Debates: Rigell, Nye, Hurt Perriello and that’s it?
By Brian Kirwin | Monday, June 21st, 2010 | PoliticsTertium Quids covers the debate over debates in the 5th district, where Republican Nominee Sen. Robert Hurt has now said he will not debate independent candidate Jeff Clark, even after saying he would.
How many lessons do Republicans need to learn from Ronald Reagan.
Nashua, New Hampshire in 1980 coming of Reagan’s loss to Bush in Iowa:
“I thought it had been unfair to exclude the other candidates from the debate. Most of them were also campaigning in New Hampshire that weekend, and since we were now sponsoring and paying for it, I decided to invite them to join the debate…When he spotted the four other candidates, Jim Baker, George Bush’s campaign manager, protested and said George would not participate in the debate as long as they were part of it.”(RR)
Reagan won New Hampshire’s primary 50-23 and was on his way to the Presidency. Bush never recovered from his hissy fit.
In the Fall, Reagan insisted on including John Anderson in debates with Carter. Carter refused and no showed, so Anderson and Reagan debated and spent most of the time bashing Carter. Another debate was canceled, and Carter never gave up his insistence that independent candidates be excluded.
Candidates cede a giant amount of populism by excluding other candidates from debates. More importantly, looking afraid is not the most electable image.
Hurt’s starting to look that way with his flip-flop. Is he better off chickening his way into a one-on-one? Or did Reagan have it right?
Perriello can checkmate Hurt by simply proclaiming he won’t debate unless all certified candidates are included. What can Hurt say? Other than looking afraid of a single-digit candidate, Hurt’s painted into a corner.
The same situation is brewing in the 2nd District. On his victory night, Scott Rigell proclaimed his anticipation for debating Congressman Glenn Nye.
And I have to admit the first thought I had was “I hope for Rigell’s sake that Nye’s debate attendance record is better than Rigell’s was during the primary.” But Kenny Golden’s independent run makes for an interesting parallel to the Hurt-Perriello race.
The debate over whether Kenny Golden will be included in Congressional debates with Rigell and Nye has begun, but only in whispers.
So, let’s increase the whispers. Should independents be included in either Congressional debates?
And don’t give me that “only if they are so high in the polls” – spending money shouldn’t be a prerequisite for debate.
In or out?
Tags:
Contribute for Conservatism!
Share this post
About the author
The right wants to jeer him. The left wants to censor him. Moderates usually want both. Brian Kirwin is a political consultant and public relations strategist in Virginia Beach with a lightning-rod flair. Brian also serves on the VB Arts & Humanities Commission and frequently appears on Hampton Roads theatrical stages, if only to prove that all actors aren’t liberals. Kirwin’s columns stir up debate and hit the political scene with no punches pulled.
Comments
27 Responses to "Debates: Rigell, Nye, Hurt Perriello and that’s it?"
According to the SBE, “independent candidates” have qualified to be on the ballot in every District except the 4th (I put independent candidates in quotes because some of them are aligned with third parties and don’t consider themselves “independents”). In the 11th, there are already 3 qualified and there could be even more that ultimately qualify.
Point is, this isn’t just about Rigell/Nye and Hurt/Perriello. The question is when should these folks be included? It’s easy to say everyone on the ballot can participate but that’ll make a race like the 11th a mess.
http://tinyurl.com/27oc6je
Any debate that Bearing Drift is a sponsor for or a part of will include all candidates vying for the position, including independents.
Hurt’s flip flop only proves what alot of conservatives have said from the very start.Hurt does what Hurt thinks is best at any time.It is called not having a backbone.The same people that think what Hurt just did is ok are the same people that would condemn Perriello if he did the very same thing.People face the facts Perriello is going back to office.We had a golden chance to remove Perriello from office and we have thrown it out the window.The GOP establishment was so damn smart they picked the only candidate that CAN’T get everyone together.Perriello and Pelosi are laughing at the GOP and they should be.The older I get the less I feel like I have in common with the Republican party.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Bearing Drift, BNN_HR. BNN_HR said: [BlogNetNewsHR] Bearing Drift: Debates: Rigell, Nye, Hurt Perriello and that’s it?: Tertium Quids covers the deba… http://bit.ly/al9d5Y [...]
