Skip to main content

Here's a summary of my debate impressions.  It's turned out fairly length, and is close to a liveblogging blow-by-blow as I can provide.  I hope that it's informative to my fellow OH-15 Kossacks!

Here are my notes on the debate:

Opening statements:

Pryce gave a mix of local pork and the usual terra terra terra, bringing an Al Queda website up with "online plans to kill 4 million Americans".

Kilroy attacked Pryce directly, mentioning the deficit, rising health care costs, job losses, corruption, but surprisingly no Foley!

Question summaries:

1 - Solving the Social Security crisis (to Kilroy).
    Naturally, privitization came up here; unbelievably
    Pryce stated that the democrats were
    over-politicizing social security!

2 - Handling the Iraq war (to Pryce).
    Pretty predictable talking points here from both sides.
    Terror terror terror!

3 - Ohio Economy (to Kilroy from audience).
    Universal healthcare plug from Kilroy.  Pryce flatly
    denied that anything was wrong with the Columbus or
    Ohio economy.  Half the audience looked like they wanted
    to boo her.

4 - Negative TV ads - bad for campaign? (to Pryce).
    Pryce went a little nutty here, saying she did NOT want
    to go negative, but her hand was forced.  (rrrrright).
    Scored one of the lines of the night, "My mother's mad
    at me!" Then claimed Kilroy was trying to buy the seat
    with the usual ooga-booga about outside LIBERAL
    interest groups.

5 - Too far left?  What about your Ohio Free Press articles?
    (to Kilroy)
.  Potential gotcha but handled well by
    Kilroy.  Invited audience to read her articles.  Pryce
    brought the LIBERAL ooga-booga back for an
    encore, and once more trumpted her "moderation".
    Then dragged out Joe Lieberman's defeat as a
    defeat for moderates everywhere!  Joe Liberman is now
    a REPUBLICAN talking point!

6 - Would Pryce be responsive to Central Ohio opinions that
    didn't jive with Bush's?  (Split district)
.  Pryce
    once more started with the terror terror terror!
    Mentioned enemies in Middle East -- and Venezuela??
    My, looks like that dig at Bush got under her skin.

7 - What to do about healthcare costs? (to Kilroy).
    Excellent plug on universal health care by Kilroy.
    Pryce touted her work with Menendez on healthcare
    reform.  Completely new one by me.

8 - The Corruption Question: Noe, Abrmoff, and Foley
    donations: what did she do with them?  (to Pryce)
.
    Pryce returned donations "immediately upon learning
    about the Foley situation on Sunday!"
    Kilroy asked why she didn't give Foley's donation to
    charity instead of to Foley's own defense fund? (Second
    line of the night).

9 - Tax and Spend: What programs would you cut to balance
    the budget? (to Kilroy)
.
    Talked of middle class tax cuts, rolling back Bush tax
    cuts, and targeting pork.
    Pryce pointed out that some of that pork benefitted
    central Ohio and laundry-listed projects.  Unfortunate
    opening there and Pryce took full advantage.

10 - To both: Would you support reduction in oil
     usage?  How would you bring it about?

     Kilroy: Pitched her work on alt fuels, getting a little
               of her own "pork" in on the county level.
     Pryce: Touted Bush's energy bill.  Talk about cognitive
               dissonance...

Closing statements:

Pryce: Legal background, Kilroy nonsolutions, moderate, AGAIN with the Joe Lieberman reference, moderate, can't have a flaming liberal like Kilroy in Congress, oh, no!

Kilroy: Thanked hosts, audience, and WOSU, even Pryce.  Very gracious.  Election referendum of Bush, direction of the country, budget, increasing minimum wage top priority if she is elected.

Overall themes:

As expected.

Pryce: LIBERAL ooga-booga, terra terra terra!, taxes, local pork she's brought to district.

Kilroy themes: Budget deficit, corruption, Bush enabling, bad economy, need for change in Congress.

My final impressions:

I won't really call a winner in this debate.  In terms of style, Pryce won; she had her prosecutor's persona on full blast, raised her voice to make points forcefully, etc.  Kilroy was a little more nervous and stumbled here and there.  Both had their talking points down very well.  And nobody's mind in that room got changed, I suspect.  But...the larger question still is...however well spoken, will those Republican talking points still fly?

This would suggest that their time has finally passed in OH-15...which means that Pryce, just like so many other Republicans, may be smoothly riding their talking points straight over the cliff.

We can only hope.

Originally posted to ArchTeryx on Thu Oct 12, 2006 at 05:52 PM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip jar! (10+ / 0-)

    How did my first attempt at citizen journalism go?

