difference between the platforms of Senators Obama and Clinton. We all know Hillary needs more debates as she has precious little cash to advertise. My only hope is the good people of Indiana and North Carolina put an end to this thing and vote overwhelmingly for Senator Obama.

What in the world for? By now, we know both candidates’s positions on just about everything. If the delegate math is correct, we know that Barack Obama will be the nominee. Both candidates have very similar policies positions, so Democrats will, at last, see the country headed in a better direction. No more debates, please.

Of course, he should have accepted! What is he scared of, the fact that if it’s not written, he can’t project well? He’s unsure and scared because Hillary is much more knowleadgeable on issues than he is and is far more qualified to become our next president! Wake up America, this is not a matter of race or gender, it’s about who is better qualified to hold the most important job in the world! We are at a crisis and we need a strong and experienced candidate, not a recently born one!
Mecca, Puerto Rico

Redding, CA

Jack,

Sen. Obama is absolutely correct in refusing Sen. Clinton’s “invitation” for this debate. He has allowed her to set the tone recently, has made his mistakes and needs to spend the time reconnecting with the voters. He needs to show that he can “just say no” to her. There is nothing for him to gain from such a debate, and nothing for him to lose by saying “No thank you.” Somehow I am reminded of the “come into my web said the spider to the fly”.

He should stay on message, ignore what will surely be coming his way from Camp Clinton.

Jack, I like to watch the debates,like 22 million others.Hillary does not need to debate, The Rev. Wright is taking care of everything.

He should have accepted Jack and went in with bosts fists swinging. He could have started with the travel-gate scandel and moved right on to Vince Foster and Misplaced documents. Then he could have brought up the Whitewater scandel, the last minute pardons, the phantom futures “investments”, and of course “Bill” and the Chinese investor/lobbyists. This is the kind of debate Hillary wants and he should give it to her.

No, we are not going to hear anything we haven’t already heard ad nauseum. Hillary only wants free air time because her campaign is bankrupt. Obama is wise to force her to spend more money. She will have to quit sooner that way.

Jack,
A real debate with no moderator, no ads, no external talking head to introduce irrelevant conflict would be great.
There would have to be a time referee and a place to hold such an event.
But, it will not happen which is too bad.

No. Barack should not engage in a Bar-room Brawl Like Debate to make himself look less presidential! Besides, Lincoln and Douglas were gentlement with ethics and morals, something the Clintons sorely lack.

To the swing (Reagan Democrat) voters, whom he must win over if he is to have any chance of beating McCain, refusing to debate could look like weakness, or far worse, fear. It does not matter that they have already had 20 debates; many voters are just now becoming interested in the election and they want to see the two candidates in a head to head, right now .

If Obama is reluctant to take on his opponent now, many voters might wonder if he would be similarly hesitant, as President, to take on foreign leaders who mean the US harm. Whether this is fair or not will not matter in November, and he will have to deal with it before then.

Heavens no! The sane democrats are tired of the negativity. Without a moderator there will be cheap shots, constant interruption, and long-winded bravado (probably one-sided). No thank you.

Obama supporters will continue to support and the same with Clinton. The “fence sitters” should go to the candidates’ websites and read their action plans to get detailed information and make a decision.

To not have an opinion on the remaining Dem candidates these fence sitters must be living in a bubble with a TV as their only source of information?

Sure! why not? If one is in this for the right reasons, then why be shy about exposing your views to the world? Obama is in his political infancy, and if he has nothing to hide, then show us now, before we call him a coward, and assume he is intimidated by a candidate who could never be intimidated by anyone, in our country, or around the world. Hillary is one smart lady, perfect for this time!

No. With no moderator it would be even worse. There would be no-one to reign in her attacks. Could it be that because her campaign is $10M in debt, she’s looking for some free advertising?

I’m not sure why she continues to bring it up. What about the word NO doesn’t she understand? Or is the reason much more machiavellian, and she wants to continue to build on her portrayal of him as an unsatisfactory candidate who is scared of her. I don’t know if Obama is scared of her, but I sure am.

Evelyn - AZ

No! I don’t need to hear national candidates debate flag pins, patriotism or the lack thereof, the philosphy of their respective pastors, or any other ridiculous topic that has dominated the public discourse over the last 12 months. It is sad when the American people who are purportedly seeking representatives of government, of , for and by people discussing everything but the people’s business or the people’s needs are being discussed. Please save us from the circus (oh I’m sorry) debate.

What’s left to debate, Jack? There have been 21 debates so far, four of which were solely between Clinton and Obama. The only thing either camp stands to gain from any more “debating” is yet another stage on which they can air each other’s dirty laundry (April 16th, anyone)?

Jackson
Rome, GA

Jack — I don’t think Sen. Obama should have another debate with Sen. Clinton. There have been 21 debates, if we haven’t heard enough during these past debates, shame on us for not listening or tuning into their differences. Enough already……Let’s just wind up this primary and select a candidate to run against John McCain.

