Most reports of the recent debate between Democrat incumbent Gov. J.B. Pritzker and Republican challenger, state Sen. Darren Bailey focused on the their slinging back and forth charges that the other guy is lying
So, in the court of whose lying, it's a wash. Every politician prevaricates, fibs, embellishes, fabricates and equivocates so both Pritzker and Bailey were essentially correct.
But on the issues, Bailey too often looked as if he was dodging and weaving. He could have scored more points if he had been better prepared and if he had more confidently, pointedly and clearly provided an answers.
For example, he knew he was going to be asked about the Democratic's biggest issue: abortion. He correctly said that restricting abortion in deep blue Illinois is practically and politically impossible. It came off as evasive. He should have attacked in detail the Democrats and Pritzker for enacting the most radical, extreme and permissive abortion law in the country. Under it, abortion is permitted without exceptions up to the moment of birth for any reason. Parents can legally be kept in the dark about their pre-teen or teenage daughter.
That allowed Pritzker to blow hard about how he is protecting a woman's "right to choose." If only one of the moderators had asked him at what stage of pregnancy should abortion be restricted. 15 weeks? Viability? Never? If the moderators had followed up, he would have had to say never.
But Pritzker is much more funderable on the issues that more voters care about. His claims about his "balanced" budget can be discarded on their face: He "balanced" the budget thanks to the federal one-time Covid-19 pandemic aid. It was so generous that Pritzker used it to fund teachers' and other government workers's pensions--something that the law doesn't permit.
More to the point, the federal aid is a one-time payment. So, what happens next year when the munificent federal aid is not available. I guess he'll have to perform another slight of hand to balance next year's budget when the aid disappears. (I would have asked him if he became president would he continue to hand such larges to the states.)
Another major issue is the governor's overly wrought pandemic response. Lockdowns, classrooms shut down, restaurants and small businesses closed. He literally killed jobs. Would someone please tell him that he wasn't "following the science?" The comprehensive science that includes not just the sometimes wrong advice (actually, demands) of the likes of Tony Fauci but he ignored the science about how children have suffered emotionally, educationally and more from being subject "remote learning." Or how could you expect an economy not to suffer from shutting down the...economy.
Pritzker can be criticized on numerous fronts (see my new book, The governor you don't know, for the details). But my strongest criticism is reserved for the "journalists" who questioned the candidates. They made the mistake that so many reporters do these days: Not listening. There were multiple opportunities for follow-up questions that would have dug deeper into the candidates' answers. But, no. For the moderators, this was their moment. To show off. They had their prepared questions and come hell or high water, they would ask them. So, the debate wandered here and there, directionless and less useful than could be. Leaving more questions unanswered than answered.
So, who lost the debate? The viewers.
No comments:
Post a Comment