Thursday, July 13, 2006

Democratic Gubernatorial Debate

Did anybody catch it? Met the two "not real" candidates at Bishop Park at the Dem Spring Fling a while back. Mac is a hoot, but Bolton is just batshit crazy (I actually found myself agreeing with Mac a couple of times, like when he said the teachers needed a big pay raise). I thought the Big Guy got the best of it, although that may just be because I've already decided to vote for him. Thoughts anyone?

18 comments:

hillary said...

Report posted on my page. There was much laughter.

Publius said...

As mentioned below, I'm behind Taylor. But, even as a Taylor fan, I've got to say I was a little disappointed in the Big Guy's performance last night. (Disclaimer: I didn't watch the whole thing.)

I dunno, kids. Taylor was on message throughout, as mentioned by Hillary, but his delivery seemed kind of flat. More than anything, he just looked kind of tired.

Not that Cathy was much better.

DoubleDawgDareYa said...

Well, yeah, by saying the Big Guy got the best of it, I wasn't saying he was good. Both he and Cox were utterly uninspiring; they were going through the motions. My only real reason for saying he did slightly better than her is that he was more on message than her (and by more, I mean like 98% to 96%), and she slung a little more mud at him, which makes her look like she's on the defensive (which she probably kinda is).

The best example of that is the closing statement, which for Taylor was simply a recital of his answer of most of the questions in the debate, and didn't mention Cox at all. On the other hand, in hers, Cox again levied the charges about Taylor "lying" and so forth.

hillary said...

You know what? "On message" sucks.

DoubleDawgDareYa said...

That depends on the message, I suppose.

It's certainly less entertaining, as you point out, but on message with the right message wins races, and that's what they're trying to do, right?

Patrick Armstrong said...

Yeah, but 'on message' can mean too often that the candidate is not responding to the actual question being asked or rebutting anything their opponents actually said. Its like a bunch of people in the same room talking to themselves. But it isn't at the crazy house, or a wacky reality show, it is on TV for high political office.

That's why I fancied the New Orleans's runoff Mayoral debates to be the shin-dizzle-bam of debates, the ones that all debates should aspire to become, as long as they use someone who isn't Chris "Hackery" Matthews.

Also, someone's going to need a lot more than 'message' to beat Good Ole Sonny Boy. They're going to need personality as well.

Publius said...

"hillary said...

You know what? "On message" sucks."


Why?

Anonymous said...

in a live, broadcast debate, a good candidate can use a little personality and go a little off-message. any time there is a substantial audience of witnesses to the exchange, it's not as critical to stick to the script if you have a candidate that has that natural ability. not every person who would make a great elected official is a great speaker with the looks, personality, wit, charm, etc. those are bonus attributes that are not critical to governing but they sure as hell make people vote for you. we're so addicted to entertainment in this country that Jeff Foxworthy could easily win most elections.

sticking to the message script became super important when the press got super lazy and unreliable. you can talk to the press for hours and have honest, intelectual, thoughtful, candid conversation and then they broadcast or print some 3 second snippet out of context that makes you look like a buffoon. when we get an American audience that is really interested in serious discussion of the issues then we'll get journalist who will give that to them and only then will politicians and candidates believe that they can freely speak.

sadly, I think we are moving in the opposite direction. Republicans have been winning because they understand the use of sound bites better than Dems. I don't blame the media because they are giving the majority of their audience what they want. you can't blame the candidates because they've learned how to best deal with the media. frustrating as hell, isn't it?

DoubleDawgDareYa said...

They're not running against Sonny yet, they're running against each other. And I'd take Taylor v. Cox in a personality battle anyday (although I will agree that he was a little flat last night).

And what's your beef with Matthews?

hillary said...

Everyone's basically explained already what the problem is, but I'll say it again: I understand that the idiot vote is a large and crucial one, but I happen not to be included in it, and I resent being told the same thing 20 times in the space of an hour in slow, simplistic language pitched at the level of a five-year-old's comprehension. That's what I hate about "on message" because that's what it generally translates into. Answer the questions, come off like a thoughtful human being who understands the issues rather than robot programmed to win elections, and try not to use those damn buzzwords so often.

I believe abortion should be cancer-causing, illegal, and performed on street corners, bitches.

Adrian said...

Sounds like Bolton has some personality for ya.

bulletdawg said...

Taylor stayed on message. The problem is he never got off message. He repeated the same lines over and over and over again. It was if he was replaying his television ads for us.

Also, Taylor looked stiff and uncomfortable on stage. I kinda expected Cox to be the one to look scared.

For the most part, Cox stayed on message. And I like her message of change. Maybe I'm an old fashioned populist, but it bothers me that Mark Taylor is paid 1oo,ooo a year by his father's trucking company in exchange for a "few hours each month."

hillary said...

Bolton does have personality. Unfortunately, he's insane. Insane, _and_ I disagree with him on a number of issues.

Patrick Armstrong said...

DiDDY: My beef with Matthews extends from his behavior on the New Orleans Mayoral debate, which he used as his own personal ratings generating machine.

Anonymous said...

Those of us who venture outside the comfortable confines of NE Georgia will notice the Cathy Cox tide rolling in throughout South GA. Too bad nobody lives there. North GA wins this one, so Taylor wins this one.

Patrick Armstrong said...

Hi, I've been representing Island City since 1983.

Ignore South Georgia at your own risk, bubba. Last time y'all used that strategery, we ent up wid a R'publican as Govner. Too much o' dat booklearnin's whut yer problem is.

I count just as many Taylor signs as Cox signs, and there isn't any 'tide' rolling about either candidate in this neck of the woods. People made up their minds weeks ago.

Anonymous said...

I'm in Augusta. And in the yards, there are ALOT more Cox signs than Taylor signs.

Patrick Armstrong said...

I gotta give my love for Augusta, as so much of my family calls it home. I hope the Soul Bar is still there raisin' hell.

But, from the city that produced such winners as Linda Schrenko and Charles Walker, I don't know how well that bodes for the Cox campaign.