“to no particular benefit”

Except of course to undecided American voters - you know, the ones who are actually responsible for electing the President, the swing voters - so they can get some actual policy understanding about the candidates instead of both of them just claiming they’re for Change and demonizing the other when they speak in sound bites in front of their screaming fans.  I haven’t made a choice because I have no idea what either of them are actually proposing yet.  I couldn’t care less what party they are from.  What are their policy positions and how will they pay for them.

So your point is the better funded candidate should win?

He should accept it, and I think he will. Obama is not scared of facing McCain one on one. In fact back in May he already said it was a good idea.

Exactly. Dr T’s goal would be better served if both campaigns agreed to three debates controlled by the LWV. The LWV used to be much better with policy questions; it was after they pulled out that we started getting the gawdawful gotcha questions.

So you think that Obama is not skilled enough to sit in a chair across the room from what is daily described here as a senile old man with no charisma and hold his own, yet you want to send him to Iran and South Korea to negotiate for us with truly bad dudes?  I see a disconnect.  Don’t you think those negotiation opportunities which Barak says he will personally handle will be fraught with ambush potential?

From a pure politics standpoint, remember the Kennedy/Nixon debate?  I would think Obama supporters would jump up and down at every opportunity to get their exceptional orator on stage with McCain.

I certainly think this would be great for Obama. (Maybe fewer than 10 though, just due to the sheer boredom factor.)). A town hall format without hideous ABC-style “moderators” is exactly what I wanted, and I’m suprised McCain’s campaign would suggest it.

Of course, the devil is in the details, but Obama’s people clearly know what they’re doing and I trust their negotiating skills.

Dr. T, Barack, at least, does not speak in soundbites.  He discusses his policy proposals in some detail.  If you only see news clips of his speeches, then sure, you’re going to miss the details.  If you actually want to wonk out on the policy, then you should check out the candidates’0 websites. 

Here is Barack’s issues page: http://www.barackobama.com/issues .

Here are his speeches: http://www.barackobama.com/speeches/index.php.

Jesse, they’re going to agree to debates at some point.  How is that any different?  Barack looks like a coward if he turns down the opportunity to directly confront his opponent.  He’s already dealt with the media trying to trip him up with questions about Farrakhan and Wright.  Do you really think McCain is any more talented at that than Tim Russert?

Plus, you mentioned Obama’s superior ground game.  There’s only one Barack Obama.  He isn’t staffing all their field offices.  How does having him commit to townhall meetings hinder that organization?  By providing some media bombs?  Like his organization didn’t overcome those during the IN, NC, and PA primaries?

Why is it that my posts disappear, never to be seen again, unless I Preview them?  It’s very annoying.

I didn’t catch originally that he wants to do these BEFORE the conventions. That, I don’t think Obama should agree to. He needs to introduce himself to the voters at the convention first. After that, town halls are fine.

You can always tell the candidate who’s behind, because he/she is the one agitating for more debates and trying to paint their opponent as a coward if they don’t show up to the schoolyard fight. Thanks, Senator McCain, for letting us know that you know you’re losing!

I’d be OK with this is they wanted to do 3.

But 10?  That’s nuts.  It’s almost as if the tactic here is to bore the crap out of people so they don’t actually watch any of them, then soundbite Obama to death.

But look, he said it right there, “I [cut] invented the [cut] internet.”  How can we elect this horrible lying liar?!!!!

Obama is not Gore or Kerry. This would be like Kennedy-Nixon.

But 10?  That’s nuts.  It’s almost as if the tactic here is to bore the crap out of people . . .

Opoponax—Possibly the idea was to give the old coot some desperately needed practice before the convention.

I feel sorry for McCain—he’s going to be completely humiliated in the debates.

Molly NYC,

Whats really pathetic is McCain’s sad attempts to copy Obama’s style and frames. Ex., check his new site design. Its completely ripped from Obama, as well as his new slogan (A Leader We Can Believe In, sound familiar?)

This is the first election in my lifetime where Democrats have actually set the framing! Its a miracle!

“Mainly, as you said, it’s the 10 in two and a half months.  It’s one a week until the convention, which essentially makes the entire campaign about them, rather than anything else.”

That’s indulging in excessive hyperbole.  Unless there is a bombshell, the media will probably spend no more than two days a week on the townhall.  Barack will spend at most a half day with it combining prep work and actually attending the event.  That leaves 6.5 days for the candidates to make news.

Plus, if the press is excessively focused on the townhalls, which candidate do you think will have an easier time of changing that focus?  The candidate who managed to get 75,000 people to listen to him (and an indie rock band that usually draws under 5,000 to its crowds)?  Or the guy who was just pilloried by his party’s cable propaganda network?

Having been through the Gore/Bush “debates” and the Kerry/Bush “debates” I already know how this movie ends.

Unfortunately, so do I:  it ends with the media screaming that John Kerry is a bad, bad man for “outing” Mary Cheney, the former gay/lesbian liaison for Coors beer.  Because apparently until that debate, nobody had any idea she was a .... a .... L-E-S-B-I-A-N.

