Should Friday's Presidential Debate Be Postponed?

[dc_dux]

The first of the Presidential Debates is scheduled for this Friday and today, McCain has called for a "delay" until Congress acts on the financial "crisis".

Sen. Lindsey Graham, McCain's representative in debate negotiations, said McCain will not attend the debate "unless there is an agreement that would provide a solution" to the financial crisis.

McCain has also said he will suspend his campaign activities until a bi-partisan compromise response is voted out of Congress..."putting the good of the country above politics."

McCain senior adviser Mark Salter said that McCain “will suspend airing all ads and all campaign events pending an agreement with Obama, though Salter did not know whether John McCain will suspend fundraising activities. He added that McCain would take part in the debate as scheduled if Congress reached agreement on the measure by Friday morning.”

Several Fox News reporters lauded the “very, very big move” by McCain.......hailed it as “a bold move, a very strong move.” ...adding that McCain is making “some political sacrifice” by volunteering to leave the campaign trail.

Obama responded that a leadership should be capable of doing more than one thing at a time and the American people should hear from the two candidates, one of whom will be the next president.

"With respect to the debates, it’s my belief that this is exactly the time when the American people need to hear from the person who, in approximately 40 days, will be responsible for dealing with this mess. And I think that it is going to be part of the president’s job to deal with more than one thing at once. I think there’s no reason why we can’t be constructive in helping to solve this problem and also tell the American people what we believe and where we stand and where we want to take the country."

Delay the debate or go forward?

[Jozrael]

I don't see why they should delay the debate. The debate is more for those two candidates and regular citizens. I can't see how it influences Congress much. Perhaps I'm naive?

[Cynthetiq]

Are they missing the session to go to the debate? If that's the case, then I'd be all for them doing their jobs before finding new ones.

If they aren't going to miss anything, then go forward with the debate.

[dc_dux]

The results of a poll after McCain's announcement:

Immediately after John McCain's announcement 3 pm ET today, Wednesday 09/24/08, that he was suspending his campaign and seeking to postpone Friday's schedule presidential debate, SurveyUSA interviewed 1,000 adults nationwide. Key findings:

A majority of Americans say the debate should be held. Just 10% say the debate should be postponed. A sizable percentage of Americans, 36%, think the focus of the debate should be modified to focus more on the economy. 3 of 4 Americans say the presidential campaign should continue. Just 14% say the presidential campaign should be suspended. If Friday's debate does not take place 46%, of Americans say that would be bad for America.

[Willravel]

Absolutely! And in the debate, they should receive an electric shock every time they don't answer a question or try to change the subject.

[Cynthetiq]

Originally Posted by Willravel

Absolutely! And in the debate, they should receive an electric shock every time they don't answer a question or try to change the subject.

could you imagine how toasty everyone would be in the TFP Politics forum if we had such a device?

[dc_dux]

Originally Posted by Cynthetiq

Are they missing the session to go to the debate? If that's the case, then I'd be all for them doing their jobs before finding new ones.

If they aren't going to miss anything, then go forward with the debate.

cyn...McCain hasnt voted on any legislation since April....Obama since July.

They can be fully briefed on any pending bi-partisan solution and the Senate vote can be scheduled before the debate..or even the day after.

Only one thing has changed on the campaign trail in the last week, while both candidates have been addressing the issue in every press appearance or campaign stop......Obama's polling numbers are going up and McCain's are going down.

[Charlatan]

I don't think they should delay the debate but they should both shelve their current economic policies of tax cuts until further notice.

[Frosstbyte]

Sounds like a meaningless gesture that's going to appeal to people too stupid to understand otherwise. The debates should go on, and if they can't both handle a debate and their job in the senate, they're not really prepared to be the president. Pretty simple.
-----Added 24/9/2008 at 06 : 17 : 08-----

Originally Posted by Charlatan

I don't think they should delay the debate but they should both shelve their current economic policies of tax cuts until further notice.

Hear hear, and I don't even support taxes.

[dc_dux]

Originally Posted by Charlatan

I don't think they should delay the debate but they should both shelve their current economic policies of tax cuts until further notice.

I would agree. And they should discuss it (w/o shock therapy, but firm moderation) at Friday's debate.

That would require changing the debate focus and format. Friday's was supposed to be about foreign policy/national security and the Oct. 15 debate about the economy/domestic policy.

They should be capable of re-focusing on the fly.

[jewels]

Go forward. I'd like them to stick with foreign policy. I wanna see how it plays out as is.

I heard an interesting take from one of Chris Matthews guests tonight. Moving forward shows the ability to multitask. McCain should be able to fly in for a couple of days of discussion and be able to easily spare the couple of hours for debate, maverick that he is.

