Email Print

Talent vs. McCaskill

Talent appears to be constantly on the defensive in Missouri Senate Debate

I was only able to watch the first half of this debate, but after reading the transcript for the remaining time, my opinions of Talent were only reinforced. He appeared to be constantly on the defensive and unable to clearly articulate his points without McCaskill correcting him on his facts. Especially on the issue of stem cell research. Talent backed himself into a corner making claims about McCaskill's stand on abortion. However, both candidates did a fair amount of question dodging. They could have done a better job staying focused on the issues.

< Missouri Senate Debate | Michigan- Race for Governor >
 Display:
Your observation of Talent's defensiveness seems to be an unfolding theme of the debates. It is easier to press the attack as the party out of power, and this attack is bolstered by abundant media providing the "evidence" for it is time to "throw the rascals out" mantra. In watching several debates I am now noticing the argument has matured to just the value of a Democrat Congress is the reason to vote, not even a rejection of the incumbent per se, as with the Rhode Island Senate debate between Lincoln Chafee and Sheldon Whitehouse.

Even as Chafee took position popular in Rhode Island, Whitehouse nonetheless:

acknowledged that Chafee often votes against his party, but says the senator helps the G-O-P on many policies that Rhode Islanders oppose.

  • Allan Louden, Wake Forest University
  • Winston-Salem, NC
  • by Allan Louden on 10/20/2006 10:00:42 AM EST