Obama doesn’t do as well in debates as Hillary, so it doesn’t pay for him to debate if he can help it.

On the downside, he runs the risk of Hillary calling him “Chicken”.

It all doesn’t really matter, because unless he loses by a large margin (Indiana is close, and he’s ahead in N.C.), he will wind up with the nomination, and then the real games can begin.

Obama might call them “gotcha games,” but this primary race not just about “what you’ll do.” It’s also about “who you are.”

No way! Obama is very right, HRC had her last chance in PA and abused it. Everyone is very tired of that nonsense. 21 debates are more than enough. Anyone who still does not know where any candidate stands can always go to their sites or go to one of there meetings. It is better to meet as much people as possible live, so they can make up their minds finally based on their impressions.

Empty Drums Makes Loudest Sounds!

YES. That would be something new that I would like to watch. It is a different style, a different setting so why not ? They both will have opportunity to question each other. The real question is why Obama suddenly become so scared of debates ? Can he go with that attitude to fight republicans ? I hope Obama would act like a real politician and accept the challange.

Nuwan from Houston, TX

I would love to see them one on one. I am leaning toward Hillary because I think she is ready to deal with the politics that go with getting things done. I know we all want politics to change and everything get done fair and square with no glitches. Like Obama seems to put it, Ask and you shall recieve. Just not going to happen. Getting things done takes alot of one on one hard ball and I think Hillary can do that. Put them together one on one and just maybe I and several other Americans will see who can handle the heat in the kitchen.

Yes, his refusal only leaves people wondering what he is afraid of.

NO, Obama should not have accepted Clinton’s debate invitation. She wants a big audience for her negative campaign and she needs some free air time. If people really liked her, she wouldn’t have so much trouble raising money. Obama doesn’t need to engage her. They have debated enough. What he needs is to get out and meet voters because when people meet him, they vote for him.

Yes, Obama should have accepted another debate. There have actually only been 4 debates between Clinton and Obama. The people deserve to know who they are voting for and how much knowledge that candidate has. Obama has demonstrated in prior debates that he is not ready to be the president. He is hiding behind rallys that say hope and change and ducking the questions. ABC is the only one in a debate that has not given Obama a free ride. We would not be in this situation had the media done their jobs from the beginning. The media spent to much time promoting Obama, instead of giving the people the information they needed.

Yes — if it is really a debate. Characterizing the last dozen or so encounters as “debates” is, well, debatable. These media fests have deteriorated into little more than staged press conferences with little or no real depth provided on the issues. The moderators, with a few individual exceptions, have added little except tiredly predictable questions which encourage packaged answers. As voters, we should have a chance to really learn how the candidates feel about issues, how they substantiate their positions, what the implications of their strategies would be across the social, geopolitical and economic landscapes — and how they differ from each other in an interactive fashion. That would be a debate. And Obama should welcome the opportunity to participate. But, was that what Hillary had in mind?

I am clueless as to why Hillary wants another debate of any kind. Another debate would waste my time and electricity. Voters know where the candidates stand on issues. Most voters know who they are voting for in the General Election. We just want to get on with the process. We want to hear debates between Obama and McCain.

Jack, why don’t we just stop this nonsense and have a debate on
something of REAL significance, such as why Hillary is still in the race after having lost the popular vote, delegate count, and number
of states won?

Absolutely not! We can visit YouTube and see all of the past debates. Who needs another one of those. I’d rather have the candidates get to the people.

Carole
Wisconsin

Jack,
Given his last debate performance and the most recent remarks by Rev. Wright I would have to say no! Hillary is a Policy Wonk and Obama can only be made to look bad or worse. He is ahead and trying to run out the clock or in a prevent defense. He is CLINGING to his narrow lead hoping for time to run out on Hillary and it just may. Hey Jack, I am from the great state of Nevada, like you, and I was wondering how Clinton won this state 51% to 46% but Obama got the most Delegates. Something is wrong with this system.

A debate with no moderator would be political suicide for Obama.

The man can’t function without his 3×5’s or a teleprompter. Without knowing the questions in advance–or having his policy notes at his fingertips–he’d be a lost soul.
Clearly he has shown…that he cannot speak or debate extermporaneously.

He was wise to not debate her…she’d win hands down.

The voters of North Carolina and Indiana could, and probably would like to, evaluate both candidates again—maybe Obama is afraid of that. After all, Clinton is very good when she is speaking from her own knowledge and experience. Obama’s knowledge and experience would possibly not measure up well with her’s in a “nose-to-nose, eyeball-to-eyeball, no- holds-barred debate” with no moderator. In this case, the best woman just might win! I would be afraid, too, if I were Obama! MS from SC

No, the Democratic nominee can have such a debate with McCain. The primaries will decide who our nominee will be for we don’t need rehash of previous debates.