[ottopilot]

and as we know, McCain can't use a computer... multi-tasking is right out.

As "Senator" Obama said... it is the "president's" job to address multiple crisis. And while I'm sure that the work of the senate is purely a linear thought process requiring laser-like tunnel-vision, the "senators" Obama and McCain still owe the debt of representation to their constituents. Either should resign their senate seats if they aren't doing their jobs.

[filtherton]

I suspect it has more to do with this:
washingtonpost.com than anything McCain happens to be posturing about.

[ottopilot]

and the fact that they suddenly couldn't put the provision through today.... McCain can come in and look like he's saving the day.

I think they should just leave it in the capable hands of Charles Rangel and do the debate.

[Rekna]

Do the debate.

Now it sounds like he wants to postpone the VP debate too....

[dc_dux]

Originally Posted by ottopilot

I think they should just leave it in the capable hands of Charles Rangel and do the debate.

Actually, on the House side, it is in the capable hands of John Spratt of the Budget Committee and Barney Frank of the Financial Services Committee.

But thats neither here nor there.

[reconmike]

Originally Posted by dc_dux

Actually, on the House side, it is in the capable hands of John Spratt of the Budget Committee and Barney Frank of the Financial Services Committee.

But thats neither here nor there.

Really, the democratic congress got us into this mess let them work it out.

Funny how 2 years ago the economy was doing fairly well until the mandate of the people in nov. 2006.

[roachboy]

i see no reason why the debates should not happen.
move it to washington if there's a need to. it's not that hard.

i wonder if mc-cain would be wearing a superhero outfit as he dashes about trying to look all Involved. and i wonder if he would say anything that is at all consistent with his history in economic matters and with that of his pal phil gramm.

[reconmike]

Funny stuff RB, I wonder if Obama is going to walk across the lake in his sandals, robe and halo, to turn bad notes of deadbeats into free homes.

[roachboy]

well, recon, it's mc-cain's claim that the "crisis" requires his attention and so forth--so the assumption is that he'd want to be an Impact Player--otherwise it'd look like cheap grandstanding. and if you're going to be an Impact Player, so as to avoid the impression of cheap grandstanding, you'd have to be Maximally Visible for the cameras--you know, like sarah palin was at the un---and so an Outfit seems in order--and a superhero is an Impact Player by definition.


i didn't say anything about cheap grandstanding because, well, i didn't think it necessary. i mean, cheap grandstanding is typically pretty obvious.
who would want to appear to be engaging in cheap grandstanding?
that's why i didn't mention cheap grandstanding.

so you see how nice i was?
and i am still being nice.

[reconmike]

Well RB, I am sure you know that McCain has been an impact player for many years in the senate while Obama has yet to get out of the minor leagues of the senate.

Obama might not see it as that important because he has never really mattered much on the senate floor, with all his experience that must be quite a blow to him.

And to be quite honest I could give a rat ass about how nice you play.

[shakran]

Originally Posted by Willravel

Absolutely! And in the debate, they should receive an electric shock every time they don't answer a question or try to change the subject.

Christ Will. What's wrong with you? We're in an energy crisis

Hell yes the debate should continue. in the first place, McCain's help - - thanks but no thanks. He's the fool that authored the McCain-Graham bill 9 years ago that freed up all these bailed-out banks to invest in shaky real estate deals in the first place. In other words, this mess we're in? That's McCain's fault, either because he was too ignorant on the economy (believable, considering he admitted last week that he's an economic ignoramus), or too greedy, to see or care what would happen as a result.

I sure as hell don't want That guy fixing what he broke.

Second, as Obama pointed out, it isn't like there will be anything going on re: the bailout at the time of the debate. This is just an attempt by McCain to get out of having to actually answer questions.

[ottopilot]

Originally Posted by dc_dux

Actually, on the House side, it is in the capable hands of John Spratt of the Budget Committee and Barney Frank of the Financial Services Committee.

But thats neither here nor there.

I know that representative Chuck Rangel is not a senator... however, he has set such a fine example and should work out nicely as a role model of financial prudence for all to emulate.

[scout]

There is enough blame for both sides in this mess. Neither side is completely innocent and this just didn't appear or happen overnight or even in the last two or eight years. This began in the 90's with the passage of NAFTA and all the other "free trade" agreements. Instead of pointing fingers we the people should be demanding to know what went wrong and insisting there is legislation and safeguards to insure it never happens again.

[The_Dunedan]

safeguards to insure it never happens again.

Like maybe not bailing out banks which knowingly made loans they knew were bad to people they knew couldn't pay and then expected the taxpayer to cover the losses they knew they'd incur.