The fact that in that same debate Bush denied that he’d ever said he didn’t care about Bin Laden even though there was footage of him saying that exact thing?  Less important to the future of the country than letting Lynne Cheney excoriate John Kerry for revealing the “private family matter” that Mary Cheney was making a living from.

the media will probably spend no more than two days a week on the townhall.

I don’t think you grasp what this actually means.

It means that McCain gets one chance per week to “gotcha” Obama.  Which can easily be done by downplaying the the debates themselves in favor of covering them ad nauseam in the aftermath.  Round the fucking clock.  Show the debates live a 2pm when most people are at work, then plug plug plug away at the one slightly questionable thing Obama might have said, or which you can make it seem like he kinda sorta implied, all day every day 24//7 until the next debate a week later, which will give you all new material to start over again.

The problem is not the actual time that the debates themselves will occupy, or the fact that one day a week the debate itself will be broadcast.  People might turn into the first town-hall, if it’s broadcast at a convenient time.  But after that people will get bored andgo back to American Idol or whatever, and you can use the resulting footage for “gotcha” fodder at your leisu.

Why is everyone convinced that McCain won’t make a giganctic mistake but Obama will? Are we like abused dogs or something?

Its in town hall formats where McCain has made some of his worst blunders (“100 years”, etc). At another town hall he said he “didn’t know much about the economy”. And theres always a chance McCranky will lose his temper and fly off the handle in a Macaca Moment.

“It means that McCain gets one chance per week to “gotcha” Obama.  Which can easily be done by downplaying the the debates themselves in favor of covering them ad nauseam in the aftermath.  Round the fucking clock.”

Why do you think it’s any more likely that it happens as a result of a townhall rather than during Obama’s other campaign stops?  Or that Obama won’t be able to punch back?  Bittergate happened at one of Obama’s own events.  And he punched back on it.  The furor over using diplomacy with our enemies wasn’t a forced error, Obama chose to pursue that tack.  Obama opposing the gas tax holiday didn’t happen at a debate, it was a volley among the candidates via the media.

It may be marginally worse for a slip up to appear as a forced error.  But how are the townhalls really providing any increased risk?  It’s not like we nominated Rudy Giuliani who would have won but for the fact that he had to, ya know, campaign.

Why is everyone convinced that McCain won’t make a giganctic mistake but Obama will? Are we like abused dogs or something?

Where have you been since January?

Barack doesn’t actually have to slip up.  He just has to open his mouth.  McCain does not have to perform flawlessly.  He just has to put the focus on Obama.

But how are the townhalls really providing any increased risk?

My understanding is that these events would be on McCain’s turf, so to speak.  Coordinated by his people, with questions gamed his way.  Staged at a time and place of his choosing.  Moderated by journalists sympathetic to him.  etc. etc. etc. 

Remember that ABC debate between Clinton and Obama which was moderated by a former Clinton administration employee, where all the questions were variations on “so why don’t you love America, Mr. Obama?”

It would be like that, but worse.

The Opoponax, all the “slip ups” overblown by the media never stuck. He brushed them off and actually used them to his advantage.

Wright was supposed to kill him, it didn’t. “Bitter” was supposed to kill him but it didn’t even move the polls. Ayers and flag pins were supposed to kill him, but it didn’t. Not supporting the phony gas tax holiday was supposed to kill him, but it didn’t.

You know why? Because unlike Gore and Kerry he actually responds to the charges and smacks them down. 

Hell, if the media were so deviously effective as you think they are we’d have a Hillary vs. Rudy race.

FWIW the town hall debates wouldn’t have any moderators. It would be free form. I still say McCain isn’t as good as them as he is cracked up to be. See: 100 years.

Let’s also be clear about something. 10 townhalls is the absolute worst case scenario.  It’s not like Obama has to agree to all of them.  And he’s shown in the past that he’s willing to turn down campaign stunts like this when there’s no obvious benefit.

He declined to be forced into the public funding limits.  He turned down Clinton’s requests for more debates in the final months.  He’s not some political tyro.

Hell, if the media were so deviously effective as you think they are we’d have a Hillary vs. Rudy race.

It’s not that I think Obama is doomed to go down in early rounds due to the devious, devious media.  I mean, if he beat everything Hillary threw at him, I doubt McCain can really do a whole lot worse.

If I thought Obama was that sensitive to this sort of thing, I wouldn’t have been in his camp since practically 2004.

My point is mainly to illustrate exactly why people see this as a lose-lose situation for him.  The best he can hope for is just a waste of his time.  And it could easily get a lot uglier than that. 

Personally I’d be OK with Obama agreeing to a couple or three pre-convention debates, provided they were on neutral ground.  But to say, “I just don’t see how this could possibly go wrong!” Is to relive the Kerry campaign all over again.  “I just don’t get it!  Kerry is just so much smarter and more articulate than Bush!  Why isn’t he winning?”

“...which when decoded actually says… “I’m going to vote for the Republican.  I have in every election I’ve been allowed to vote in.  My decision was never in doubt.  But I want the Democrats to think there might be some chance I’ll switch.  But I won’t…”

I’ve never voted for a Republican Presidential candidate in my life.  Twice for Clinton, and for no-one the last 2 times because they were all jackasses.  If the Democratic leadership thinks like you, that there are 3 undecided voters in this country at this point, your are going to have President McCain come January.

