Clinton Letter Requests Debate A Week With Obama

Clinton campaign manager Pattie Doyle has released a copy of a letter sent to Obama's campaign, seeking a debate a week through the rest of the primary season. Read it below:

David Plouff
Campaign Manager
Obama for President
Chicago, IL

Dear David:

Congratulations again on your victories Tuesday night. As Senator Obama declared, it was a great evening for Democrats.

One of the things I've always appreciated about the Democratic Party is its willingness to engage the toughest issues facing our country, even if we don't always agree on how best to solve them.

After seven years of a Bush administration that has left the economy struggling and our health care system in crisis, Americans are certainly facing their fair share of challenges and deserve to hear how the candidates for the nomination will address them.

As such, I was disappointed to see that Senator Obama rejected the idea of having more debates given the fact that he and Senators Clinton have had only a single one-on-one debate. I think we can do better and so does Hillary.

Senator Clinton believes voters should have more than one opportunity to see the candidates discuss the issues and has accepted five debates between now and March 4th from CNN, MSNBC, WJLA, ABC and Fox News.

Story continues below

advertisement

To that end, we hope Senator Obama will join Senator Clinton for a debate a week beginning this weekend. I'm sure we can find a suitable place to meet on the campaign trail. There's too much at stake and the issues facing the country are too grave to deny voters the opportunity to see the candidates up close.

As Senator Obama has said, "In an era when Americans are rightfully skeptical about the quality of our politics, let us set an example [they] can be proud of and give them the kind of campaign they deserve." We couldn't agree more.

Best wishes,

Patti Solis Doyle
Campaign Manager
Hillary Clinton for President

+++

Obama responds -- he's not interested:

Mr. Obama said most of that fighting would be done on the ground in the next voting states, not in debates. When asked whether he would accept the invitation from Mrs. Clinton to attend four more debates in the coming weeks, he laughed.

"I don't think anybody is clamoring for more debates," he said. "We've had 18 debates so far. I think we've had 10 more than we've had in the last Democratic contest."

He said he would agree to at least one debate, but noted, "It's very important for me to spend time with voters."

Comments

[findingthetruth]

WHY IS HILLARY ASKING FOR DEBATES? She doesn't answer questions. She doesn't want debates. She NEEDS Obama to STAY OFF THE STUMP!!!!!!

[sarainitaly]

who gives a heck what either of them want. It is what WE want. They are going to be working for US. I want to hear them debate more. I want more time to dig deeper. I want them to be asked other questions, besides what we have already heard.

This is our right.

[nihilon x]

How did we become I so quickly in your post?

What I want (not we) is for Obama to continue the grassroots campaigning that got him where he is today.

Debating isn't what got him where he is now, and only a fool changes a winning strategy mid-effort.

[OtayPanky]

One of the problems with the historical debate formats is that it allows participants to get away with non-answers when someone probes their weak spots. Hillary has been a master (mistress?) at this particular game...particularly on the issue of her war votes.

Here's what I'd like to see instead: Get a room full of bona fide undecided voters, AND voters who are not democrats as well. Give them each little controllers so they can VOTE at the end of each question whether the candidate answered the question directly, or bullshitted their way through.

Alternatively, get a bunch of Clinton supporters to ask questions of Obama, and vice versa.

Then sic 'em on the candidates, directly. Show us all, the audience reaction to each candidate's answer (or non-answer) to each question. Hold the candidates' feet to the fire. Make 'em answer EVERYTHING. Let 'em get away with NOTHING.

THAT would be a political show worth watching. But more of this preening dog and pony show? What's that worth, anyway?

[OtayPanky]

POSTSCRIPT: And then, repeat the process in the general election.

[piezoid]

Coward. 'Fraid of a girl? Don't worry McCain will go easy on the Messaiah. No problem. Idolatry will carry the day.

[SDgirl]

Go away Hillary. Our guys got better things to do and so do we. It is painful for him and us to have to listen to you hog all the debate time while you drill a whole through our brains with your chainsaw of a voice.

[MrBritesnide]

Desperate?
Are we watching the same campaign? You prefer airy rhetoric to cogent solutions to hard realities? I'm one of those people who wants to be "forced" to buy health insurance. I've been recently blinded and I could have used it. You're a jackass.

[PKSSK]

Tell your Clinton supporters to start reading the websites and educate themselves on the candidates issues and policies then they will have all they need to vote.

Educate your supporters and potential voters, this is key in any campaign, not debates. Tell Hillary to travel to the primary states and convince the voters herself that she is worth their vote.

[research]

Only of the profits go to CHARITY!

[mrcontinental]

And I see that the Shillary "volunteers" have infiltrated HuffPo with their incessant whining and inane drivel. Pathetic.

[sarainitaly]

i see that the assholes have infiltrated huffpo again, with their incessant derogatory comments, and pathetic attempts to avoid the issues. pathetic indeed.