If I'd gone to the Belmont Stakes this year and lost my shirt betting on Big Brown, nobody'd bail me out. The Fed wouldn't steal $.01, let alone 1.5 TRILLION dollars to save my ass. Why should these banks and their idiot CEOs be any different? Let them fail, let them sink, let them blow away like dust in the wind. Then, when it becomes clear that there are consequences for this kind of idiocy, maybe we won't have to worry about this again. This is what happens when you insulate Corporations from the effects of the Market; they become impervious to any kind of sanction, do whatever will make them short-term gains, and then strongarm the Fed into robbing the rest of us to pay for it.

[dc_dux]

The current situation has little to do with Democratic policies over the last two years (reconmike) or NATFA (scout) and everything to do with how the banking and financial lending institutions have been and should be regulated or de-regulated....and now, with the govt in the position to decide if, how miuch, and with what oversight safeguards, it should step in.

The problem for McCain is that he has been all over the map on the issue. His problem is further compounded by the fact that the conservative base is opposed to any bailout at any level. From the Republican platform:

“We do not support government bailouts of private institutions. Government interference in the markets exacerbates problems in the marketplace and causes the free market to take longer to correct itself.”

McCain did the only thing he could...he punted with the idea of postponing the debate ...hoping to stall until he can enunciate a position that he can sell to his supporters....as his poll numbers drop by the day.
-----Added 24/9/2008 at 09 : 40 : 51-----
There will be a bailout...we should just accept that as a given...whether we like it or not.

What the Democrats (and even many Republicans) in Congress have done, and what Obama has articulated in a far more consistent manner than McCain, is a push back against the WH proposal in a meaningful way, with details....that it should include more safeguards (ie regulations) than the WH proposal, provisions preventing more "golden parachutes" for CEOs, more oversight than the WH wants, and a lower price tag...particularly in light of a recent statement by a Dept of Treasury official:

In fact, some of the most basic details, including the $700 billion figure Treasury would use to buy up bad debt, are fuzzy.

"It's not based on any particular data point," a Treasury spokeswoman told Forbes.com Tuesday. "We just wanted to choose a really large number."

Friday's debate will be held with or without McCain....its up to him...but I dont think he should expect to see his poll numbers rise if he ducks the debate and attempts to play the "country above politics" martyr.

[filtherton]

It's interesting to me that the democrats are showing some balls and not completely rolling over for the Bush administration right before the election. It seems to me they've made a pretty consistent habit of rolling over for Bush on any issue that might play a substantial role in anything.

In other words, I like what they're doing, I just wish they realized they could have started doing it sooner.

[The_Dunedan]

It's interesting to me that the democrats are showing some balls and not completely rolling over for the Bush administration right before the election. It seems to me they've made a pretty consistent habit of rolling over for Bush on any issue that might play a substantial role in anything.

In other words, I like what they're doing, I just wish they realized they could have started doing it sooner.

QFMFT

I can't stand the Democrats. I wouldn't trust them to tell me the color of the sky. But DAMN do I wish they'd start acting like a ballsy "Loyal Opposition" at some point! Czech-style gridlock would be BEAUTIFUL, if only we could get these assholes to hate each other more than they love money and power.

[ASU2003]

I would let them postpone it for one day. Congress doesn't meet on Saturdays unless something is wrong.

I want to see them debate at their best. If they are too distracted by doing their jobs as senators (can't be in two places at once), I would be ok with waiting another 24 hours.

[snowy]

Originally Posted by shakran

Christ Will. What's wrong with you? We're in an energy crisis

Hell yes the debate should continue. in the first place, McCain's help - - thanks but no thanks. He's the fool that authored the McCain-Graham bill 9 years ago that freed up all these bailed-out banks to invest in shaky real estate deals in the first place. In other words, this mess we're in? That's McCain's fault, either because he was too ignorant on the economy (believable, considering he admitted last week that he's an economic ignoramus), or too greedy, to see or care what would happen as a result.

I sure as hell don't want That guy fixing what he broke.

Second, as Obama pointed out, it isn't like there will be anything going on re: the bailout at the time of the debate. This is just an attempt by McCain to get out of having to actually answer questions.

shakran, I'm glad you pointed this information out; I was hoping someone would bring it up.

The debate should go on, period. There is no reason to cancel it, and McCain's insistence that they do so feels like a cheap political ploy. Obama actually made a good point in his statement today about using the debate to discuss what the economic crisis means on the global stage, and the effect it will have on our place in the wider world.

[The_Dunedan]

He's the fool that authored the McCain-Graham bill 9 years ago that freed up all these bailed-out banks to invest in shaky real estate deals in the first place. In other words, this mess we're in? That's McCain's fault, either because he was too ignorant on the economy (believable, considering he admitted last week that he's an economic ignoramus), or too greedy, to see or care what would happen as a result.