No, I certainly wouldn’t agree to debates on McCain’s ground and terms. Ten is also a bit much, but say 3-4 neutral, town hall debates with 1/3 of the audience Democrats, 1/3 independents, 1/3 Republicans with no moderators held in swing states would be a good thing.

I wouldn’t call Kerry “articulate”. Smart, sure, but he had been in the Senate too long. He spoke too much in what I call “Senatelish”—long, laundry list speeches delivered technically well but uninspiring and canned. Basically the problem McCain has.

I mean, if he beat everything Hillary threw at him, I doubt McCain can really do a whole lot worse.

This is the salient point.  Clinton isn’t the media darling that McCain is, but she was the presumptive nominee the moment she declared her candidacy.  Well, she was, until Obama claimed the first victory in Iowa.  And then he won the nomination.  He didn’t do it prettily, but he did it ably. And it’s safe to say he’s been vetted by now.

Let’s give him and his campaign some credit.  Obama and his strategists have proven enormously capable.  They’ve weathered numerous storms.  Everything a campaign does entails some risk.  Obama seems equipped to handle whatever comes his way.  In that regard, he’s probably the most able, and best-spoken candidate the Democrats have had since Bill left office.

They’ll negotiate neutral or favorable terms for the townhalls and will take advantage of the format, or at the very least, perform successful damage control.

I’ve never voted for a Republican Presidential candidate in my life.  Twice for Clinton, and for no-one the last 2 times because they were all jackasses.

Unimpressive, even if true.  Bill Clinton was the best Republican president since Eisenhower, and if you couldn’t tell by 2004 that another four years of Bush would be a catastrophe regardless of who replaced him, then your judgment isn’t particularly trustworthy. 

If the Democratic leadership thinks like you, that there are 3 undecided voters in this country at this point, your are going to have President McCain come January.

Dr. T, I don’t spend as much time on this board as I once did, so it’s possible I’ve missed something, but I’ve never seen you be anything but hostile to the goals and beliefs of this blog, the Left, and the Democratic party.  Given that, why on God’s Earth or Lucifer’s Hell should we trust either your undecided status or your campaign advice?

I’d be curious whether this might actually be a better format for Obama than debates. The media-straitjacket “take turns giving your stump speech in 30 second bites while Tim Russert occasionally attempts to disrupt your flow” tv debate format we seem to have settled into never seems to have been something Obama got the hang of.

Believe what you like Seraph.  I fully realize and have witnessed that within your very tight circles here that just for supporting Hillary rather than Barak you treat the other side disrespectfully and harshly.  I expect no less. I am also fully aware that generally you are imcapable of engaging with anyone who doesn’t beleive everything the exact same way that you do around here.  But without the ability to engage Clintonian conservatives you have zero shot at the WhiteHouse.  Shoot yourself in the foot.  Nothing new there.

But without the ability to engage Clintonian conservatives you have zero shot at the WhiteHouse.

We need to engage with Clinton supporters.  But Clinton was not supported by conservatives.  We gain nothing by engaging with conservatives.  Conservatives would not have voted for Hillary, they will not vote for Obama, and the Democrats will not gain the support of “undecided, swing voter” conservatives like yourself by continuing to act like Republicans Lite.

Bill Clinton - not Hillary Seraph.  Lots of conservatives voted for Billy Boy.  That’s how he won twice.

Bill Clinton - not Hillary Seraph.  Lots of conservatives voted for Billy Boy.  That’s how he won twice.

And that’s how DADT and DOMA came to be. 

Another such victory and we are undone. 

Bill Clinton was a good ol’ southern white boy, Dr. T.  Hillary lost access to most of those conservatives by being born with a vagina, and Obama by being born with black skin.  Don’t pretend otherwise.

And please don’t insult my intelligence by suggesting that we could win you over if we would only treat you thusly, or do such-and-so.  We can’t.  It’s a waste of time and energy to try.  We - and Obama - are better served by spending the next six months motivating the base and winning over actual moderates than trying to appease conservatives.  Conservatives have their candidate.  They know who to vote for if they want to put fags in their place and make sure dirty sluts are punished for having sex - and if they want to continue sending their money and their children over to Iraq, never to return. 

Oops.  Guess that’s kinda the problem.

McCain is the second coming of Bob Dole, and he’s on record supporting a war that nobody wants.  His supporters are already dispirited.

You need a scarier boogeyman if you want to intimidate us.

The Obama campaign has responded by requesting that the meetings be Lincoln/Douglas in format. That’s actually a really good response, because it means that if one side wants to slime the other, they have to do it personally; they can’t just rely on some guy at the townhall meeting or some reporter asking a question about what’s “out there.”

Heres a crazy idea, Dr. T—

How about the Republican Party finds its inner Eisenhower/Nelson Rockefeller and try to appeal to moderates and liberals? You know Eisenhower—that crazy CRAZY socialist (sarcasm) who built the Interstate Highway System and started the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare?

Or that crazy left winger (more sarcasm) Dick Nixon who started the Environmental Protection Agency?