Obama Blows Another Debate Opportunity

For Sen. Barack Obama, last night's Democratic presidential debate at Howard University should have been his version of a fastball hitter getting a perfect pitch down the middle of the plate with the count set at three balls and no strikes.

Instead of swinging for the fences, Obama took one looking.

I wasn't in Washington, D.C. because I was hosting Paula Zahn's show on CNN, but all of the folks I've talked with said the room was hot, the audience was packed with some of the biggest names in black America and there was a general feeling that many were there to shower Obama with the love and affection you would expect with him being the only African American in the race for president.

So, on my Chicago radio show this morning — on the only black-owned, black talk station in a city with the second largest collection of black folks outside of Africa — what was the first sound bite I played? Sen. Hillary Clinton's remarks about black women and HIV/AIDS. What was No. 2? Sen. Joe Biden, discussing the U.S. Supreme Court's decision on race and education. What was No. 3? Rep. Dennis Kucinich's denunciation of mandatory minimums.

Obama was trailing behind.

That is telling, because others who were in the room came away with the same conclusion.

But don't just rely on my analysis, go to www.messagejury.com.

On the Web site are sample results of how voters in early primary states watching the debates rated the candidates based on their statements.

Prior to last night, Clinton had a pre-debate score of 5.3. After? It was 7.0, a 1.7-point bump; the highest among the eight candidates. Sen. Christopher Dodd began with a 3.7 and ended with a 5.1 (a 1.4-point increase). Biden started at 3.5 and ended at 4.7 (a 1.2-point increase). The biggest winner of the night was Kucinich, who began at 2.3 and ended at 5.1, a jump of 2.8 points.

Obama began at 6.1 and ended at 6.6, just a bump of half a point (even former Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel had a larger increase — 0.8 — than Obama).

I didn't need an elaborate dial-up test to come up with those results (well, maybe for Dodd, who I've pretty much written off).

So what gives with Obama? How can a candidate who speaks so eloquently and passionately on the campaign trial come off as flat and unemotional during debates? (I thought that was supposed to be Clinton's role!)

Most of it lies in the fact that Obama dislikes debates.

During my interview with him to air on Monday at 10 p.m. EST on TV One Cable Network, Obama admitted that he is not enamored with debates, saying they provide little time to speak on issues. He prefers to use his time to "inform."

And he really doesn't like the idea of sound bites driving a campaign. That's understandable; politicians prefer to expound.

But it's time for him to wake up to reality.

When he has a campaign rally that attracts 20,000 voters, that's one heckuva turnout. But when there is a debate and 2 million people are watching, you can influence a lot more people.

He is riding on being the anti-establishment candidate who wants to avoid the normal rules of the campaign. But common sense suggests that style and substance are required when people vote for commander-in-chief.

Based on all the current polls, Obama is running second to Clinton. This isn't a guy who needs to play it this safe. He has to know when to take his shot and go for it.

Because he was speaking before a nearly all-black audience, Obama had to tread carefully. Although he was speaking before what some may view as the "home team," he also has the most difficult job because he has to be inclusive and represent all Americans. He can't appear to be pro-black and alienate white voters. But he also can't be so racially non-threatening that black voters — who by and large don't know him as well as Clinton (by virtue of husband Bill) — are left puzzled by his lack of forcefulness when speaking to issues they hold near and dear.

His image-makers and debate-preppers are going to have to step up their game — or be replaced — if he is going to overtake Clinton. She has come out of each debate looking strong, speaking passionately and decisive on issues and appearing to be able to master the format better than Obama (and the other candidates).

My good buddy, former NBA player Spud Webb, says a great basketball player is a triple threat; one who can shoot, pass and dribble.

Sen. Obama, your game needs some work. You're good on the stump and you can raise money, but if you aren't able to master the debates and speak to the minds AND hearts of people, then your speech in Denver at the Democratic National Convention next August won't be the final one we hear. That spot will be reserved for Clinton.

Roland S. Martin is a CNN contributor and a talk-show host for WVON-AM in Chicago. Please visit his Web site at www.rolandsmartin.com. To find out more about Roland Martin and read his past columns, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2007 CREATORS SYNDICATE