RSS
In my opinion, it was a tie
In every contest, people like to have a winner. Even though individuals may not admit it, they probably agree, at least tacitly, with legendary Green Bay Packers Coach Vince Lombardi, who said a tie is like kissing your sister.
Of course, the implication, for those who may not understand, is that no matter how much you love your sibling, kissing is not the same (at least it shouldn’t be) when it’s between family members as opposed to a significant other or spouse.
That said, we’re going to disappoint — or maybe anger — a lot of people when we say the debate between 9th District Congressional Candidates Rep. Gary Peters, D-Bloomfield Township, and Rocky Raczkowski, R-Farmington, was a tie.
Excuse me while I duck. I know that there are supporters for each candidate who will swear, among other things, that their particular man won. And so they should feel that way — they’re supporters of the candidate.But if you take a more independent, middle of the road look at the debate, you’d have to conclude it was a tie.
Neither candidate was able to out wit, out talk or out last the other. They both were logical, fluent and confident during the discussions.
In most cases, as we pointed out in an editorial, they didn’t differ much, if at all.
For example, both favored the tax abatements and efforts to keep the GM Orion Plant open. Peters said the tax breaks were essential while Raczkowski said “we shouldn’t be begging our employers to come here.”
On health care, both said there were some good aspects to the lengthy new law. Peters defended it saying a critical component of health care is that it’s affordable and that insurance exchanges in 2014 will make it so. Raczkowski said the current bill was giving citizens higher taxes. However, he supported provisions that allow individuals to stay on their parents’ policies till they’re 26, and prevent insurance companies from denying coverage to children due to pre-existing conditions.
In reference to foreign policy, both agreed that strong efforts need to be made and steps taken to ensure that Iran does not become a nuclear power.
There was no impartial judge or referee scoring points during the debate, so calling it a draw will remain merely an opinion, just as the views of Peters and Raczkowski supporters, who believe their candidate won.
But the biggest victory for one of the candidates, as we all know, will come in November at the ballot box.
Of course, the implication, for those who may not understand, is that no matter how much you love your sibling, kissing is not the same (at least it shouldn’t be) when it’s between family members as opposed to a significant other or spouse.
That said, we’re going to disappoint — or maybe anger — a lot of people when we say the debate between 9th District Congressional Candidates Rep. Gary Peters, D-Bloomfield Township, and Rocky Raczkowski, R-Farmington, was a tie.
Excuse me while I duck. I know that there are supporters for each candidate who will swear, among other things, that their particular man won. And so they should feel that way — they’re supporters of the candidate.But if you take a more independent, middle of the road look at the debate, you’d have to conclude it was a tie.
Neither candidate was able to out wit, out talk or out last the other. They both were logical, fluent and confident during the discussions.
In most cases, as we pointed out in an editorial, they didn’t differ much, if at all.
For example, both favored the tax abatements and efforts to keep the GM Orion Plant open. Peters said the tax breaks were essential while Raczkowski said “we shouldn’t be begging our employers to come here.”
On health care, both said there were some good aspects to the lengthy new law. Peters defended it saying a critical component of health care is that it’s affordable and that insurance exchanges in 2014 will make it so. Raczkowski said the current bill was giving citizens higher taxes. However, he supported provisions that allow individuals to stay on their parents’ policies till they’re 26, and prevent insurance companies from denying coverage to children due to pre-existing conditions.
In reference to foreign policy, both agreed that strong efforts need to be made and steps taken to ensure that Iran does not become a nuclear power.
There was no impartial judge or referee scoring points during the debate, so calling it a draw will remain merely an opinion, just as the views of Peters and Raczkowski supporters, who believe their candidate won.