[mrcontinental]

You want a debate? Then bring ALL of the remaining candidates on BOTH sides and let's ask some serious questions about what they WILL do about the economy, the wars, the FED, NAU, and other RELEVANT topics. Last I checked they are running for POTUS period.

You fools are so naive and only want more debates to shill and spin for your chosen candidates; and it's nauseating.

[sarainitaly]

Well, that was kind of rude of you to say and assume.

I say bring it on! Let's do the debate. with both sides.

[mrcontinental]

Really? Have you been reading these post? Many are just shameless shilling and it's disgusting. Nothing about the country or it's challenges just "my candidate" should get the job and then resorting to name calling of the other with a heaping dose of sexism, and racism thrown in when no valid points can be made. It is nauseating.

[transendentilist]

Let's not and say we did. Obama is afraid to take Hillary on. She will trounce him on the issues, and obama knows it. That's why is cutting and running. Promises of hope only go so far. If he is afraid of Hillary, how's he going to stand up to foreign leaders that don't like us???? What's he going to do, shout racism??
Obama's all hat and no cattle. A few calves maybe, but no cattle.

[sharon40]

Obama - the emperor with no clothes. Times are too scary for on the job training - and who is he any way and what has he done that was positive? If he hadn't joined the campaign (he could have waited 8 more years) maybe Biden or Dodd would have at least had a chance. But Obama provided entertainment to a media that is biased against Hillary Clinton because she is a woman (just listen to that pig Chris Matthews). But everything aside, Howard Dean is right - if this goes on much longer - say President McCain loud and clear.

[midtown]

Hillary is broke. Used her $5 million for Super Tuesday ads. She cannot afford TV ads; therefore, she needs -- desperately needs -- these debates to reach voters in upcoming races.

[sarainitaly]

personally, i wish all the campaigning was done via the debate method, and tv interviews. the fact that ALL these candidates have raised and spent MILLIONS of dollars is gross.

[transendentilist]

Oh, I am starting to see a parallel here between obama supporters and the righties. The truth is just not on your side.

[Kansas Evans]

No one answered my first post - so I'll post again.

The problem I have is what good is having 5 more debates to the party? If the different debates will cover issues that we haven't talked about - socioeconomic and political justice, reform in criminal law - I can see the usefulness. A healthy discussion on issues of race, gender, and class would be helpful to everyone. Perhaps if the debate focuses on how to rid the country of intellectually dishonest conservative frames - like how to restore the word "feminism" back to its original meaning or have actual economists admit the folly of the Laffer curve - I can see the usefulness.

Besides that, all I see is a fractured Democratic party heading into November. The comments here demonstrate exactly the problem. Empty "rhetorical" attacks that say less than they accuse Obama of saying. I admit, I'm an Obama supporter, and I don't like Clinton politics. But if anyone can explain why 5 more discussions about healthcare policy - Krugman is misrepresenting Obama's plan - or the war -Clinton NOT going to say she was wrong - is helpful, please do.

Moreover, those who argue that Obama only has platitudes haven't been paying attention. Neither to the previous 18-19 debates or his speeches. You haven't done your research, but I'll explain it as best I can. Michelle Obama says it best, but basically, progressives know the things we want to do. The problem isn't a lack of plans, the problem is getting the job done. If you don't think Obama is progressive enough, that's fair. But to say he's afraid? Afraid of what? To say he has nothing to offer?

I ask that people criticizing Obama's "Yes, WE can" actually listen to what he's saying. It's up to WE the people to make the changes we want, not anyone person.

[Kansas Evans]

Why is no one responding? Is there anyone who believes the debates will gives us new information and help keep the party together?

[transendentilist]

Bullshit. The people have no power. Why have a government at all if the job can be done by the people?? "Yes We Can.....what?" I want to see obama face off Hillary on the issues and what she plans to do. Obama offers nothing but abstract platitudes and empty promises.

[Kansas Evans]

"The people have no power. Why have a government at all if the job can be done by the people?"

History would prove you wrong.

On one hand, it's true that individual citizens can't keep the roads, bridges, or levies safe; can't regulate commerce, etc, etc. But, we elect the people whose job it is to do those very things. WE tell them what to do. WE force changed by only by voting, but also by protesting, boycotting, writing letters, etc, etc on the local, state, and national level. So, you're wrong on that hand, too.

Obama offers plans and specifics, maybe you've missed them, but do some research.

Lastly, I enjoy civil discussion. Please, be civil.

[mirandaK]

More debates, yes. So what if it's free air time, great. Clinton has money, Opbamah has more. Okay. Debate already, we have had what one "debate" with just the two of them?

Truth is Opbamah is a wind bag, all platitudes and plagiarized slogans. At his last speech he was quoting Maria Shriver who was quoting yet another hopeful piece of fluff.

We need substance, we can't hope for an end to this war, we can't hope for health care, we can't hope that this junior senator can get us out from this gazillian dollar debt.

We need change "yes, we do" but we need change with someone with experience. We need Hillary, a woman who will not let anybody fuck with her or her country on day one!