However, what Obama should do is have townhall with regular folk and if Clinton wants to join in that’s fine. That way the questions will be more spontaneous. Hillary is banking on formal debates so that she can regurgitate her robotic circular reasoning responses. She thinks she’s so good at debating but she’s not. The only thing she’s good at is her command of english and the flourishes she makes: basically “speeches” which is what she says Obama does.

When Obama answers it’s to engage your brain in logical reasoning to get to a reasonable conclusion so you understand the issue better. That’s the difference and that’s why when people hear him, they tend to agree with him and vote for him.

I know this is historic election but really Hillary is no Lincoln! What a joke!!

To my way of thinking ,all the debates of both partie should have been this way.We would probably have different candidates running
for office now.

No. There have been enough debates between these two candidates who are essentially the same on policy. Lincoln and Douglass had big differences and by the way Douglass won the senate race because he told people what they wanted to hear about confronting the evil of slavery which was to leave things as they were. Lincoln was right that a house divided could not stand.

Why? So Hillary can keep bringing up issues that have nothing to do with the issues at hand?
Don’t waste your time and energy Obama

Jack,
I get the sense that Obama doesn’t want to debate her again because he may not be able to hold back from calling her out on her lies and manipulations of the truth and adding to the in-fighting that is hurting the Democratic party. I feel that is the second reason the ABC debate went poorly for him. I felt he was holding back on tearing her apart. Just in case you are wondering, the first reason it went poorly for him was that they pulled George out of Hillary’s back pocket to ask the questions….that way SHE didn’t have to talk about anything ‘that she didn’t want to talk about’.
I voted w/ my parents early last Monday here in Clayton NC. We voted for Barack and we need no more lies from Hillary and no more debates.

Many of the past 21 debates would have been better without a moderator. In fact, the last debate was a debacle due to the moderators, not the candidates. Obama and Clinton are very close on the issues so why listen to an exchange of snide remarks that can only make both Democrats look worse and McCain better in absentia? No, thank you.

We have heard enough debating already it’s time to to just pick a winner in this race and get on with the general election.
Indiana

No!. Hillary would have no qualms about saying anything, true or untrue to make Obama look bad. He seems to be a gentleman who prefers the high road and would be out of his element in another debate with her. He should do what he does best, which is give inspiring speaches. Maybe enough voters will see the light.

No, because he has not yet learned to be as cuthroat, conniving, and negative as Senator Clinton. This challenge seems like a desperation move on her part.
Let’s just hope that - if indeed she is the one answering the phone at 3 am - she doesn’t ‘mispeak’ … because of tiredness.

Dieter
Toronto
Canada

While it would be incredibly interesting I think it’d be terrible for the democratic party. A no-holds-bar with Hillary? All that would happen is Hillary attacking Obama, Obama justifying himself, and when it was all over Hillary would wrant about how Obama never talked about the “issues” and how he was just “talk”. It’d hurt both candidates come general election time more then it would bennefit either in Indiana.

Of course they should debate. That being said, Jack, have been living under a rock since Friday? Does the name Jerimiah Wright ring any bells? I know you are pro-Obama but to ignore the biggest story of the last 3-4 days in your “questions of the day” is even below you. Can you say irresponsible, biased journalism.

No, Senator Obama should not accept another debate. We have had more debates than necessary. It’s time for him to spend time on the ground and get to speak directly to people in states where the future primaries are being held. Truly, enough is enough! There is so much ugliness going on in this country today for which Obama has not really been the instigator. I think people are trying to prove that Obama is wishing for a pipe dream because we’re so diverse and so polarized that we will never accept blacks as full citizens because our heritage was built on slavery and may want that underlying factor to remain for as long as we’re a country. Sad, but true.

Dear Jack – I regret few people would agree with me in Owosso, Michigan. I think such a debate would be a waste of time. All Hillary Clinton wants is another opportunity to lie to the American voters. It is tragic anyone would consider such an immoral person as a Presidential candidate. Hillary will be too busy entertaining guests, who rented the Lincoln bedroom, to answer any telephone calls at 3:00 A.M. in the White House. The only direct line Hillary and Bill Clinton have is to the switchboard in Hell.

Not in a million years. Have the last 7 years been good enough to warrant another 4 years just like them? That is the question voters should ask themselvesif they are considering voting for McCain. McCain is just a repackaged George Bush.

No moderator. No word in edgewise. No way.

Barack Obama will most likely reach a majority of pledged delegates on May 20th, the night of the Kentucky and Oregon primaries, and this will all be academic. The one-third of the remaining superdelegates he needs to be nominated will be easily within reach at that point. Then, for all intents and purposes, the debate is over.

He does not do well in debates so best he stays out of them. Hillary has won all the debates hands down and he knows it.