But the biggest victory for one of the candidates, as we all know, will come in November at the ballot box.
posted by Allan Adler at
1:57 PM
9 Comments:
Allan, my objections to the debate were 1) your continuous questioning regarding the 'birther' issue. It's a non issue. Obama is already President and it took away precious time that could have been spent on more pressing issues. 2) Peters falsified a statement regarding GM paying back their TARP loans, which I wrote about in your paper and this issue was never challenged by the OP Panel. It was a glaring lie misleading his constituents and was reconfirmed prior to the debate by the current CEO of GM.
I was hoping for a more substantial debate between the two candidates on the issues that are important and impact the lives of those that live in this district. I was extremely disappointed that the debate questions didn't meet my level of expectations from the leading newspaper in my county.
I don't know who structured the format of the debate. But allowing the audience to applaud during the debate was distracting and cut away time from the candidates. Also, I noticed, the panel continued to hammer Rocky on the birther and lawsuit issue. Again, this was a non-issue with so many serious issues to discuss. Rocky, in my opinion was shortened several times and cut off, while Peters always got everything in he had to say.
I hope that this coming debate will be better structured, the audience more contained in their applause, and the questions only issue oriented.
We must concur with the observations of Rotti and Renee. In addition, several of the current representative of our district made statements that were absolutely false and he was not held accountable for them. It was during this debate that we concluded that he isn't a deliberate liar - he actually believes what he is spewing.
Since our current representative has voted with Pelosi 95% of the time, it appears that he has been brainwashed by the socialist inhabitants of Washington DC. He needs to be brought home for psycholical debriefing just like the American POWs who were held by the North Koreans in the police action against the North Koreans.
Oakland County cannot afford to repeat the mistake again of hiring a lap dog to the socialist regime.
Dear Mr. Alder: I'm confused! Were we at the same debate? First of all, I thought the debate format was terrible. It was handled more like a weekly sit com than a debate that would give the candidates a forum of professionalism.
Second..you call it a tie?? I have been a fence sitter for most of the campaign. This debate sealed the deal for me with Rocky winning by a landslide.
For Mr. Adler to state that The Hon. Rep. Peters was "logical,fluent"really strains credlulity. When presented THE Facts of the Lawsuit,His Eminence maintained his ads are truthful.No one addressed the constitutionality of "O" care,so that "logic" cannot be questioned.He was certainly "fluent" to his cheering section, who continually innored entreaties to not applaud/cheer,by both parties. Obfuscation on Rep. Peters' Responses was ,in large part a factor in this"TIE". 11/3/2010 will tell,won't it? By the way,wasn't it curious that this debate could not even fill up O.C. auditorium? A low turnout WILL favor the challenger,if I may be so bold.
Dear Sir: I take offense with your statement that there wasn't much difference between the candidates. Only one of them has been in the hip pocket of the Speaker of the House, voting for nearly every spending bill presented to him - - Gary Peters. I'm of course talking about Cap & Trade, ObamaCare, Stimulus I, II and III, etc. Mr. Peters exhibits all of the signs of being a social progressive liberal who can't say "No!" or cut wasteful spending.
The questions were all 'liberal hot-button issues' and were mostly framed with a liberal slant or agenda, and I felt that Peters was allowed to have a lot more of his people in the room and was also given more respect and time by the moderators, and so if Rocky was able to battle to a tie with a sitting Congressman in that environment, that speaks to his skill and character. Let's drop Peters in to a random townhall anywhere in his district and see how well he does answering questions from real people about his votes over the last couple years- I'm sure you'd see real quick that while Peters might hold his own in a liberal environment, he doesn't do to well in the real world.
Come on- Peters said that Rocky wants to raise taxes 23% and honestly believes that, when in reality Rocky wants to reform the tax code and likely lower taxes for everyone. Either Peters is an idiot or a liar, or both.
Alan,
When you say the candidates have similar positions on things like taxes you fail to recognize that Peters has already voted for substantial tax increases and increases to the nation's debt. Only during campaign time is he against such things. Why won't he talk about his record instead of some lame business dispute his competitor has? By the way, I heard Peters was sued 6 times. Do you guys in the media do any investigation anymore?
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home