Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Open primaries pushed
Next Post: Nix grilled
Posted in:
No surprise here. Hizzoner says “No” to debates. Daley hasn’t debated anyone since he first won the office in 1989.
…There is no need for Daley to engage in a public debate since he has answered more questions than any local elected official during his nearly two-decade reign, campaign manager Terry Peterson said Friday.
Plus, Peterson said, the proposed debates are “nothing more than a political strategy of our opponents to get their names out there.”
“For the most part, the people of the city know where the mayor stands on the issues,” he said. […]
“I think this is another example of the ‘Daley double,’” said Brown, Cook County Circuit Court clerk. “On one hand he tells the people of Chicago he is going to take responsibility, but then he turns around and arrogantly snubs his nose in the face of the voters by saying he will not discuss the issues with the other candidates. He wants to hide from people.”
On the one hand, Peterson is right. We know where he is on most issues. On the other hand, debates, done well, are a healthy part of democracy. The mayor should be pinned down on the issues, forced to talk about the future, forced to defend his legacy.
Thoughts?
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Jan 3, 07 @ 3:44 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Open primaries pushed
Next Post: Nix grilled
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
We still study the Lincoln Douglas debates.
What a sad comment about Illinois that we don’t have to debate the Chicago mayoral campaign because the questions have already been answered.
Comment by Bill Baar Wednesday, Jan 3, 07 @ 5:49 am
The other candidates should hold a debate, with a seat reserved for Mayor Daley. If Daley fails to appear, they should place in that chair a rubber chicken wearing an orange prison jumpsuit, which I deem to be an appropriate substitution.
Comment by fedup dem Wednesday, Jan 3, 07 @ 8:50 am
Hey Mayor,
The last time I checked there are several other candidates in the race. And debates would help me decide between Doc Walls and Dorothy Brown. Because you ain’t getting my vote. You’ve lost that priviledge.
Comment by jerry Wednesday, Jan 3, 07 @ 8:53 am
Modern “Debates” have turned into alternative presentations without cross questioning and severe time limits. Lincoln Douglas went on for hours.
In any event, smart candidates will use the internet (such as YouTube) and get exposure well beyond the radio and TV and the news cycle. On You Tube, the candidate can show the empty chair he is ‘debating with’.
Comment by Truthful James Wednesday, Jan 3, 07 @ 8:57 am
Voters should refuse to vote for any candidate who refuses to debate.
Comment by Squideshi Wednesday, Jan 3, 07 @ 9:16 am
We all know who this guy is and what he’s done so far. We don’t need to watch him do some wierd PR game and play debate in front of a bunch of pompous journalists.
Like him? Vote for him.
Don’t like him? Vote for him anyway unless you want those idiots in the Counsel driving what little is left in Chicago away.
Comment by VanillaMan Wednesday, Jan 3, 07 @ 9:34 am
Questions Daley receives about corruption at press conferences are dismissed with a “Gee, how about the corruption at (insert questioner’s media outlet here)”, as if that’s the slightest bit relevant. Daley’s non-answers trump his claims of being the “most accessible mayor.”
Daley cannot speak extemporaneously, which is why he would be a disaster in a debate. It would be nice, though, if he thought enough of the voters to defend his record against his opponents.
Comment by Tom Wednesday, Jan 3, 07 @ 10:04 am
If we look at his and his father’s record of gaffs while speaking in public, it is very understandable why he would try to avoid a debate. I think he is avoiding the debate because he has to, not because he wants to.
And here is a little gem from the first Daley, “The police are not here to create disorder, they’re here to preserve disorder.”
Comment by Lovie's Leather Wednesday, Jan 3, 07 @ 11:44 am
Who cared about or even watched the governor’s debates? Not many care and it makes little difference.
Comment by 105th Blues Wednesday, Jan 3, 07 @ 1:33 pm
Why debate?
Why even have an election, what is the point?
The machine has already elected Dickie Daley!
Worked for the DA Guv!
Comment by Waist Deep In The Big Money Wednesday, Jan 3, 07 @ 3:20 pm
I don’t see why Daley has any incentive at all to debate either of the announced challengers. There’s no need to “defend his record.” Presumably, likely voters are already familiar with what Daley has(n’t) done over the past 25+ years in office, and a debate for him becomes either more sound-bite regurgitation or fodder for comedians and humor columns.
I admit, I would like to see office-seekers actually debate like Lincoln and Douglas, but that’s just not going to happen any time soon. Unless both candidates were supremely confident of their respective abilities to speak coherently on any issue to come up, no one would ever walk into a situation where the potential for looking like a buffoon is so high. Especially when such buffoonery would then be repeated in news stories for a few cycles and then attack ads until the end of the campaign.
Let the challengers debate. I’d love a chance for either one of them to explain to me exactly how they’re going to make Chicago better. What I’d expect to get is platitudes and half-formed ideas that don’t back either candidate into a corner, where, heaven forbid, some voter might not *like* their ideas.
Comment by Snidely Whiplash Wednesday, Jan 3, 07 @ 5:59 pm