Absolutely. As the presumptive nominee–and let’s face it, he is–eventually he is going to have to get in the ring with McCain.

He has far more potential as a debater than he’s credited–team Obama should be training him for the knock-out punch that will send Hillary, once and for all, out of the ring! Then bring on McCain!

Here is the narrative for Hillary Clinton: If I can’t beat Obama, I couldn’t care less if John McCain does. She will do anything to win, the media describe her as a fighter, but they do not say that she is only fighting for herself, not for the good of American people. We all know what are the differences between the candidates , no need for another debate where Clinton is setting the tone, how low can she go. I am very sad to see Clinton legacy got destroyed, being once a big supporter
thanks,
Bea,
Texas

Latest poll Hillary stands a better chance to beat McCain than Obama does.
She would beat his a** in a debate. then she sould go whip Keith O’s a** as well. He would continue to crumble like he is doing now. He is all talk, no substance. If the Super Delegates do not act in the party’s best interest and vote for her, then the republicans get another 4 years. Why no question about the new poll Jack?

This is a tricky situation but I would like to see a debate of ideas, no moderators and gotcha questions would only make the person asking look like a jerk. If nothing is settled by the time the june primaries are done, this would be a great way to give the undecided super delegates and the rest of america fresh insight into the two candidates.

Yes he should, And I would like to see him and John McCain and Hillary have a Debate too. Who do you think will win that one. His last debate with Hillary was bad just think what John McCain is going to do to him. Wake Up American. LOOK WHAT THE ECONOMY IS IN. THE WAR THE GAS PRICES NO JOBS.

Vickie, Columbia, La.

Jack,
Last time we heard from Hillary, she compared herself with Rocky Balboa. Which one of the two she pretends to be now - Lincoln or Douglas?
By the way, would you please explain to the viewers the rules of a Lincoln-Douglas debate and ask them how much sense her proposal makes ?

Emilia,
NC

No Jack!

Hillary has been setting the agenda and making the rules up as she goes during this race!
I’m glad Obama refused, It’s about time for him to start taking control of this thing ! If he can’t do it now then how can he run the country?

I watched every debate and every debate is the same issue with the same format with the answers. I am done with debates…there have been 21 debates. There is nothing more that I need to hear from either one of them. I am just ready to vote.

Besides Hillary is starting to sound like Huckabee….desperate!

Absolutely not. Why should Barack Obama waste his time answering Hillary’s sophomoric questions and dodging her jabs when he can get to know the people of Indiana, one on one, without her interference. Obama needs to take the lead by setting an agenda for the best use of his time. Town meetings, local appearances and allowing the people get to know him are far more productive than a contest of who can put on the best stage performance. He doesn’t need that or her. He’s got the money, she’s got the need.

No, no, no, Senator Obama is correct when he said the previous debates have offered little new information and if the nation don’t have an idea where each of these candidates stand on the issues, than they never will.

Besides, Jack Senator Obama is winning and therefore have nothing to gain and everything to lose. On the other hand Sentor Clinton has nothing to lose and everything to gain. If I was in her position I would be talking big debate talk too.

The Douglas - Lincoln debates were good for exposure back in the day and it worked for Lincoln. It made people aware who this guy Lincoln was and it exposed his ideas and rhetoric
However, after twenty-one debates between Mr. Obama and the Clinton Machine, there is nothing left to expose.
If there was a twenty-second debate all we the people will be exposed to is rhetoric from the likes of: Howard Dean, James Carville, or James Clyburn and the merits on the issues gained or lost in the debate would be twisted . And we the people would be lost on the issues again.

I don’t blame him a bit for not wanting to debate her again - every time they meet to debate, she mops the floor with him. He can’t afford to look any worse than he currently does, as she gains momentum. Face it, she’s smarter than he and will do a better job as president. He is, well, he’s a good speech reader.

No, we don’t need another debate, we need to hear details of how the candidates will change the economy, stop the war, provide health care. They should just talk to the people. no debate necessary.

No,he shouldn’t bother.If he could be assured that the topic would stay on issues important to the country and the actual running of government,maybe,but an unmoderated debate with Hillary Clinton?
That would be as fair and classy as an Arkansas land deal.

No, there have been too many as it is. There views on issues do not differ by much. She is a better debater but he is the front runner. It should be noted that just because you are a better debater doesn’t mean that you would be the best person to lead the the country. George W Bush was/is a good debater and we know where that has gotten us!

Trying to chide the leading candidate to more debates is campaign strategy 101. The trailing candidate has nothing to lose, If the leader (Obama) declines, the trailing candidate raises questions. IE what is he afraid of? If he accepts, the trailing hopes that the leading candidate commits some gaffe that they can exploit to the trailing candidates benefit.
They have already had a recording breaking 21 debates. Enough is enough.