Hope = no, not this time. Debate Opbamah, we need to hear from the two candidates, the country is changing, the world is changing, every day, how are they going to handle this change. We need answers, not hope!

[KPinSEA]

You know who had just a TON of experience?

Donald Rumsfeld.

Want him as your nominee?

[transendentilist]

Apples and Oranges, dude. Apples and Oranges.

[BikerJim]

He has agreed to more debates, just not one a week....

[transendentilist]

Really? Got a link?

[sarainitaly]

I would love to see them in one on one debates, especially on Fox. I would love to see how they both perform against the republicans, and get to some issues other than those we have already discussed.

With all the other debates, each of these two candidates have only had about 10 minutes of talking time, each per debate. What is that, like, an hour and a half each. To me, that is NOT a lot of time.

I know Obama would prefer to have his rallies, where he performs very strong, but his rallies only reach a specific audience, in each location.

nationally televised debates give us ALL more depth on the issues. With these two strong candidates, we need more details, in order to form a more educated decision.

I am a hillary supporter first, but I do like him. But, we can never have enough information, and there are many undecided still. I do not want people voting for Obama merely because they have jumped on the rockstar bandwagon, nor do I want people to vote for Hillary because they know her name.

We need more debates. Especially now that we are so evenly divided, and getting closer.

I think if Obama refuses, he is afraid of revealing he has no depth. I am not saying he hasn't any, but if he runs away from debates, then I assume he is afraid. Those fortunate enough to attend a rally, for either candidate, are lucky. But the rest of America has a right to hear them debate the issues, 1 on 1.

[cambio]

Way to go Obama! He is absolutely right, we have had a ridiculous amount of debates, and they have all pretty much centered on Obama and Hillary, so her excuses are bullshit. If voters haven't figured out where they stand on issues yet, repetition isn't the problem, the problem is with the people. Hillary just wants to interrupt Obama for talking to the people on the ground, because there he is unstoppable.

[ljsfolly]

It looks like some people think if they post the same thing over and over it might make a difference. I find it disturbing to think you feel repetition is the best way to deal with issues. If you say it with feeling once it means something over and over just means you have no more original thoughts in your brain. As far as debates we have had all we need and the information on both is out in the public MSM or available on the internet. Free coverage is all Hillary wants and the last debates were a waste as no one debated they just did the friendly I think this you think that as we have had before. Barack needs to spend the time in front of people not answering idiot questions again. I agree with you cambio!

[soylentgreenleftovers]

ljs, Hillary has an group of staffers whose sole mission is to log onto message boards like this & agitate for "debates" or whatever message it is that the candidate is pushing at the time. That is what we are witnessing here.

[Political Voyeur]

Hillary should be fundraising anyway. She and Bill don't have Romney money to throw at THEIR campaign.

[BikerJim]

Spot on, Hillary just wants free air time...

[transendentilist]

That's a pretty shaky excuse not to debate Hillary. What's Obama afraid of?? I know what he's afraid of, and that is actually having to talk about the issues. You can only go so far on a pocketful of hope.

[KPinSEA]

No ... caving to an opponent's demands to do everything on their terms and playing to their strengths ..... that's weakness.

When Ahmadinejad tells the next President "I demand you have a conference with me every week now that it looks like I'm facing sanctions," you want him (or her) to say "Gee I guess I'd better so I don't look weak" ...?

No.

[transendentilist]

Yeah right, and up is down and left is right. Didn't we already cover this with baby bush???
It's very simple, and requires no spin. Either obama accepts the challenge like a man, or he does what he is doing now, trying to wriggle out of letting the people see for themselves what his strengths and weaknesses are.
This has nothing to do with Iran or anything else. It's about a one on one debate with Hillary on the issues. Why should he not want another chance to expound on his ideas????

[AdLib]

Of course he was willing to debate 18 times, we all know the truth though, debating 19 times is what proves you're not afraid of Hillary and Al Qaeda.

Another ridiculous Hillary troll, you're so oblivious that you're only making her look worse.

[MrBritesnide]

Better than a Hillary hater. You're politics of the past. You want fresh change, but you want to get it the same old crappy-ass way.

[transendentilist]

Obama and Hillary have had only ONE face to face debate. That's not enough. Why all the excuses? Is he trying to hide something from the people?

[COwoman]

I have no idea why Huffpost has seemed to have lost this post. It is important and missing in action.
Please read:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/deepak-chopra/senator-barack-obama-resp_b_85428.html

[BikerJim]

Thanks for this post.. a COSman

[transendentilist]

Come on, Deepak Chopra? Why not Dr. Phil too?

[mirandaK]

Dr. Phil will be next, him and Deepak are part of the Oprbag family. Bought and paid for. If they didn't support him they'd never be on the book club again.

Obamah doesn't want to debate because his 26 year old speech writer Jon Favreau cannot provide the feed quick enough.

How could he wax lyrical on JFK, RFK, MLK Jr, Oprbag, Hopi elder and Bubba Gump without his speech writer in a debate?

Hell no, he won't debate.