Well, I watched the Republican primary debate for the Senate race just now. It was on PCN, PA public access, so I doubt anybody else will get a chance to view it, hence I thought I'd throw up a diary entry just giving my impression of it, for anybody that might be interested.
If you live in PA and want to catch it, here's a bit of the press release:
[quote]PCN will air the only scheduled debate between Senator Arlen Specter and Rep. Pat Toomey on Saturday, April 3, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. The debate is being held in Altoona. Both candidates are seeking the Republican nomination for the United States Senate seat currently held by Sen. Specter.
Replays will air on the network as follows
Sunday, April 4 - 2:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m.
Monday, April 5 - 12:00 a.m., 6:00 a.m., 9:00 a.m., 6:00 p.m., 8:00 p.m.
Tuesday, April 6 - 6:00 a.m., 9:00 a.m., 6:00 p.m., 8:00 p.m.
[quote]
I haven't been able to find a transcript of the debate online, and somehow doubt I'll ever be able to, so you'll just have to take my word. :) I wasn't taking notes or anything, so these are just my impressions. All quotes are paraphrased from memory (badly).
The debate was somewhat stiff, but for the formal tone was surprisingly bloody for a primary race. This is a young challenger that really believes, ideologically, in his cause (and knows he has a shot at winning), and an old guard politician who realizes that his seat at the table may be in the process of getting pulled out from under him. So, the gloves are off in this race (and have been for some time). There was none of that "I think he's a fine congressman, we just have different views on some things" or anything like that. This was the different wings of the Republican party tearing each other to shreds. Specter even refused to speak Toomey's name for the entire hour ("My opponent"), and Toomey never said "Specter" without saying "liberal" in the same sentence.
Specter characterized Toomey as a loose cannon, making sure to point out that of the 12 Republican congressmen from PA, Rep. Toomey has voted AGAINST their delegation more than he has voted for them (something like 74 times it was 11 voting one way, Toomey the other). His line was "Senator Toomey isn't far-right, he's far-out". Specter also made sure to point out his own seniority, his endorsements, how established he is in Washington, and that PA voters would lose all that without him.
Rep. Toomey characterized Specter as the most liberal Republican Senator in Washington (namedropping "Ted Kennedy" many, many times), and documented extensively Specter's voting record as judged by conservative watch-dogs. "Senator Specter is closer to Hilary Clinton than he is to Rick Santorum". While ignoring the fact that Bush, Santorum, and Cheney all support Specter, Toomey did take great pains to paint Specter's best attribute--his experience--against him, saying "I think that Arlen Specter being next in line for the judiciary committee and the appropriations committee isn't a plus, it's a threat," going on to discuss how the National Review and other publications have skewered Specter as being too liberal for the judiciary, and how Specter, in terms of appropriations, got the award this year for the Biggest Spender in Washington, of either party. "So what's the benefit of him chairing the appropriations committee? He makes it to the Big Spender Hall of Fame?" His main point on experience was basically "I'd rather be right than senior".
Each candidate brought a long paper trail with them, shuffling through notes for each rebuttal to rattle off a list of votes, endorsements, what have you. Both scored effective blows on that front. What was odd was that half of the time, their sources were directly contradictory. As in Toomey would say Specter voted for this, Specter would say "your facts are wrong, I voted against it, and can document that," and then Toomey would say "I think you're wrong, and can document it". It was weird that way, it sort of reminded me of the old Monty Python Argument sketch. "No you didn't," "I did!" "You didn't!" "I did!" "Look, I dun wanna argue about that!" "Yes you do!"
I won't break it down issue by issue, but a few highlights was that Toomey absolutely tore Specter apart on spending, every chance he got (how can you not? It's Arlen Specter for chrissakes), but Specter got in a surprising blow on abortion, of all things, quoting Toomey when he was running for his Congress seat saying "I don't have a position on abortion" and being supported by a pro-choice organization, then gradually switching to a 90% pro-life record, until he began running against Specter, at which point he upped that to 100% pro-life. Specter, btw, has a position on abortion that I enormously respect, and it's one of my favorite things about him as a Republican Senator, but it's not a popular stance in a Republican primary, so I have no idea how much the abortion blow against Toomey will hit home for voters that are using that as a make-or-break thing.
The other good blow Specter got, besides having credentials and endorsements out the ying-yang (which frankly may be working against him, as Toomey spins it effectively to make Specter look like a Washington fat-cat and old guard politician), was in referencing Toomey's "far out" stances, pointing out that he's a pariah of the Republican PA delegation, and chaired Specter's re-election financial committee in 2001 until a large special interest took interest in Toomey and financed him to the tune of a few million dollars, at which point Toomey decided he didn't like Specter much.
But, most of the real hits belonged to Toomey, who lashed out at Specter for not seeking the Death Penalty for Saddam, for bowing to multilateral organizations, for cutting pay raises to troops, for pork barrel, etc. For an overview (and a notion of how vicious this has gotten), check out www.arlenspecter2004.com
And the real, most important, and least substanative difference between them also worked wholly in Toomey's favor. Specter is a smart guy, and he was well-referenced and rehearsed for this, but he just looks so old. He has these jowls that just scream "time to retire", and his speaking voice is something between Richard Nixon and Robert Dole, but without the energy. While he's a good debator in the classical sense, he also gets sidetracked quite a bit, and flubs quite often ("Muslimism extremisism" being my favorite phrase of the night). For instance, for his rebuttal to the last question, it seemed like he accidentally gave his closing remarks because he didn't understand what was going on. And, when he had to ACTUALLY make a closing remark, it didn't make a whole lot of sense.
Toomey, on the other hand, is crisp, young, energetic, smart, articulate, and ideological. i.e. He was MADE to run against Specter, practically. It's apples and oranges. The positives of one are the negatives of the other. I'm sure I'm not telling you anything new, but I've read the same news stories as you have on this race, and seeing them together debating the extreme differences are even more starkly contrasted. It's night and day. You could have hit the mute button during the debate and the dichotomy would have remained clear. Specter = Old and Busted, Toomey = New Hotness. Toomey made a point of remarking that he wants more debates but Specter doesn't. Frankly, I don't blame him. I wouldn't want more debates either if I were Arlen Specter.
Debate performance: Toomey = A, Specter = C+. Specter did a good job of landing some substantial blows here and there, but Toomey did it more often, and just gave the impression all throughout that he was the new guy in town and Specter was on his way out. And, he might be right. Specter certainly looked the part.
I'm voting in this primary on the 27th, and I'm voting Specter, but whoever wins this one is going to be in serious trouble against Hoeffel (who I also plan to vote for). These guys aren't holding anything back against each other, and they're already doing all of Hoeffel's leg work in terms of shining the light on weaknesses and forcing the other guy to spend all their money. Specter being one of Bush's chief cheerleaders and a senior Republican in an important part of the country electorally, we need to be salivating over this seat. Do whatever you can for Hoeffel. Specter, if he manages to get out of this primary (which I'm beginning to doubt), is in SERIOUS trouble.