DebateScoop.org: Santorum Casey Debate

Santorum Casey Debate

By rob noerr 10/13/2006 10:39:28 AM EST

On October 12, PA senator Rick Santorum and challenger Bob Casey had their second debate.

Tags: PA-Sen, Bob Casey, Rick Santorum, rules violations, bad debates

This debate was entertaining to watch, but regrettably did little to educate the audience on the platform of either of the candidates. Right from the outset of this debate, both candididates begin issuing attacks on the other. Although the forum of the debate required the candidates to respond only to the panel asking the questions, both Casey and Santorum decided to question each other and bicker amongst themselves. In fact, I think that I was hard pressed to find even one time when either of the candidates answered the question that was asked of them. Instead they would each just blame the other for being even worse.

An example would be the very first question asked. The question was directed at Santorum, and he was aksed about the fact that he and his family reside in Virginia. The question was if he had used a home he owned Pittsburgh to claim PA residency so that he could recieve a cost reduction in the private school his children attend. Santorum's response was "I pay taxes in Pennsylvania" and "Bob Casey never goes to work". He asked Casey to identify how many days he had missed as state treasurer, and Casey responded by saying "Senator Specter (R-PA) says you don't work enough."
Niether person would answer the panels question, or even the accusations being levied by the other.
Now picture this carried on for an hour, with both people ignoring time limits and all other rules that were laid out for them.

By the end, it literally led to both Casey and Santorum calling each other liars and talking over each other. I was watching this with a couple of friends, and we were literally laughing the whole way through. It was almost as if Casey and Santorum were two drunks arguing over politics at the bar. The sad part is I now realize that I don't want either of these people as my Senator.

I also thought that this debate was sad because it is an example of how many politicians feel they need to persuade the public. Instead of viewing the public as reasonable people that can vote based on the plans of the candidates, they view the public as imbeciles that don't care about the issues as much as they do the candidates dirty laundry. Despite the fact that this upsets me, I can't help but think that they may be right.

< Rendell & Swann to hold debate this evening | Santorum v. Casey >

Santorum Casey Debate | 2 comments (2 topical, 0 hidden)

WWJL Do? (none / 0)

What Would Jim Lehrer Do?

That's a tough one for the "dean of moderators." As someone who has been in that situation once or twice, I can say that its never easy to regain control of a debate once decorum is lost. When it happens, one of the questions we need to ask is whether or not it was part of the candidate's pre-debate strategy? Who started it? How did they start it? And how was it reciprocated? If it was part of their strategy, what does that tell us about the demographics of the undecided voters? You seem to indicate that while you would be ashamed to have either as your senator, I wonder who might find that sort of behavior appealing?

by Tim ODonnell on 10/13/2006 04:22:53 PM EST

another debate (none / 0)

Although I didn't get a chance to watch last nights debate between Rick Santorum and Bob Casey, the initial reviews seem to suggest a greater degree of civility last night as opposed to last week. The Philadelphia Inqirer notes:

When they last met for a televised debate, Republican U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum and Democrat Bob Casey Jr. looked like they were ready to jump from behind their lecterns and scuffle.
Last night's meeting at the National Constitution Center - the final in a series of three Pennsylvania debates - was tempered and substantive by comparison...

Also found an interesting email exchange between MSNBC and the two candidates. Although the emails don't seem to have been issued as part of an online debate format (and don't break much new ground), these may be useful to a little sense of the candidates if you've not had time to see all the debates.

A few comments about the emails:

I'm not sure how Santorum can confidently argue that intelligence showed Iraq as a bigger threat than North Korea. If WMD was the concern, it seems to me we might have been better off looking at a nation whose leader was being pretty explicit about the efforts to aquire the bomb.
On a related note, I'd like to hear why Iran is a bigger threat than North Korea. In last night's debate Santorum said that he felt Iran was a threat but that North Korea would be defensive with the technology.
I really have no idea what Casey wants in terms of Iraq. While he seems to be saying the right things to generate a lead in the polls, his answer to the question about his plan for Iraq just lacks depth:

(MSNBC)You've said your plan for Iraq is different from Sen. Santorum's, yet he's accused you of not laying our any details. Care to give any?
(Casey)First, we need to agree on the facts on the ground. Second, I want clear, measurable benchmarks from the Iraqis and the Bush administration. Third, most military people tell me the solution is not ultimately going to be military; it's going to be political. Fourth, we need to rebuild the American military. Finally, but perhaps most important, I want some accountability.

Jim Lyle - Director of Debate & Instructor, Speech Communication - Clarion University of Pennsylvania

by Jim Lyle on 10/17/2006 10:31:23 PM EST

Santorum Casey Debate | 2 comments (2 topical, 0 hidden)