Hillary shows her strengths in debate. Barack shows his strength in direct campaigning to the people. Hillary wants to debate constantly because that puts her in her best light. She’s basically using this as a distraction from the delegate math which, regardless of her Pennsylvania win, she’s still at a disadvantage on.

Barack Obama is right to reject debate. We know what these candidates’ positions are. As Dean has suggested, the Democratic party needs to get going and make a decision, not endlessly rehash the issues.

At this point, the race has become more competitive and it appears that Clinton is turning it around, based on the latest AP poll. Obama has to engage her in a debate and state the substance of his positions and not just rhetorics. Otherwise, he may see her beat him at Indiana anfd come a very close second to him in North Carolina.

After 21 debates if the voters still can’t make up their minds they don’t deserve the priviledge of voting.

After the tone of the questions in the last debate, why in the world would Obama subject himself to more of the same? He’s better off getting his message out on the stump.

Jack,

We are trying to pick the next president of the USA. Clinton has gotten the short end of the stick on this whole election. She is out talking issues and he is playing basketball. I think he has been painted the next big star…. Like Miley Ray Cyrus. So maybe he should talk to Huckabee’s agent and maybe he could have a big job on the BIG screen. Clinton is out there fighting and really trying and the only one we are discussing is Obama. I don’t think I would want my last debate to be left like the one most of us picture in PA. debate.

Just my 2 cents

No!! She is a waste of his and the voters’ time and energy. He would be better to discuss his position on issues face-to-face with the voters. He has wasted precious time defending himself on dribble. Now he needs to speak out without interruptions.

Have you not heard about flogging a dead horse, Jack? They had a debate only a few days ago. Hillary knows for sure that there are no more policy differences to highlight. But this is politics and she intends on scoring some points by portraying herself as tougher than Obama.

If Obama thought another debate would be good for the voters and the country, he would agree to another debate. He is, however afraid of Hillary and knows he can’t answer her questions adequately for the voters. He therefore tries not to say anything to the press or to the general public because he has already screwed up so much in his campaign. Why would anyone vote for this unknowledgeable man?

Senator Obama is not accepting a debate because he doesn’t have to. They really only had four debates between themselves so it would have been nice. He blew the last one, so why would he risk blowing another one?

Of course he shouldn’t have accepted yet another invitation. At this point, Sen. Clinton is a loose cannon and will do anything she can to turn the tide in her favor. Sen. Obama has been silent on all of her dirt (Whitewater, Travelgate, Peter vs. Paul trial) because of the the kind of campaign he’s trying to run. She has no qualms about throwing her fellow democrat under the bus and giving the republicans talking points for the general election. He’s also being smart by not allowing her anymore free air time. She’s run her campaign into the ground financially……let her pay for ad time like everyone else!!!!

I’m sure the New York Yankees would like to replay game 7 of the 2004 ALCS too but do you think the Boston Red Sox are looking for a re-match? NO!

Yes, Obama should debate. He says they have already had 21, but from those 21 how many were before all the controversy of his pastor and acquaintances. He got put on the ropes in the last one and knows he can’t “float like a butterfly” out of it. He’s hoping he can just brush it off his shoulders as he demonstrated but he can’t and as I see it Mr. Wright is just putting him tighter and tighter to the ropes.

I think Obama should have a sit down, kitchen table, interactive discussion with ordinary people who would ask the questions and air what’s on their minds. Clinton and Obama have already had multiple debates–that often go way off course. Let the people speak.

Jack, Why should he? She is no more an opponent to Obama but a spoiller of the democratic party who needs to be called to order. She refused to debate while running for the Sen. now she finds debate so important after 21. What a polarizer? - thanks to the media who has flatly ignored her plan to “obliterate” Iran rather the media find issues such Rev. Wright who is not even running for any office more important to feed to Americans. I am ashamed of the media in this country.

its about time you americans woke up and realized that mrs Clinton is the best candidate/ Obama and hip troop are running scared and knows a debate will make him look bad. Come on America VOTE CLINTON

Does Hillary ever realisze that in times when American people are struggling to make ends meet, the last thing they need is a selfish, power hungry politician who keeps asking them to switch on their TV and consume more electricity just to watch her expensive pant suits and big golden hearings? Shame on her. NO more debates, Save more electricity.

MODESTO
Mahe,
Seychelles Islands
(Indian Ocean)

This would be one debate I’d tune into. The candidates actually going toe-to-toe. It wouldn’t be about the moderators and if they are being “unfair” to a certain candidate. Maybe it would truly be the perfect forum to see which candidate really is the most brilliant, shining star. Obama needs this as his rock star has lost its luster, shine and twinkle.

Why should he? With already the record number of debates between the candidates than ever before and their policies out in the open for everyone to see, why would anyone want to hear the same thing over and over again?

