http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070409/ap_on_el_pr/presidential_debate_6
Is this just proof the Democrats will be running for president in areas that they already have support? Why not take a debate on Fox? I have never seen a republican turn down a debate on CNN? Is this just proof they do not have a platform?
2007-04-10 03:28:43 · 15 answers · asked by Barack O Bankrupt 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Its because FOX will not be throwing them slow pitch softball questions. Remember how PO'd Bill got when he was asked serious questions on FOX?
2007-04-10 03:31:24 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 4⤋
Because Faux News continues to provide a bull horn for false claims against these candidates. Faux news spreads lies about Obama's religious background. Faux News asks unfair, leading questions. Faux News cuts off debate before it is over. Faux News' in house commentators will spin the debate poorly against the democrats. The only people that think that Faux News is "fair and balanced" are the less than 30% who still support Bush. The rest of us know better. I wouldn't participate in a debate in a forum that has been known to be dishonest about my background, and I don't think you would either, respectfully.
CNN is also hardly a democratic equivalent. If you've seen Malveaux's smears against Pelosi you would know better.
Democrats have a strong platform in favor of balanced budgets, national security, peace in the middle east, access to health care, honesty in government, protecting the environment, enforcing civil rights, resurrecting our relationship with countries in the whole world, returning power into the hands of the people rather than the oligarchy . . . . . . .
Anyone who would say that the Democrats do not have a platform has obviously been listening to Fox News too much, and thus, proves the point of why Obama and Hilary would not want to go on there.
2007-04-10 03:55:23 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I already know how this will go. Our lovely little democrats have decided they will only do 6 debates blah blah. Than the liberals will say Fox is obviously biased. Than of course they will assure you that CNN is the least biased of the news sources. Well now with that out of the way, Clinton and Obama have already proven how they will handle pressure if they were elected. By doing nothing. I am sure this is the same thing that Liberals are claiming bush is doing. So we are now left with only one hope. ONE person who has the guts to take some heat runs for president and than shows live to America they can take the heat. I do not care if it is a Republican or Democrat this election I am voting for the one who will take the heat and show they are most compitent to respond.
2007-04-10 03:40:43 · answer #3 · answered by Liberalism is a Social Disorder 1 · 1⤊ 2⤋
No reason to go before bias hate pundits. This is a sign of intelligence, when you know the sessions will be monitored and censored. Bill would turn the mic off at his pleasure when being embarrassed by Hillary or Barrack. O'Reilly can't handle Stephen Colbert or Geraldo right now. America knows the difference by the last vote. Americans aren't buying the trash talk from the right anymore. I have some sources:
2007-04-10 03:52:29 · answer #4 · answered by leonard bruce 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Because thousands of democrats, myself included, signed a petition and sent letters to the candidates asking them to skip the FOX News debate. Now, for argument's sake, lets just agree that everything said about Clinton and Obama on FOX News is true. Why should they go on there? Virtually every show on that "News" network has treated them like enemies. Fox has zero credibility when it comes to bias. None.
Mike H.
2007-04-10 03:41:51 · answer #5 · answered by Mike H 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋
No thank you, I even have an ulcer as that's and that i don't want it to get any worse via having to envision that witch. “the folk will not be able to make those options, we can would desire to make it for them.” Hillary Clinton ”we can would desire to take this far flung from them for the "worry-unfastened reliable." Hillary Clinton "It takes a village to advance a infant." Hillary Clinton "the issue in this u . s . a . is only too lots individualism." Hillary Clinton
2016-10-28 08:25:05 · answer #6 · answered by sherie 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
To quote from the article "Obama and Clinton aides said they intended to participate in six debates sanctioned by the Democratic National Committee. The DNC's list did not include the Fox News-CBC Institute debate, a concession to liberal and black activists who say Fox has slighted blacks and is biased in favor of conservative."
All news sources may be biased, but none more blatantly so than FOX. It is also interesting that all 3 major candidates have backed out. I think it says something more about the credibility of FOX than the candidates.
2007-04-10 03:34:30 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
"Obama and Clinton aides said they intended to participate in six debates sanctioned by the
Democratic National Committee. The DNC's list did not include the Fox News-CBC Institute debate, a concession to liberal and black activists who say Fox has slighted blacks and is biased in favor of conservatives."
there's their reason (from your story) but what it comes down to in the end I would think is that they are still focusing on winning the primaries.. and the states where most of that debate would reach aren't the states that are going to win the primary for them.
2007-04-10 03:35:48 · answer #8 · answered by pip 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
They don't have ANY ideas and their only platform is to be against whatever the Republicans are FOR.
They'd do fine in a debate where they always had to go SECOND...they could just be against what was just said.
FOX might - horror of horrors - make them go FIRST every now and again!
2007-04-10 03:37:26 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋
They can't handle dissent. Yet more proof that they are unqualified to be President.
2007-04-10 06:30:17 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
What would they have to gain by participating? It is just going to be slanted to make the Democrats look bad, just like everything else on Fox.
2007-04-10 03:34:29 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