Today at the Johnson County Convention Center, presented by the Chamber of Commerce, Pat Roberts came to bat in a debate with Independent Greg Orman. The debate discussed numerous topics, from Social Security to Health Care, but Pat Roberts found himself frequently debating against things he wished that Orman had said, rather than anything his opponent actually did say.
In a contest of wills, Pat Roberts continued to reference Harry Reid, Barack Obama, Obamacare, Deadlock, and circle back to the fact he has been endorsed by the national chamber of commerce. What was missing of Roberts - and something that was missing in Hutchinson as well, was the Pat Roberts joking barb or light laugh that looped the audience in. Instead, Pat Roberts continued a furtive, at times grumpy demeanor that made it very apparent that he knows he's in a dogfight.
Greg Orman began his debate by talking about the fact that he was the "only one who has actually created a job" on the stage, which may have been some news for the moderator from Fox4, but you have to realize he was speaking directly to Pat Roberts. Roberts began his opening the way he finished in Hutchinson, mentioning Harry Reid quickly, and discussing how a vote for Greg Orman was a vote for Harry Reid.
As the debate continued, references to Harry Reid and President Obama (to which Pat Roberts did not say "President Obama" just "Obama") came fast and furious as Pat Roberts accused Greg Orman of being a liberal democrat.
Roberts continued his debating style "I am the only one on stage who can end the gridlock in DC by bringing a Republican Majority". A phrase which he used frequently, but of course requires far more wins than just Pat Roberts.
On issues of tax policy and Roberts found himself often distracted, and rather than answering the question at hand, he frequently referenced Harry Reid and talked about Gridlock, repeatedly noting that the senate is "The place where good legislation goes to die"
Pat Roberts found himself in structural problems, at one point noting that he strongly backed the Keystone Pipeline which would bring "50 to 60 thousand jobs to Kansas". When he went into why he backed the pipeline, he noted that we could transport Natural gas through the pipeline, to sell to eastern Europe - as a way to undermine "Vladimir Putin" and help the world.
There are a few science problems with this argument; the first is that the Keystone Pipeline will not transport natural gas. The second is, even if it could, widespread container based transport of natural gas to an overseas market would be cost prohibitive and would not impact Vladimir Putin, who has a much easier time transporting any natural gas available. In continuing, Pat Roberts insisted that his opponent, Greg Orman, was with Barack Obama and Harry Reid in waging a "war on fossil fuels'.
Orman, for the most part, took the debate to refute claims, often pointing out logistical errors of the Pat Roberts presentation, most notable when Pat Roberts called Greg Orman out for having "voted for Harry Reid, for Barack Obama".
Greg Orman's reply was simple and cute: "I've come to realize we don't live in the information age, we may live in the misinformation age", noting "despite what is said, I have never committed voter fraud, and I have never voted in a Nevada election." These kind of punches helped show how Orman was different than Roberts.
When Orman needed to grab hold of Roberts or move on conservative issues, though, he did; talking about his goal of eliminating regulations, especially on small or single and state level banks (no nationals), and his thoughts on tax reform, all of which lined up far more conservative then I think Roberts was prepared to discuss.
Roberts, though, struggled awkwardly with a question regarding any potential litmus tests on judges. Greg Orman, who handled the question first, answered that he viewed competence as the most important factor, and that he would want to make sure the person who was being nominated was both competent and well versed enough to handle the job, and as someone who had employed people, that was his standard.
Roberts started out with a clean statement: "I am against litmus tests", and then found himself hanging ornaments on that: "By that I mean, they would have to be for limited government, and have a conservative view of the courts role in laws" in the end indicating that those in fact, would be litmus tests for him.
Roberts ended the debate by telling the audience that there was only "one person on this stage" who could overturn Harry Reid, and that Kansas was "at a tipping point", a tipping point toward something that was left undefined. Pat Roberts labeled his opponent as "Jello" a "Flip Flopper" and "you never know where he stands", working his best to try to paint Greg Orman as a "liberal Democrat", Greg Orman, however, ended the debate by talking about how all it took was people willing to try and change - "Change is scary, but so is the status quo", and asking the audience: “What frightens me is that we have two parties that are more interested in seeing the other party fail than in seeing the country succeed.”
Pat Roberts spent an hour trying to convince business leaders that his opponent had no stance on any issue. But for that hour, the business leaders heard Orman detail his thoughts on actual plans - and as someone who had been an executive in one of Kansas City's largest businesses (KCPL) too many in the room knew Greg Orman to buy the argument.
At a nearby table this was said to me: "Pat Roberts probably should have retired."
I think many Republicans feel that way today.