I didn’t watch last Wednesday’s presidential debate in Philadelphia between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. From what I have read and heard since, I gather that the debate was more of a "gotcha" game of distractions than substantive questioning of the two candidates. The media critique of the two moderators, George Stephanopoulos and Charles Gibson of ABC, has been mostly negative. With the Democratic Party nomination process being extended beyond common expectations and with the two candidates (and one prominent spouse) willing to throw barbs at each other, over ambitious, smart alecky and boorish journalists are in hog heaven this year and are practically salivating to outdo each other in latching onto every silly turn that this long campaign has taken.
More interesting to me than what the bloviating pundits have to say is what American voters, particularly those in Pennsylvania where the primary takes place next Tuesday, think about the media created political circus. I came across a sampling of viewers’ response to the debate in Thursday’s issue of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. 20 out of 22 comments rated the debate as frivolous sham. Most readers appear annoyed with the moderators for their less than professional line of questioning and with Clinton for playing along.
Pleased though I am by the public reaction to ABC’s ham handed hatchet job, I can’t help harboring a slight suspicion that some of the outrage too may be a bit of a sham. Do most voters really feel upset by the sorry spectacle of journalistic sleaze or do they want to believe that they do? Is there a brand of Bradley Effect at work here too? Despite all the negative comments about Hillary’s merry mud slinging, I have a feeling that she will pull off a double digit victory in Pennsylvania. Of the several tons of dirt she has heaped on Obama’s personal credibility and character, at least a few kilos are bound to stick.
Some examples of readers’ reactions:
11 Minutes devoted to the "bitter" comments.
10 Minutes devoted to Reverend Wright.
9 Minutes devoted to a flag pin and Obama’s supposed lack of patriotism.
5 Minutes devoted to Clinton’s Bosnia flap.
3 Minutes devoted to gas prices.
I REST MY CASE!
Edward A. Owens, Pittsburgh
webmaster Red Raider Nation http://redraidernation.com/ "Where Champions Live"
I, like so many others, was disgusted with the line of questioning and lack of time spent on the real issues we are facing. I’m not sure if you will be able to post this link in your comments section, but I thought I would show people a way to directly vent their disdain if they so choose.
http://abcnews.go.com/Site/page?id=3052660
It’s simply a comment page, nothing more.
Brad Gething, State College
The "debate" was nothing short of shameful. Apparently, Stephanopolous and Gibson would rather be playing sandbox or tabloid politics than allowing the public the opportunity to hear the candidates speak on the real issues we face as a country. ABC owes the American public an apology.
Patricia Schwartz, Washington, PA
I was totally disgusted with George and Charlie. Instead of focusing on the issues, they wasted time with stupidity like flag pins. Wearing a flag pin does not a patriot make! I can’t believe that people even notice such things. I am an Obama supporter and will vote for him on Tuesday. Last night’s debate was a waste of time. I should have stuck with America’s Next Top Model!
Toni Yates, Ford City, PA
This "debate" was a farce. I thought I needed to turn it off the minute the question was "Do you think Reverend Wright loves America as much as you do?" But I hung in there another few minutes of what felt like brain cell-killing, mindless hours of meaningless drivel. Until the glassy-eyed woman asked "Do you love the flag?" Then I turned it off.
Honestly, I don’t know if it’s the media or if it’s us, but I do know one thing: If we’re really this dumb, we deserve a hundred years of the Bush family.
Dan Richey, Shadyside
Debate? This was an ambush. Clinton got booed for bringing up this stuff and tries it again with the help of George and Charlie. She lost my vote as of tonight and ABC came across so biased any idiot would see it.
Joan Slish, Latham, NY
Was this really a debate? It was more like an hour-long attack ad for the Republicans. I don’t care about Hillary Clinton’s excellent Bosnia adventure. I don’t care about Barack Obama’s pastor. I really, really, really don’t care what kind of lapel pin Obama (or, for that matter, Clinton) wears.
What I do care about are Clinton and Obama’s plans for dealing with the problems that America faces. We are stuck in Iraq and Afghanistan without a good exit strategy. We are mired in foreign debt up to our eyeballs. Our economy is cratering. Vast swaths of America have been essentially abandoned to sink into poverty and despair. Energy costs are skyrocketing, we are too dependent on foreign oil, and we lack a coherent energy policy. The cost of health care is hitting the stratosphere, but our health isn’t improving. We are trashing the environment and eliminating 50 years of environmental protection. As far as consumers go, it’s caveat emptor for contaminated food and poisoned toys. The Bush administration sat on its hands as one of our great cities drowned. It trampled our beloved Constitution, spied on innocent American citizens, tortured prisoners and denied them their basic human rights, and in general acted like a rogue state — leaving an enormous mess for the next president to deal with.
Did we hear much about these issues during the debate? No. Did we find out what the candidates plan to do to get our wonderful country back on the right track and restore America’s good name? No. However, we did hear a lot about some dude Obama knows who was once a member of the Weather Underground.
Shame on Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos! This debate was a joke. I guess I shouldn’t be surprised, though. God forbid that they press the candidates on the dull, boring issues issues that actually make a difference in our lives. It’s much easier to stick to "gotcha" questions, non-issues and sound bites.
Heckuva job, ABC!
Nancy Ott, Aspinwall
Apparently intellectually lazy tabloid journalism is what passes for a debate at ABC News. This shamefest taught us nothing about either candidate. It was nothing more than a continuing slide down the hill of infotainment. Would ABC have us believe that the first forty-five minutes of the debate was simply to show what it would be like for Senator Obama when the Republicans begin their attack campaign? If so, it’s pretty thin excuse for a hatchet job. Making it uncomfortable for the front runner is not their job. Their job is to report the news and give the electorate information useful to making a decision on April 22 and beyond, not to manufacturer it. I am embarassed for American journalism, for ABC, for George and Charles, and for anyone who thinks that this is what politics should be about.
Teddy Carroll, Pittsburgh, PA
Accidental Blogger 
3 responses to “The Debate Debacle”
My suspicion is that the most vocal critics of the debate are largely the strongest Obama supporters, of whom there are undoubtedly many.I doubt whether a lukewarm supporter to one who is outright opposed to Obama will choose to waste their time weighing in negatively on the ABC debate. Undecideds will tilt the race, and it’s anybody’s guess as to whether the ABC debate will have made up their minds- my feeling is that the lack of substantive debat e on issues will not have swayed any of these people much.
LikeLike
Double-digit victory for Hillary, Ruchira? Most of the polls have her lead in the 5 to 9 point range – and since Obama tends to win voters over the more he is able to give speeches and campaign for them, the long, seemingly endless, run-up to the PA primary might help him chip into that lead even more.
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08109/874589-100.stm
LikeLike
Andrew:
I know what the polls are saying… my husband rattles them off to me daily. And indeed, Obama has closed the gap admirably. But what I fear is that unlike in Texas where Obama’s rise in the polls just before the primary was real, PA may mirror Ohio more closely. Rural white voters will not change their minds about him even if they don’t tell the pollsters. Those “undecideds” will lean heavily toward Clinton. So even though Hillary no longer holds the 30 point advantage, she is probably further ahead than the polls reflect. I am of course hoping for a very close race or a miraculous victory for Obama. But I am pessimistic about it.
If Obama has some sense and is not bashful about a bit of late day muck raking, he should run an ad and remind those “white working class” voters what Hillary said about them when her husband was president.
LikeLike