100 Day Sprint: Impressions from first Doheny-Owens debate
To see my straight-up story on the issues tackled last night in Greenwich, go here. Now for some more rambly thoughts:
1. Bill Owens’ advance teamwork wasn’t great last night. He has a big war chest and Washington County has an active Democratic Party. What’s more, farmers are currently pretty impatient with the GOP’s handling of the farm bill. Yet there was no evidence of Owens support, in the room or outside.
2. Matt Doheny had some spirited support last night, but it didn’t look anything like what we saw for Chris Gibson, the newcomer who toppled Democrat Scott Murphy in Washington County two years ago. To win this race, Doheny will need big margins from conservative areas like this. I’m not sure I saw that kind of zeal last night.
3. Neither of these guys are barn-burners. They’re not particularly ideological and neither light up the stage. Again, it’s a big departure from the Gibson-Murphy contest, where we saw some real fireworks, both issue-wise and rhetorically. (Remember Gibson’s call for a new nuclear power industry in the North Country? No big ideas like that this time.)
4. Both of these guys seem really relaxed less than two months before election day, and I have no idea why. You would think that Bill Owens would be fighting for his political life in a district that leans heavily Republican; and you’d think that Doheny would be hard-charging as the challenger.
5. Farmers may lean Republican, but they have both parties eating out of their hands. Owens and Doheny basically agree that farmers should get tons of goodies from the government without paying much in the way of taxes or facing significant regulations. In a year when fish kills and toxic algae blooms are making headlines, Gov Cuomo wants to ease farm pollution rules. That, my friends, is real political clout.
6. I have absolutely no idea where this race stands. I’ve heard rumblings of an independent poll being done in NY21 and I am eager to hear theories from In Boxers. What are you hearing from your neighbors, from political leaders in your area? Is Doheny gaining traction? Is Owens’ Democratic brand hurting him?
Wild (but civil and intelligent) speculation welcome.
Tags: election12
Don’t want to speculate, because I don’t know enough. Maybe you can help, Brian.
They seem to agree on almost everything, accdg to your news report. How would their policy differences affect local farmers? And the non-farmers?
Sad that like all the other mainstream media, you irresponsibly failed to mention that the debate did not include all of the candidates… or, heaven forbid, take the next step to ask why?
FYI-the third candidate in the race is the Green Party’s Donald Hassig, who you should be familiar with since you did an interview with him earlier.
(And no, I don’t care if you consider him to be a ‘viable’ candidate or not. That’s for us the voters to decide on Election Day, not you journalists.)
It does seem from your story that Doheny is trying to move back towards the center for the general election. Will that work?
On Aug. 3, 2012, Brian (MOFYC not NCPR) wrote: “I’m a Green and strong advocate of badly needed multipartyism. I’ve never been a fan of Hassig’s candidacy because I think single-issue campaigns demean not just the Greens but smaller parties in general. We’re trying to get people to take us seriously and this harms more than helps. I’d rather have no candidate than a joke candidate.”
In my coverage, I’ve been checking in with Mr. Hassig daily, so I’m not going to get into a debate about who is or isn’t paying attention to the third party candidates. But it seems you yourself do not consider Hassig viable.
Chris: I’m not in listening range of your radio station so I’m not in a position to comment on its coverage.
But you’re missing the point. Mr. Hassig should be covered not because I do or don’t think he’s an amazing candidate. He should covered because he is a candidate and it’s to the voters writ large to the decide if he or anyone else is viable or not. Give them the information and let them make up their own minds.
I think Doheny and Owens are quite unimpressive too, but I wouldn’t tell you or anyone else not to cover them. I thought Doug Hoffman was a joke but apparently a large number of voters did not. The media covered him and the voters were able decide for themselves without some higher power decreeing him ‘unviable’ on their behalf.
About Owens’ advance work. Washington County boast a strong and active Democratic Women’s group. I was talking with a friend last night who is a prominent member of the group and she wanted to know when the debate was taking place. Doh!
I don’t think someone deserves serious coverage simply because he gets himself on the ballot and shows up in a couple of towns without notice to get interviewed and/or arrested.
I know about a dozen progressive-types in the Tri-lakes who are smart and politically active, are disgusted with Owens’ Keystone Pipeline vote, and would probably worked and voted for a real third party candidate with a real campaign, with volunteers, literature, buttons, and all that stuff. This might have translated into serious, possibly fatal, problem for Owens, and a possibly the birth of a viable Green presence in the North Country. Mr. Hassig is obviously not that candidate, and deserves the level of coverage he is getting , at least in this neck of the woods.
Or am I missing something?
Excellent point Newt.
Newt you are not missing anything. The amazing thing is that if you simply researched this guy he has been acting like this for the past couple of decades, people in SLC assumed it was a joke candidate as they know who he is.