Of course Obama doesnt want this debate because they would have to focus on the issues. As we all know Obama knows how to rile up a prep rally however lacks tremendously on the issues. As a matter of fact when he doesn’t know an answer he claims his policies are the same as Hillary’s. Well I ask, where is really the change????????

Obama shouldn’t accept the debate offer. He has nothing to win and everything to lose. Right now, he feels pretty comfortable making presentations in front of audiences with few questions being asked.
Clinton needs the debates to trip Obama up.

No. We’ve all had enough of endless chatter about debates where the topics don’t concern our futures. Enough is enough. Move on.
Is it November yet?

Len in Washington

With Hillary’s campaign in the hole financially it only makes sense that she would ask for this. She wants the free coverage and another opportunity to throw more political trash at a man who has shown that he chooses to stay above that type of gutter politics.

Matthew, Seattle

Obama rejecting her debate offer is just another reason for the public to think that is too soft for the job. While not responding with his own attack ads may be seen as courageous, debating and attack ads are the nature of the beast [campaigning]. As far as Hillary “losing” I think it is too close to call for now a win in Indiana will keep her going just like the 10 point win in PA.

Right now the only way Hillary can remain relevant is by making a lot of noise. She knows the lights are dimming, no money coming in, and soon enough the media will walk away from her. These are the final kicks of a dying horse.

She can debate herself: NAFTA, BOSNIA, IRAQ, COLUMBIA, CHINA

she has taken both sides on these issues.

NO!! How can people call that most recent ABC disaster a “debate”??

We’re tired of debates, where the same old topics are brought up again and again.

This campaign has gone on for too long. They - the candidates and the media - don’t have enough new stuff to talk about and I, for one, am getting real tired of what they DO talk about.

No he should not debate her. She wants to get up there and argue and drag Obama down. Hillary should go argue with Bill. She is broke and needs free press. Don’t believe the hype. Make her pay for media.

Ida, Atlanta

It would serve no purpose. WE have heard over 20 debates and it’s the same poilitcal diaheria over and over again. What the party needs is unity, but that can’t happen now because all thet (Clinton and Obama) are both too self-serving.

Steve C
Laguna Niguel

Absolutely he should have accepted an offer to debate Clinton again. He may be the front-runner, but he is still the underdog in some ways unless he knocks Clinton out.

He is a hypocrite if he doesn’t. Newsweek Nov. 12 he said that Hillary is whining about her treatment at a debate because anything goes we are running for the most powerful position in the free world. but since the last debate he has whined and cried and now won’t debate her.

Yes I think he should! This is the Presidency of the United States. This is too important, and frankly in all past debates, Hilary was asked the questions first, which gave him plenty of time to think of an answer, and he started his answers mostly with, I agree with what Hilary just said. He hasnt been tested. For all you idiots that didnt understand Hilarys frustration in the debate where she made a point of asking why she always got the questions first! Thats why!!! Lets put him to the test and see how well he stands up to real pressure.

Obama did the political thing by not accepting a debate while leading — but this will further polarize the Clinton base should Clinton not get the nomination

All the phony big wig Dems (Kennedy, Kerry, Dodd, et al) want this to be over before the convention — they want Obama inbecasue the inside Dem leaders believe they can “handle and manage Obama” But what they fail to realize is that the Democratic base is solidly behind Hillary and they will likley turn to Mccain before they take Obama — I, for one, a long standing MA democrat, will not support Obama - It is Hillary first and them McCain —

I am sure that one can find all 21 of those previous debates on Youtube. We have had enough debates. That last debate was clearly biased and a waste of my time as a viewer. I would not waste my time with another one, even if it didn’t have a moderator. No more debates. It is time to get a democratic nominee.

He should absolutely accept another debate!!! That way we can hear more on his plans for health care, immigration reform, education, the war in Iraq, job development, tax reform, trade reform…. and on and on. Frankly, I’d like to see how he responds when his back against the wall…. instead of the feathered peacock speeches we’ve heard for the past 12 months!

No. Clinton is fully of dirty tricks. It makes sense for the frontrunner to decline additional debates. He can’t risk looking bad in any way. Hillary is desperate and vicious: she would tear him to pieces in a debate (although this doesn’t make her a better candidate).

Obama’s being smart and promoting his image of “rising above the fray” by refusing to another debate. After the ABC debate, I really don’t care to see another. I don’t enjoy hearing Hillary talk anyhow.

If Obama is the “squeeky clean” honest up-front candidate he claims to be, he should not hesitate to debate Hillary Clinton. Putting his views in contrast to hers in front of the public should be more important to him than appearing to be hiding from the recently bad press that he has received.

I think he is afraid to because debating is not one of his strengths
and he gropes for words and answers. He is still a mystery.