JR
Glad you chimed in because, to me, the debate participants should be determined by the debate hosts, not the candidates. Glad to hear that’s BD’s policy.
All accredited candidates vying for a position should be part of the debate as they do represent a constituency of voters, no matter what the polls say. These “anointed” candidates have to get off their thrones, take off their robes, step from behind their campaign managers and hope they have some clothes on.
good idea: debate host gets to invite whomever.
the poll #s are not relevant to this.
Tim J: I think that’s workable in Virginia, where we do make you put in some effort to get on the ballot. But what about presidential elections? Some years there are ten or so candidates who are on the ballot “somewhere.” What about that? Limit to only canidates who get on the ballot in every state?
Steve, I wouldn’t care. Why not? If you limit who gets on stage, you’re determining the outcome.
The 2003 California recall election had three columns of names on their sample ballot (135 candidates-all of whom worked hard getting their signatures. Is that really a valid argument for getting in a congressional debate? So because I spend countless hours in front of Home Depot and Lynnhaven Mall I get on stage with the Congressman-Really?, but I digress.) What a great debate that would have been in California 2003. Porn stars and pseudo celebrities waxing poetic about the virtues of legalized marijuana.
There must be benchmarks for political debates. I would tie it to the viability of a candidate. Unfortunately the best way to measure the viability of a candiadte is to analyze their fund raising-unless you’re a democrat in South Carolina LOL.
I applaud Bearing Drift’s stand. Any candidate who has put in the time, money and effort and qualified for the ballot should be included in the debates.
If Bearing Drift is going to host debates, I would also encourage actual debates. One minute answers are not “debates.” Give the candidates a topic and give them at least 4 minutes for an answer. It cheapens public policy to say that something as vital as a war can be distilled to a one minute answer. I want to hear serious debate, not canned answers.
richard, the sponsor of the debate could invite whomever they choose. of course, that may say more about the sponsor than anything else.
then candidates would be free to accept or decline.
for example, if NORML held a debate & invited candidates, would they show up?
Ghost, that’s a good suggestion!
I agree with Ghost.
The best course of action would be a series of debates, each focused on one issue. A debate where nothing is discussed except the economy, one on the military and our foreign wars, one on energy independence, etc..
Good post Brian! I agree that they should be included in the debate.
Those that attended or watched our Apr. 15 forum recognize that we did give the candidates much more than 1 minute to answer the question. With three candidates participating in such a debate, it would be easy to set it up where each candidate has three to four minutes to provide an answer with a one minute rebuttal and a 30 second response.
I agree that some kind of “benchmark” needs to be put in place, I’ll leave it to smarter people than myself to determine what is fair.
Voters have a right at this point to hear from who can viably be there next congressman, and given that right now there are exactly ZERO independent members in the House of Representatives, this really should be with people that can logically be sworn in January for the next Congress
if fundraising isn’t the benchmark, should polling be? then who will commission/pay for the poll? the debate hosts?
Brian, thanks for the video, it made me smile and remember what a strong, great man Reagan truly was, not afraid of anything. I am glad of BDs stance of including everyone. It is how it should be.
You’re welcome, Kathy. He was amazing.
He was/ is your messiah afterall – even if folks like you conveniently ignore the facts that he:
1) granted amnesty to millions of illegals
2) cut and ran out of Lebanon
3) had the first openly gay couple sleet in the White House
4) raised taxes
etc.
Reagan’s son is gay. So Reagan was not a homophobe.
Hi, Mark. How unsurprising you’d post about gays.
Didn’t know gay couples could sleet. Is that a superpower?
Contrary to what is posted above, Ron Reagan, Jr. is not gay, or someone should tell his wife of 30 years.
Reagan lives in Seattle with his wife, Doria, a clinical psychologist whom he married in 1980.
Ron Reagan? Ok, I sure do stand corrected. But I’ve read it & heard it on TV.
Leave your response
The comments section is for meaningful discussion. Readers are reminded to post comments that are germane to the article and write in a common language that steers clear of personal attacks and/or vulgarities.
Please take a moment to review our comment policy.