And Bill Clinton's the asshat who signed the thing into law. I'm no McCain fan, but there's more than enough blame to go around for this mess, and the Dems have their fair share to carry as well.

[Poppinjay]

"The fundementals of the economy are strong." -McCain

So why the need to drop the debate? Does he realize that Ole Miss has spent a million bucks to host the thing? Screw them? It's just kids getting educated, and why would a state like Mississippi need to educate young 'uns?

[The_Jazz]

Hold the debate. Neither on are on the committees deciding things, and any vote can be scheduled around it, before or after.

And I don't think the bailout is the foregone conclusion that some think it is. One will happen, but I think it will be very different than proposed. That's what I'm hearing, anyway.

[kutulu]

Originally Posted by shakran

Christ Will. What's wrong with you? We're in an energy crisis

Hell yes the debate should continue. in the first place, McCain's help - - thanks but no thanks. He's the fool that authored the McCain-Graham bill 9 years ago that freed up all these bailed-out banks to invest in shaky real estate deals in the first place. In other words, this mess we're in? That's McCain's fault, either because he was too ignorant on the economy (believable, considering he admitted last week that he's an economic ignoramus), or too greedy, to see or care what would happen as a result.

Do you maybe mean the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act in 1999 that resulted in teh deregulation? McCain wasn't a co-sponsor but he did vote in favor of it.

[roachboy]

bill clinton was a neoliberal. duh.
phil gramm is a right radical version of the same basic ideology. duh again.
he is mc-cain's economic advisor.

it's always funny to read stuff from republicans about shucking and jiving insofar as responsibility is concerned for event x or y when they like to talk so much about reponsibility. i guess that applies to other people, not to themselves. witness the "bailout" for example.

i see no reason why the debate should not go forward.
for all we know, there could be a deal today.
look at the papers.
devils in the details of course.

[Tully Mars]

Originally Posted by jewels

Go forward. I'd like them to stick with foreign policy. I wanna see how it plays out as is.

I heard an interesting take from one of Chris Matthews guests tonight. Moving forward shows the ability to multitask. McCain should be able to fly in for a couple of days of discussion and be able to easily spare the couple of hours for debate, maverick that he is.

I don't understand the logic of delaying. Are future problems for the POTUS going to happen one at a time?

I think it's a ploy on the part of the McCain camp to look like they're taking some high ground here, when really they're just trying to stall out their dropping poll numbers. McCain's been anti-regulation since the start of his political career. He was literally against regulation one day, boarded a plane and by the time it landed he was in favor of regulations.

[Poppinjay]

He also apparently converted to Baptist on that same flight.

[jewels]

Y'all did see this?

WhitesCreek Journal: McCain Ditched Letterman, Gotta Save Economy...Well, no...Gotta Appear with Katie

[Willravel]

Originally Posted by shakran

Christ Will. What's wrong with you? We're in an energy crisis

I have a solution for this. We have Al Franken and Anne Coulter running on mouse wheels with a camera facing just in front of them so they'll try desperately to run to the limelight. The power from the wheels can be used to shock them.

/outside the box

[aceventura3]

My cynical view:

Here are two possibilities -

If McCain actually believed the economy was fundamentally sound and in fact changed his mind coming to the realization that the financial sector was in a melt down, going to Washington to address the issue, putting the debate and the campaign secondary is the right thing to do.

If Obama believed the economy was not fundamentally strong and was at risk as he campaigned either indicates he did not believe things were as bad as he made them out to be, or did not care enough to go back to Washington, do his job and demonstrate leadership.

So, I try to determine where the truth is and I conclude the following:

The economy is fundamentally strong.
Both candidates know the economy is fundamentally strong.
McCain made the political mistake of saying the economy was strong.
Obama made political points from McCain being honest.
McCain dishonestly backs of of his statement.
There are no political leaders in Washington willing to state the truth about the underlying strength of our economy risking being the butt of endless political jokes and political suicide.
The financial sector panics, compounded by the lack of political leadership, and then looks to Washington for a quick fix. The Bush administration uses hyperbole to promote their plan to address the panic (very similar to the Iraq war, giving Congress an excuse of being pressured or lied too).
McCain being a wily politician recognizes Obama's empty rhetoric regarding Obama's jokes and comments about the strength of the economy and Obama' history of not leading on issues - and takes the dramatic position of saying he is going to go to work to fix the "melt down".
Obama is caught having to say the McCain manuver was purely political (which it was), but to some people (outside of his loyal supporters) makes Obama look like a light weight.

So, in answer to the OP question - the debate has actually already begun. McCain made the first shot and is not playing by "the rules". McCain 1 - Obama 0.