Hi Jack,

The only reason that Hillary would want to debate is that she would get a whole lot of “free” air time. Something she desperately needs since she is running out of money for tv ads…

Absolutely. Mr. Obama talks about bringing a new day of openness and conciliation to Washington and the world. What better way than to have a non moderated debate where we, the American people would be able to judge them by their comportment, candor, the quality of their questions and the depth of their answers. Doing so is not without risk, especially for Mr. Obama, who is leading by slim margins in just about all primary categories. If he doesn’t accept such a debate, however, perhaps his talk of a “new day” will be perceived as just spin for the sake of getting the nomination.

If Hillary was so interested in doing what’s best for the Democratic party, she’d would have quit by now. She cannot catch up in delegates and if she convinces the superdelegates to overturn the will of the people, she will have destroyed the Democratic party.

She has no interest in what is best for the Party.

Alex in San Antonio

Jack, what a fateful act this debate could have been in Obama’s favor had he been able to foresee the actions of his religious mentor, Jeremiah Wright. This would have given the Senator the perfect venue in which to refute all that his pastor stands for. You know the moderators (if there were any) would have asked pertinent questions. But Obama refused to discuss issues with Hillary Clinton, and it looks like the chickens have,indeed, come home to roost!

Mauri
Sugar Land, Texas

The last thing America needs is another debate that produces no answers to any questions that matter. People stopped caring about the issues at some point in November, and these debates stopped discussing the issues at around the same time. Would it really help to have another 2 hours of answers to media sound bites and personal attacks? Oh, I know, it will give us another chance to hear Obama say that he has hope, and for Clinton to say she has experience. I’d only watch another debate if it actually involved debate. I want to hear about economic policies, educational policies, and foreign policies. And not just what the candidates will do about Iraq and Iran. I want to hear what they think of the growing tension in the Balkans, the steps to peace between Israel and the Arab world, how we can fix our relationship with Russia. Trouble brewing in the Balkans, Middle East, and Russia. Are we sure it isn’t 1908?

Jack, He would be a fool. He does not do well in debates. You must be able to think fast and he has shown that he is very weak in that area. Without a prepared speech, he is like a duck out of water.
Charlotte
Clovis, CA

Yes of course. The situation has changed with all the new revelations (wrightgate abd bittergate) and clobbering Obama took in Pennsylvania. What is he afraid off …chickens coming home to roost. Theres is no such thing as to many debates. If he cannot stand the heat of the debates…get out of race.

I really don’t see the point for another debate between these two candidates. There have been 21 overall and 4 between the two of them. I don’t know what more can be said we haven’t already heard. I know her phrases by heart and I know his phrases by heart. Let the candidates talk directly to the people they are campaigning for.

Sure, Barack and Hillary should debate. The two of them have faced off only a couple of times. There just isn’t a legitimate reason to deny voters the opportunity to compare the candidates.

Jerry Wilson

I think that it was a good idea for Obama to not pick another debate because the main argument people make is that they don’t know him while they feel like they know the Clinton’s, since they’ve been around so long. Meeting people on the ground is something that is very positive for his campaign.

However, with enough spin, the choice to not pick up another debate could really hurt him with Hillary deciding to play on his fear of her or the supposed existence of.

Hi Jack,
I believe Hillary is pushing for debates because it’s free air time for her and even if she has a bad debate it’s better than not being on the air at all. Strategically I think Obama is doing the right thing as no new information is going to come out about these candidates. I do wish he’d dig in and let her have it at least once, but with the Clinton loyalists being a significant percent of the democratic party he’s opted to be extremely respectful.

Another blatant attempt by her to throw him off his game which is best
served by him meeting people in person. I applaud him for his
rejection of this nonsense. Besides if I had to be subjected to yet
another of their meaningless debates I might go Elvis on my TV set.

Jack, absolutely not, Obama should not debate Hillary again before May 6. After 21 debates, we all know that the substantive differences between the two are minor. Hillary’s poorly-run campaign is short on cash and in debt. She needs a debate as a means of free visibility. It would be foolish for Obama, whose campaign is spectacularly well run and flush with funds, to give Hillary that opportunity. Let her supporters put their money were their mouths are.

He definitely should….debates are Obama’s “pay no attention to that man behind the curtain” moments: he becomes unveiled….he’s a Wizard of Words…only

Jack,

I do not see any reason, at this point, for another debate. I have watched many of them (though not all) and after the last one, I have no desire to watch another. If the candidates would focus on the issues, then perhaps, but don’t we all know where they stand. I have not liked the way that Hillary Clinton has been running her campaign. I do not like the mud slinging. She masterfully brings up non-issues to divert attention from what is truly important, the issues and the American people.

Jack he should not debate anymore with her…They have debated it to death. I was a long time supporter of the Clintons in the past but they are old news and need to step off the stage.

jack -

hillary is now grasping at straws and there’s no net to support her when she falls, and she will soon fall.

a debate at this time, just like the last one, is a much needed free air time for her. obama, surrounded by men and women of great intelligence will surely refuse to give her this benefit and rightfully so.

also, has there been a precedent wherein two candidates for a party’s nomination have debated 21 times? enough already.

