I did watch the one-hour debate and while not taking notes I will give you my impressions and the things that stuck out (think of it as my advice to my liberal friends in-state).
Coakley: Sorry to say it, ladies, but she did not look warm at all. Too much of a cop. She had a nice, girl-next-door feel but that simply contributed to the feeling that she would be in over her head in the U.S. Senate. I must say I was disappointed to hear her defend her opposition to the marijuana decriminalization question we passed by a 65% vote. She said it was to protect kids, but one of the provisions was to have pot busts wiped from the kids' records so it doesn't keep them from going to college or getting college aid. C'mon, Marty!!! You are supposed to be better than that!
Capuano: I'm surprised to see myself type this because I think he's been a creature of Washington too long and didn't have the temperament; however, he did seem the most capable of them all. Even though he was combative right from the start (why hasn't a Kennedy endorsed you?), he struck me as the one guy who wouldn't be overwhelmed down there, although I laughed when he defended the mammogram controversy by saying -- and I quote -- "science changes." Yeah, apply that to the climate change crapola please, Cappy! If the guy wasn't in-deep in D.C. and so gung-ho on getting "Al-CIA-Duh" I would probably vote for him over Brown in January.
Pagliuca: Yeah, Pags looked a little unsure of himself at times and struggled to get his words out; however, despite the wealth factor the guy actually projected that he cared -- more than the front-runners above. One of the things about his wealth is that he is not beholden to the special interests and sliver, one-issue constituencies of which his opponents are beholden. Yes, he wasn't as polished as the other three, but that probably helped him. And I was impressed with him coming back on Martha after the "it's personal" remark on abortion -- after which Capuano piled on him. I wouldn't have blamed Pags if he felt persecuted. It looked like Coakley and Capuano were double-teaming and trying to knock him out.
Khazei: At times I thought he was the only adult in the room. He was the only one not involved in the elbow-tossing, which hurt him because he didn't get as much air time. Of course, nice guys finish last anyway, right? He did say some good things at times, but nothing stuck out. In the little time he did get he seemed to wonkish.
The weird thing is, if you run the names up instead of down that is who I would most like to have a beer with (in that order).
Actually, I'd rather smoke a joint with Martha; maybe she would relax a bit more.
And how is the Globe is spinning it?
In a word:
"Abortion....
The debate, carried live on WCVB-TV and co-sponsored by GateHouse Media New England, ended just minutes before President Obama addressed the nation on his plan to send 30,000 additional troops to Afghanistan....
--more--"
And when I pick up my printed paper this morning what leads the Metro section?
"Candidates spar on abortion issue; Foreign policy sidelined, as debate centers on support for health care overhaul" by Matt Viser and Frank Phillips, Globe Staff | December 2, 2009
Let's see how I did with the rest of my analysis.
A staid primary campaign for US Senate turned testy last night, as Attorney General Martha Coakley cited her gender in an unusually pointed personalization of the abortion issue and US Representative Michael Capuano accused Boston Celtics co-owner Stephen Pagliuca of taking a position on health care that would lead poor women to seek abortions in alleyways.
Yeah, I didn't like her playing the gender card, and felt Pags was attacked by Cappy with that low shot. He saw an opening and went after it.
The sharp exchange, over how to balance all four Democratic candidates’ support for abortion rights with their professed support for a health care overhaul, overshadowed foreign policy on a night when the nation’s attention was focused on President Obama’s much-anticipated speech on Afghanistan....
The debate featured the rawest exchange yet between the four candidates, with a feisty Capuano at the center of most of the hard-edged back and forths....
Coakley, who has been criticized for a lack of passion in the campaign, offered a rare display of her personal side. She talked about making difficult medical choices when her mother was dying of leukemia, said her own family has had to cut back on restaurant dining because of the recession, and defended her personal finances, which have raised questions because she has disclosed remarkably low savings in her bank accounts.
Yeah, as a person I thought she would be more understanding of the average sentiment. But she was too much of a cop.
Pagliuca touted his private-sector experience creating jobs, but the wealthy businessman was put on the defensive by both Coakley and Capuano.
I believe I called it a double-team.
Khazei largely stayed out of the fray, but in doing so was less visible than in a previous televised debate in October, at which he was accused of talking too much.
That's the way I felt, yes.
The heated exchange over health care last night was set off when Pagliuca reiterated his oft-stated insistence that he would be the most reliable supporter of health care legislation among the four Democratic candidates. That prompted a sharp retort from Coakley.
“Steve, it’s personal with me,’’ Coakley said. “And it’s personal with every woman who’s in this, who’s watching this.’’
“It’s personal with me, too,’’ Pagliuca responded. “We have 45,000 people dying because they have no access to insurance. That’s the greater good.’’
Capuano then interjected and sharply rebuked Pagliuca, for both his television ads and for his political view.
“And by the way Mr. Pagliuca,’’ Capuano said. “Have you ever known a poor woman who was forced to choose for an abortion without health care coverage? Have you ever known one?’’
“Yes, I have,’’ Pagliuca responded.
“So have I. And you would send them back to the alleys of America?’’ Capuano said.
“Poor women don’t deserve to be treated that way, and I’m sorry that you feel that way.’’
But he seems fine with chasing "Al-CIA-Duh" all over the place.
How many poor women been done in by those bombs, Mike?
***********************
Following the debate, Coakley’s aides said she would oppose reauthorization of the Patriot Act.
So she will buckle under pressure, huh?
All of the candidates said they supported a $20 million federal appropriation for the Edward M. Kennedy Institute for the United States Senate.
Related: Ted Kennedy Still Costing the Country
None was supportive of the job performance of Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner.
Kind of a dumb question if you ask me.
