Senator Ted Kennedy’s office has announced that he will debate Republican challenger Ken Chase on Chet Curtis’s show on NECN. Here’s the press release:
Yesterday, Senator Kennedy received an invitation to participate in a campaign debate hosted by Chet Curtis of New England Cable News. NECN reaches more Massachusetts households close to 2 million statewide than any other television outlet. Because of its wide reach and Chet Curtis breadth of experience, Senator Kennedy has accepted the invitation and looks forward to discussing the important issues facing the people of Massachusetts.
Go Ted! This is exactly how a sure-to-win incumbent should behave. Don’t starve your opponent of oxygen, refusing to acknowledge his existence and refusing to debate. If you do that, you’re a chicken. (*cough* Galvin *cough*) Instead, go on TV with your opponent, talk about the issues and what you’ve done for the state, and persuade the voters that you, rather than the guy across the table, should be sent back to Washington.
Even if your opponent is this guy.
If this was 1904.
Will he debate Jill Stein?
<
p>
He’s going to win, no doubt, but Jill has some important issues to bring up that Galvin doesn’t seem to want to discuss so far.
<
p>
Call on Galvin to debate her.
<
p>
(my brief lunch break is done, back to the count…)
Should definitely call on him to do so. his refusal to debate Bonifaz makes me think that it’s unlikely, but it also helps to make the case. I’m picturing framing a central question: “Will Bill Galvin debate ANYONE?”
And, if you noticed the reason Kennedy gave to accept the debate wasn’t because Chase needed to be addressed, or that it’s valuable to have the debate, but because Chet Curtis and NECN reach a lot of people.
It’s really not fair to compare Kennedy debating Chase to Galvin debating Bonifaz.
<
p>
All Kennedy has to do is show up and breathe. If that’s all he did, he might lose 10 points of his lead. I can see it now: “Ted? Ted? Did you hear the question? Will you respond?”
<
p>
If Kennedy were to actually speak, and somehow, his words came out of Chase’s mouth, then he could lose the debate: again, causing at most, the loss of 10 points of his lead.
<
p>
Galvin, on the other hand, would have gotten his ass kicked by Bonifaz. “Tell us again why you are considering Diebold Secretary Galvin?” “Mr. Bonifaz, your response?”
<
p>
Having had his hat handed to him by Bonifaz, Galvin would then watch as the media began paying some attention to Bonifaz, and subsequently money and support going to his opponent. Bonifaz could have mounted more of a campaign, increased his visibility, built more of a ground game, see a steady rise in the polls, and actually win.
<
p>
Stop picking on Galvin like Kennedy is courageous and he is not. The two situations are COMPLETELY different. And as Galvin so clearly pointed out, Bonifaz is, in all likelihood, a Red, so it would have been downright Communist Sympathizing to debate Bonifaz (whose name, I might point out, sounds decidedly like he’s a foreigner!).
<
p>
Sheesh people. A little attention to the details please.
I think that whole point is bogus. If Galvin debated Bonifaz, there would have been minimal media coverage and it wouldn’t have been played on state-wide TV.
<
p>
Galvin was a chicken, plain and simple. I don’t vote for cowards. I’m not even sure I’ll vote for him in the general, I’ll probably just leave it blank (I don’t think I could bring myself to vote green). LOL maybe I’ll write-in Bonifaz.
that roboy is joking…
Pay that man!!!
<
p>
Whew, I was almost afraid I had started another Kerry Healy headed for the Supreme Court thread.
I sure as hell wouldnt, Bonifaz went around like an idiot taping a commercial “wheres galvin” when he was at his mothers funeral, he proceeded to call him a do nothing SoS etc. Bonifaz had he been elected would have been in a direct conflict of interest with his father in laws law firm, moreoever he would have used the position as a bully pulpit to attack his opponents and this would have compromised his neutrality as a candidate.
<
p>
I wouldnt debate anyone who made fun of me on the day my mother passed away and used vile, dishonest, and despicable campaign tactics against me.
<
p>
Im saying this and Im not even sure if Ill vote for Galvin.
Bonifaz screwed up with the “Where’s Galvin” thing, but no one has EVER suggested that he was actually aware that Galvin’s mother had passed away that day. And when they found out, they pulled the spot that had been filmed that day.
<
p>
As for the rest of the stuff – conflict of interest, etc. – I have no idea what you’re talking about. Care to clarify?
John Bonifaz, his campaign manager, and the person who made the video, all told me directly and without any qualifiers that they were not aware of Galvin’s mother’s death at the time they made the video, nor at the time they posted the video. They, like I, found out about it later.
Okay, you need to back up against the wall, put your hands up over your head, and beg for mercy. Your egregious ignorance on what actually happened here needs to be corrected. Go back and research the sequence of events.
<
p>
Of course, there’s always the possibility you don’t mind looking like a shill for the Galvin campaign, your disclaimer notwithstanding. If that’s the case, you may leave your comment as is, unaddressed, for posterity.
Kennedy could show up riding a tricycle and wearing a clown suit, and he knows it wouldn’t hurt his chances for reelection.
<
p>
The last time he had a real debate, Mitt Romney clearly tossed him down the stairs and into the street. Yet Ted still won the election with ease.