Thursday evening I had the opportunity to attend the taping of the U.S. Senate Republican primary debate. The hour-long debate will air on ABC affiliates throughout the state on Sunday, May 9th. As far as I know, this is the only scheduled television debate with all three candidates before the primary election on June 8th.
Held at the Museum of Tolerance in Los Angeles, the debate was moderated by Los Angeles ABC anchor Mark Brown. Since readers can watch the debate themselves this weekend, I won’t go into detail about what took place. Although, I live tweeted the entire debate that evening. I will offer a few insights on the general response from the audience (mostly filled with campaign supporters for the respective campaigns), and share some of the feedback I encountered immediately following the debate.
Each of the candidates stuck to their strengths as they squared off. Tom Campbell, ever the professor, provided detailed policy answers to each question. I heard those around murmuring about how knowledgeable he is, and how he always comes across as an expert on technical policy issues.
Chuck DeVore provided lots of red meat conservative responses to questions, and was able to really shine on matters relating to foreign policy and the military, mostly due to his experience in that field.
Carly Fiornia was the most eloquent of the three, speaking in clear, concise sound bites that sliced through complex policy jargon and displayed a breadth of knowledge on key policy matters.
Unsurprisingly, all three camps have claimed victory for their candidates’ performance. I think each candidate was able to deliver on their respective strengths. However, each performance should be analyzed based on each candidate’s ability to win not only the primary, but the general election.
I would never support Tom Campbell in a Republican primary if I had a choice of someone more conservative, which both DeVore and Fiorina obviously are. This was most clearly elucidated when the candidates were asked whether they support someone listed on the no-fly list being allowed to purchase a firearm. Campbell immediately responded, “No.” While DeVore and Fiornia affirmed their belief in the Second Amendment right to bear arms and the due process of law (those on the no-fly list haven’t been convicted of a crime). Taken aback by his peers’ response, Campbell retorted, “It seems somewhat unusual to take that position, except perhaps in a Republican primary.” Republican primary voters won’t miss this slap at their conservative, Second-Amendment-supporting reputation.
On a side note, it may be a personal prejudice, but I’m still bothered when candidates jump from one political race into another simply because their chances are better. Campbell jumping from the gubernatorial race to the senate race halfway through the campaign season looks like political opportunism, instead of a real desire to seek the senate seat for the public’s good.
While more and more conservative leaders—such as Sarah Palin and numerous pro-life groups—are throwing their support behind Carly Fiorina, dispelling Chuck DeVore’s contention that he is the only conservative in the race, there is no disputing DeVore’s conservative credentials. He is among the most conservative votes in the State Assembly. And he’s been a Republican activist for years.
DeVore immediately went on the attack during the debate, repeatedly insisting that any conservative stances by Campbell or Fiorina were merely instances of them “joining” him in his long-held positions. One of the most bizarre moments of the debate came when DeVore responded to a question about America’s presence in Afghanistan. In the last breath before his time ran out, DeVore stated, “We have to prepare for the next enemy. It’s not Afghanistan. It’s the People’s Republic of China.” Immediately, a buzz went up amongst the audience as they tried to make the connection between the question and DeVore’s seeming non sequitur of an answer. At his next opportunity, he did clarify that he views China as a greater threat because Afghanistan lacks the infrastructure that exists in China.
When it comes to their positions on key conservative issues, it seems that there isn’t a real distinction between Fiorina and DeVore. Of the three candidates, Fiorina is by far the most polished and camera ready. Her years in the board room at a Fortune 20 company have obviously prepared her for the rough and tumble of politics. Because she speaks in sound bites, media love to quote her and viewers will be able to quickly understand and relate to her.
Fiorina immediately differentiated herself from her fellow candidates by reminding viewers that she has never run for public office before and is not a career politician. A key difference between Fiorina during the debate was her laser focus on Barbara Boxer, referring to her as a “failed senator.” While she did take a few barbs at Campbell and DeVore, Fiorina is obviously focusing on the candidate anyone would love to run against: a very unpopular, liberal, career politician who hasn’t accomplished anything for her state.
With the election less than a month away, voters are just now beginning to pay attention to candidates. The senate race has been overshadowed by the far more expensive governor race. Polling numbers show Campbell neck-and-neck with Fiorina, and DeVore trailing both. But there is still a large group of undecided voters. As conservatives begin to examine the positions of each candidate, they will immediately rule out Campbell and begin focusing on the other two candidates. When it comes to conservative positions on major issues, DeVore and Fiorina are both appealing. It then becomes a matter of who can beat Barbara Boxer in November. Based on Democrats’ attacks on Fiorina during the primary season, it looks like Boxer would rather not face Fiorina this November.