Asked what personal changes they have made as a result of the recession, the candidates offered a window into their own homes: Capuano said he changed lightbulbs to be more energy and cost efficient; Pagliuca said he is giving more of his time and money to charity; Khazei said he is increasing his charitable giving and reducing gift-giving at home; and Coakley said she and her husband are cooking more often.
What sacrifices as so many are suffering because of their policies, huh?
I don't want to be too harsh, but WTF?!
A third, and final, televised debate is scheduled for tonight at 7 on New England Cable News, WGBH-TV, and WBUR-FM and is being cosponsored by the Globe.
Oh, I think I will be skipping that one.
--more--"Related:
- Selecting a Senator: The Massachusetts Electorate
- Selecting a Senator: Meeting Martha
- Selecting a Senator: Mad Mike
- Selecting a Senator: Pag's Bags
- Selecting a Senator: Crazy Khazei
- Selecting a Senator: Brown Out
- Selecting a Senator: Jack Be Nimble
- Selecting a Senator: Capuano Clashes With Coakley
"As dust settles, frontrunner emerges" by Todd Domke | December 2, 2009
THE DEBATE last night was strange, but decisive.
The frontrunner for the Democratic Senate nomination, Martha Coakley, now looks inevitable.
Huh?
Coakley stood out in a winning way. Usually only a connoisseur of dullness can appreciate her public speaking. But this time she spoke eloquently about health care and seemed stateswoman-like while her opponents squabbled. She was the only candidate who flashed a winning smile - and had reason to.
Mike Capuano was the big loser. He had momentum, but his nasty side came out frequently. He was testy, snide, and seemed indignant that he had to compete with amateurs.
Is that why I liked him?
:-)
Steve Pagliuca was another loser. He still has trouble delivering scripted lines. His most memorable line was that he was proud of Burger King. Perhaps BK execs let him wear the cardboard crown at board meetings. But his handlers can’t be proud of his performance. If he finishes a distant third or fourth, it won’t be easy for them to talk him into challenging Deval Patrick in the primary.
Alan Khazei seemed thoughtful and sincere, as usual, but was at his best on a non-federal issue: opposition to casinos.
Where I agree with him, and which probably dooms him in the pro-casino, agenda-pushing halls of power.
The debate itself was a loser.
That's why I'm not watching tonight.
The moderator acted like a wacky emcee. WCVB’s Ed Harding seemed to be auditioning for candidate, injecting his opinions and interrupting answers.
Yeah, I noticed.
He seemed surprised that no candidate wanted to invade Pakistan or shared his outrage about a pollen study in Iceland. Final grades for the debate: Capuano D, Coakley B+, Khazei B-, Pagliuca D+.
My grades: C+, C-, C, C+
Todd Domke is a Republican political analyst, public relations strategist, and author.
Oh, no, he's one of my own!
--more--"
Let's try someone else:
"Legislator revels in getting hands dirty" by Joanna Weiss, Globe Columnist | December 2, 2009
MIKE CAPUANO spent much of the debate with a look of frustration on his face, as if he were an air conditioning repairman who had just stepped into a symposium on the philosophical underpinnings of the air conditioner.
He stood out as the guy who preferred verbal combat to measured conversation - the promoter of action over study, ugly truth over carefully-considered six-point plan. While his opponents spun theoretical answers over the need to curb health care costs, Capuano raised the less-palatable truth that most people, faced with the illness of a child or parent, want to spend whatever it takes on whatever cure is possible. There was even awkward honesty in his response about what he’s done, personally, to weather the recession: “Mostly light bulbs.’’
Overall, Capuano presented himself as the guy who understands Congress (and, as he noted derisively at one point, what Stimulus One actually did). It’s a tricky thing to run as the insider. Most campaigns assume every voter is dying for hope, change, and the chance to send the bums home. But then, this is a race to fill the seat of the consummate insider, a man whose understanding of the Senate helped him accomplish his goals, and whom Massachusetts voters sent back to Washington time after time.
Capuano isn’t about change and doesn’t pretend to be; he’s about the realities of the sausage-making process. His challenge lies in convincing voters his gruffness has a purpose - frustration can translate into action, and ugly truths can turn into legislative gains.
Is that an endorsement?
--more--"
All right, let's break the tie:
THE JOYLESS pursuit to replace Ted Kennedy drags on.
Last night’s debate among the four Democratic candidates did nothing to change the dynamics in this special Senate election.
Indeed, when you have two guys fighting over abortion, it’s a decent night for Martha Coakley.
And the winn-aaaaahhh!
Suddenly, Michael Capuano started talking like Gloria Steinem, as he challenged Stephen Pagliuca on his pro-choice credentials. Have you ever known a poor woman who didn’t have the money to pay for an abortion? Capuano demanded. Pagliuca said he did. Their squabbling was a reminder that Coakley, the only woman in the race, first made abortion rights an issue when the House of Representatives passed a health care reform bill with an amendment restricting access to abortion.
Capuano, who voted for the legislation, later said he would vote against a final version if the restrictions prevailed. He repeated that last night, while citing other possible reasons to vote against it - an inadequate public option or provisions that hurt what he called Massachusetts’ parochial interests. The cranky exchange between Capuano and Pagliuca was the most contentious moment of the night.
Capuano tried to corner Coakley on the Patriot Act, which gave government sweeping surveillance and regulatory powers after the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. He opposed it and said she’s wrong to suggest it can be rewritten to protect civil liberties. But Coakley followed the script that has so far rewarded her with frontrunner status. When Capuano smolders, Coakley stays cool. When he or Pagliuca push for specifics, she ducks.
Maybe I did underestimate her political skills.
She leaves the vision thing to Alan Khazei - the other beneficiary of last night’s debate. Khazei was the only one to offer even a sliver of the optimism about government that Kennedy symbolized.
You mean the brothers, right?
--more--"
