Their final debate is tonight. Barring any unforeseen bombshells (not of the blonde variety, mind you) Tennessee voters will be left with their choices. The race has essentially been narrowed into a popularity contest, and in those cases the slick-talker usually wins. See Clinton, William Jefferson.
Of course the reason is largely due to Ford's posturing that began when Junior was annointed his dad's Congressional seat in 1996. The Senate was always on his horizon (and perhaps more) but Tennesseans don't elect northeastern lib'ral types. This is blue dog democrat country. So, the strategy was chosen to take conservative positions on the big issues but appease his street level constituency by coming down to the left on social issues.
It worked--Corker's had to resort to veiled attacks on the Ford family machine and Harold's apparent love of the nightlife to make any headway, something easily counter-attacked by the dems.
In effect they've made Ford bulletproof, an almost Rovian-like strategy (although only Rove is painted as an evil genius for doing such things). Junior's managed to make any criticism of him look like racism or mud-slinging despite the fact it's appropriate to mention he's connected to one of the most corrupt political families in the state. If the shoe were on the other foot it would be dropping in a similar fashion, and with impunity.
From a conservative viewpoint there remains one weakness in Ford's hawkish posturing, and that's the fact he's still a democrat. Based on some of the positions he's taken it's surprising he didn't switch parties, especially considering the flak he's taken from his own party. But that alone should tell us something. It tells us he's a true believer who'll likely come down with the any democrat majority once he reaches the upper chamber. His base understands this, at least most of them. Corker might want to bring this fact to light in tonight's debate rather than blabbing about trips, women and football parties.
I'll have my .02 cent report later..
LATER 10/28/06
From a liveblogger:
Nashville for the 21st Century
Wonder if this was discussed? And wow, are they that interested Down Under, or was it just the comment about Aussie nukes that got their attention?
As to the winner, Corker folks say it was Bob. Ford folks saying nothing yet, but his fan club thinks it was a slam-dunk. Does this prove that Ford's IT people are inferior to Corker's, or that Corker pre-loaded his post? Inquiring minds don't really care.
RECAP RESOURCES 10/29/06
Still haven't gotten into a position of offering any detailed opinions on the debate, but that's ok, you'll survive without it. In the meantime, if you've been looking for the video it's right here.
HT GOP and College
MORE 10/30/06
After re-viewing the debate I'll share my thoughts. First thought, the video link I posted won't play in Firefox, only Windows. Or maybe I'm just an idiot.
Oh yeah, the debate. Bob Corker is definitely more seasoned and experienced. I like the fact he's actually accomplished things in the real world, while Ford's drawback is being a career politician at a relatively young age. But Ford's learned well--he's the better politician by far--a natural. If he loses this race he might run for Mayor of Memphis and win by a landslide.
On the Social Security question, he lost me on his plan to set up a cutoff point where some people (he listed blue collar workers) would get their FICA contributions while others, the so-called rich, would not. I don't like artificial lines since they can easily be moved and because somebody close to the line is always getting screwed. There's gotta be a better way. Funny, while watching I couldn't help but wonder if Ford's plan becomes reality whether they'll continue sending us those SS benefits statements just to remind us how much our monthly annuity check would've been?
I did find the idea of setting up the 500 dollar account for each child born to be intriguing outside-the-box thinking, which probably means it'll never happen in DC. That he gave Santorum credit is typical Harold Ford.
As to the question about harsh treatment of detainees, both agreed (Ford voted yea) but Corker scored points by mentioning sunset provisions, which I agree with.
On taxation, Ford skillfully tried to paint Corker as a tax-raiser while never acknowledging his own votes. In my view Corker won that argument by pointing out his own success in Chattanooga while Ford didn't do enough to help himself by pointing to his own votes on the Bush tax cuts. Perhaps he was content with letting that sleeping dog lie.
As to closing statements, Ford showed his charisma and once again brought up his Christianity, which the radical left continues to hypocritically ignore. I did like his comment about someone upstairs knowing much more than he'll ever know, and I wish more poiticos would admit to that. And his statement about voting for change is apt, since a vote for Harold might turn out to be a vote for Harry Reid as well.
Corker's final statement was stock speechtalk and not very effective. I agree with others who said this debate was a draw as to talking points, but I still lean to Corker because it appears he'll vote closer to my thinking. For what it's worth.
Meanwhile, they're trying to stir up the 'drop off' voters here in Shelby County (Memphis), which are defined as ones who only vote every four years but skip the off years. According to the WaPo most are black. Let's see, the Ford family has tremendous influence here, desires one its members to hold office somewhere, and we saw what happened when John Ford was indicted and resigned--sister Ophelia ended up on the ballot and in the middle of a dead-voter scandal. If this race is close the lawsuits could drag on forever.
SPEAKING OF THE LORD 10/30/06
Harold apparently thinks He's on the democrats' side. Side question, is Corker actually a midget or is everyone around him just gigantic?
No comments:
Post a Comment