  •  View from row 3 (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Ahianne, franziskaner, ArchTeryx

    Nice summaary. I agree with you that Pryce won on style. But Kilroy comported herself very well and hit some major points that will resonate:

    • ending the war (whereas Pryce called Iraq the focal point of the war on terror)
    • Republican mishandling of economy (while Pryce said it was a textbook great economy)
    • quoting Boehner as saying that SS privatization will be on the agenda if Republicans retain control

    It was very interesting to see Pryce run away from Bush.

  •  If the debate was even, so was the whole (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ArchTeryx

    day overall on this race.  The Columbus Dispatch endorsed Pryce but then this poll shows Kilroy leading by 12 points.  I think that poll was way too optimistic.  Is sounds like some of you guys are also from the Columbus area.  If you are, please make sure you write an LTE to the Columbus Dispatch.  I am writing one right now stating that the only reason the Dispatch endorsed Pryce and Tiberi was the same reason they endorsed Bush in 2004, social security privatization.  I can't find the original 2004 endorsement on-line for free but I am heading to the UA library tomorrow to get it.  It is important that Ohioans are aware that social security destruction will be on the agenda if republicans control both houses.  

    •  This did come up. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      franziskaner

      Kilroy only got to point it out once, but she did -- and Pryce, while she repeatedly stated that the public didn't accept Bush's proposal, also dropped very strong hints that absolutely nothing was changed with it, either.  It WILL be back from the grave, and Pryce will be leading the charge, if Repubs still control both houses.

    •  Here's the 2004 Dispatch Bush endorsement (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jj32, franziskaner, auditor, ArchTeryx

      Despite missteps, Bush is better able to steer nation through difficulties ahead

      On Social Security:

      One other factor gives Bush an edge. In a second term, relieved of concern about re-election, presidents look to their legacy. This is when they feel free to take chances and expend political capital. There is no bigger problem facing the nation long term than senior entitlements. Without significant reform, Social Security and Medicare are headed for fiscal collapse under the press of millions of retiring baby boomers.

      Kerry, who knows touching these programs is political suicide, has ruled out any change in how they currently operate. But with trillions of dollars in unfunded liabilities, they are unsustainable as they currently operate. Electing Kerry would simply delay action for four more years.

      Bush has every reason to take on precisely this sort of challenge, especially if he hopes to ensure that history remembers him for something other than the Iraq mess.

      As Pryce admitted during the debate, Bush's plan "didn't play in Peoria" and is now "ancient history."

      The Dispatch has its finger on the pulse of America once again.

      •  Wow. You are good! (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        auditor

        I searched the archives but it said I had to pay.  How did you get this?  This is great, you saved me a trip.  I have no excuse to procrastinate, I must get that LTE out. Thank you.  

        •  Here's an old google trick (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          DanD, franziskaner

          Put some likely search terms ("columbus dispatch" endorsement bush) into Google and find a page somewhere that quotes at least a sentence from the endorsement. That got me to Doug's views from which I got the sentence fragment "Since President Bush took office, this newspaper repeatedly has criticized his". Putting that fragment into Google homed in on the full article.

          Usually if you can get a good string of words quoted from an article, the whole thing can be found.

          •  I am not with it. (0+ / 0-)

            I did find Doug's views but for some reason I didn't think to use a string that was quoted from the article. I must have been out of it yesterday. I remember your excellent analysis on the 2004 election. You were the distribution map man were you not in Ohio? You made a map on the allocation of machines in Franklin County but you concentrated mainly in Cuyahoga County on poll locations that had multiple precincts. If that was you, THANK YOU!  I hope you clear out your schedule for this November.  

  •  Tie Pryce to Bush (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    franziskaner, Public Servant

    Here in Columbus, as in the rest of the country, there are many disillusioned Republicans who reget the day their party nominated Bush. We need the House and then the subpoena.

  •  Dispatch was close (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    franziskaner

    on not endorsing Bush in 2004. A number of folks down there on Third Street that may now regret that decision. Pryce, Tiberi and Hobson have delivered the pork for Ohio.

  •  I heard the first half hour (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Ahianne

    I would say that in my opinion Pryce was losing at that point.  Kilroy hadn't gone in for the kill, but Pryce was just trotting out tired old lines.  There was just too much of I've been around forever, I've done you right for an election where being an incumbent republican is a bad thing.

    I couldn't believe the nonsense of insisting that the economy was great.  Who in the hell is supposed to be believing that.

    Over all, after about 10 minutes I found Pryces voice to be annoying and I got the impression that she didn't really want to be there at all.

    •  Of course she didn't. (0+ / 0-)

      Incumbents almost never want to be in debates, as they have alot more to lose then win in such a debate.

      She had her persona on full blast, though, and afterward, she hung around to shake hands with her supporters and chat them up.  Guess she's the consummate congresscritter when she's in a close race.

  •  Blogging the Debate in OH-15 (0+ / 0-)

    Here's another write-up of the debate

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site