« Senate District 31: Candidate Field Narrows to Pointless Primary | Main | Herron Back Again »
September 16, 2009
House District 62: The Debate Over Debate
Mark Brown writes about the special election in House District 62 (Shelbyville, and other places) today, and as is expected from a former Senate Democratic Caucus staffer, he castigates the Republican candidate, Pat Marsh, for demanding a debate with his Democratic opponent, Ty Cobb.
As for the repeated calls for a debate, only candidates trailing in the polls demand debates. They want the opportunity to stand on the stage with the candidate ahead of them, thereby appearing to be that candidate’s equal in the eyes of the voters. They also want the opportunity to trip up the leader, maybe get him to say something damaging. Conversely, a candidate in the lead has very little to gain from doing debates.
I know that the above describes conventional strategy. I'm aware of "how it works." But from the perspective of a voter advocate, it also represents a lot of what is wrong with politics and elections. Why should a candidate allow polls to dictate whether or not he or she deigns to appear in public? Why, for that matter, is fear of losing the only seeming motivator for a candidate to want to hold public discussions?
Worse yet, there are three candidates in this special election, not two. The third candidate, Constitution Party member Chris Brown, wasn't even invited—but asked to be included when he heard about the possibility, even if Ty Cobb refused to show. And Pat Marsh, the guy supposedly all for informing voters, said "no."
I hope, mostly for the sake of District 62 voters but also for those of us around the state who care about the entire state government, that we will get a chance to hear from all three candidates together in a public setting before the October 13 election (and preferably before, or as, early voting gets underway). I implore Ty Cobb to agree to a debate; and even if he will not, I ask Pat Marsh and Chris Brown to go ahead without him. The voters will decide whose ideas they like best.
The typical campaign methodology is great for staffers, pollsters, pundits, and, well, one candidate in each race; but it is bad for voters. If one is running for office, one should be eager to present qualifications and issue positions directly to the voters, and to discuss freely with other candidates whose ideas have the most merit. It's not easy to do, as I now personally know; but hiding behind "safe" poll numbers is cowardly; as is, to be fair, ignoring any candidate that doesn't sit on the precious two-party see-saw.
See also: Post Politics has Ty Cobb's rebuttal to Pat Marsh's accusations
State House Elections | By joe lance | 12:41 PM
Comments
The top candidates in the Houston Mayors race canceled all their remaining debates because they claimed they were boring. AC Wharton refuses to show up at debates because he thinks he's better than the infamous gadfly "prince mongo". It makes you wonder about them and what they'll do if they win. I think a lot of it comes down to the dems and gopers believing their a better person than their opponents and the voters. I dont care if you have a D or an R beside your name. If you get bored at a debate or if you dont have time for a debate in a state house race or if you act like your going to have a nervous breakdown if you have to be in the same building with a guy named prince mongo. You frankly have no business being anywhere near an elected office.
Posted by: dan t at September 16, 2009 3:19 PM