No. Clinton refused to debate Obama in NC April 19th. Obama didn’t whine or go on and on about it. Clinton’s like a bully who keeps taunting someone and when he finally hits back she cries, “No fair! He HIT me!” Why should Obama give Hillary all the opportunities a debate can give her? He’s ahead. He should ignore her and attack McCain.

Why don’t they save everyone a lot of time and money by getting a videotape of the Philadelphia debate, and dubbing “Indiana” over everytime one of them says “Pennsylvania”, and run that…no one will no the difference; there is nothing new to be said. It’s like reruns of M*A*S*H, just not entertaining.

What??? MORE debates? PLEASE, make them stop! I’m sick of the Clintons’ pouting and their down-and-dirty politics, the endless media spin, and panels of “analysts” constantly telling us how to think. Often it’s “much ado about nothing.” And it goes on, and on, and on.

Barack is right: get out among the people and talk about the issues. Voters can make up their own minds and actually converse with the candidates that way.

absolutley not. Indiana and NC are part of the untied states, i’m sure they have watched the last 21 debates. why continue beating at a dead horse? and i thibk he is right, thsi debate would be a chance for Hillary to stir some controversy about Obama, not a platform for getting the key issues out. all issues have been debated, now let the people vote

What is not covered is the fact that Senator Clinton herself has backed out of proposed debates. Anyone who has an ounce of common sense, knows that this is purely a political ploy by Senator Clinton. And in Washington and in the MSM, she gets applauded for doing something that does not advance the cause of the American people. As much as I am a Democrat, I love this country must more than a party. It is time that the very best of America is represented. Those who are appealing to the very worst of America and Americans are the truly unpatriotic ones. If Senator Clinton wins the nomination, or even becomes president, this country will be mired in gridlock, political point scoring, paybacks, and gotchas. Which do you think serves the citizens of Indiana and North caroling more: debates, that at times seem pointless, choreograph, and focus on everything but the issue; or, a candidate travelling both states getting direct information from the voters?

Done is DONE! 21 debates is obviously at least one too many! Despite rumors to the contrary, the last one was not a series of “tough” questions to Barack, but mindless, tabloid dumb questions. He remained focused on wanting to talk about the issues and the moderators failed to get the message. HRC seems to want to “fight” for any attention and as a desperate gasp at the prize. Rarely have so many primaries “counted” in selecting a candidate. Look at how many primaries for the Republicans didn’t “count” once JMcC became “presumptive.

Hey, I am a reformed republican who is all for Obama because he is least untrustworthy politican running. Until yesterday, he did not need the debate. Now with Jeremiah Wright back on front burner, he does need it to show off his stuff. The question isn’t who is the most electable; it is who will be the best president in these times when the country has to unite (and grow up)
gary

You can run(from a debate) but you cannot hide (from a debate)

against Grandpa McCain. He is yet to prove himself as the nominee.

He should agree to it, so he can prove himself to superdelegates.

We need a democrat in office Jack, and in my opinion, he is

highlighting a weakness of his.

Justin
Edinburg, Texas

Sure. I always need something repeated 22 times before I finally get it.

No, he should not. They have been having debates forever. I don’t really care to hear either of them speak about everything over again. Clinton wants the free press. They’ve had their debates. Let the people vote already.

Why not debate? Don’t they owe it to all the talking heads on the news channels?

No, Barack correctly declined the 22nd. debate. Enough already!

How does Hillary know what the Indiana voters want - they may just want her to get out of the race! Did she ever think of that?

I don’t see what the big deal is about having another debate. Any real candidate for President ought to welcome the opportunity to put forth his or her ideas. I guess based on Obama’s reaction, we know who the real candidate is: the one who never backs down, never quits. That’s what I’m looking for in my President — a live wire. GO HILLARY.

Jack, no way!

If he wins, he’s mean and DEFENSIVE. If it’s a tie, he lost! If he loses, she’s making a comeback … she has the momentum.

What’s the upside to Obama?

They’ve already had 21.

I think he should not fear a debate from his tough opponent. He looks like a wimp when he refuses to debate Hillary Clinton.

I think ABC has killed any future debates for a while.

I think Barack Obama should agree to a debate once Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton have FULLY DISCLOSED all of the donors to their Foundation (including the Saudi Family and many many other foreign donors) who have donated at least a half billion dollars!

Yes and then went all-out to make her cry. Now, that’s what I would call her 35-years of experience.

I think HRC’s idea is a novel one. Granted, the two candidates have debated each other many times previously; however, most of those debates occurred last year, when most Americans were not focused on the campaign. Now a Lincoln-Douglas type debate would be quite interesting and there would be no calls of foul on the part of the moderators, since there would be NO moderators!

No Obama should not accept the debate.