Its Debatable
In Sunday's Journal Gazette, Nikki Kelly and Ben Lanka wrote about the commissioner's actions in dodging debates with their opponents.
Whether they are dodging a debate doesn't matter. What matters is the perception that they are dodging a debate.
incumbents aren't thrilled to enter debates with their opponents for several reasons. For one, it puts them in a situation in which they can't control. Scary things can happen to campaigns that are faced with something they weren't expecting. Secondly, by agreeing to a debate they automatically lend a degree of legitimacy to their opponent that they didn't otherwise possess.
However, if public perception is strong that they are avoiding a debate it can hurt an incumbent. It gives the perception of weakness, that the incumbent is afraid of something that their opponent brings to the table. It also gives almost as much credibility, by default, to their opponent as would have had they lost the debate.
The only way to alleviate such perception is to debate their opponent.
Whether they are dodging a debate doesn't matter. What matters is the perception that they are dodging a debate.
incumbents aren't thrilled to enter debates with their opponents for several reasons. For one, it puts them in a situation in which they can't control. Scary things can happen to campaigns that are faced with something they weren't expecting. Secondly, by agreeing to a debate they automatically lend a degree of legitimacy to their opponent that they didn't otherwise possess.
However, if public perception is strong that they are avoiding a debate it can hurt an incumbent. It gives the perception of weakness, that the incumbent is afraid of something that their opponent brings to the table. It also gives almost as much credibility, by default, to their opponent as would have had they lost the debate.
The only way to alleviate such perception is to debate their opponent.
posted by Indiana Pundit at 6:59 AM
7 Comments:
Yeah, tell that to Souder. To bad the ACRP keeps stuffing socks in Larsen's mouth every time he opens it. Politicians....phooey.
I agree, but doesn't an incumbent have an obligation to the public to debate. The incumbent was elected by the people, so they must be held accountable to decisions they have made or did not make. It seems an incumbent that does not want to debate is concerned about their decision or ashamed.
Mark Souder should be voted out of office at once.
Mark Souder PROMISED to debate all comers AND he promised to serve a MAXIMUM of twelve years in office...
His 12 years are up and he does NOT debate all comers...
He is a hypocrite...
He and Julia Carson are the only two Indiana Federal Representatives that voted AGAINST the recent immigration reform passed by The House...
Way to go Mark...
Mike Sylvester
You've gotta admire Linda Bloom's up-front "what the heck's in it for me" comment in the article. No tippy toeing around, just out and out "it's MY seat and I intend to keep it that way."
Am I right, that Marla Irving has never been elected in her own right? Didn't she get elected to a vacancy in a caucus and almost lost that to Ron Swart of Cedar Creek Township?
She was appointed in 2000 and was elected to a full term in 2002.
She wasn't appointed, I know that much. Precinct committeepersons of the deceased or resigned officeholder need to vote on the replacement.
Thanks for informing me that she did get elected to a full term.
But I am pretty sure she only got by in a squeaker originally with the precinct vote. And I think it was Ron Swart who almost beat her.
Post a Comment
<< Home