Luckily, I was able to attend the Senate Candidate debate last night in Rochester.
I watched last week’s NHIOP "debate" (online) but heard that the Rochester event might be more of a true debate, where candidates actually engage each other.
Well, it didn’t exactly go that way, but it was better than the ‘infommerical" that the NHIOP conducted. As you would expect from a 912 Group, the questions were more direct and interrogatory, and focused on the issues that are giving us the most heartburn. They also focused heavily on our friend, the US Constitution. I liked the questions – they came from the 912 community, not a moderator. I would have asked similar ones myself.
I went to this debate planning to take an objective look at all four candidates. I do have my favorite, but I haven’t pulled the voting lever yet, so any of them could still possibly pull me in their direction.
In all, I gave the Blue Ribbon to Ovide LaMontagne. I picked Ovide as my favorite a few months ago, and I felt justified in that decision last night. He had passion, sincerity, knowledge of the issues and a no-nonsense, comfortable approach to his replies. In my opinion, he feels comfortable in a 912 group, because he’s a Conservative and is doing this from the heart. He has solid command of the Constitution, good legal, business and education backgrounds and seems to know how we feel.
I gave 2nd place to Jim Bender. I never really gave Jim much credit or the chance to be taken seriously but he did show good poise, sincerity, and knowledge. I think his business background is valuable and he could make a good Senator, although I am still a little hung-up about his past political contributions to Massachusetts Democrats when he owned a MA based company. I do give him kudos for his performance last night. He was the surprise of the evening.
I gave Kelly Ayotte 3rd place. Personally, I like Kelly, but there’s something about her that makes me uneasy. She sounds unsure of herself, tentative and afraid. She would be better off showing her (occasional) passion without coming across as frustrated or angry, like she did a few times last night. She has good command of the issues, knows the Constitution (as a former AG, she should) and did show some signs of fire. Yet, many people I speak to wonder if she really wants to be in this race. It may just be her style, but if people are thinking that, it’s an issue to be dealt with. I can’t imagine that a lawyer who pleaded and won her case in the US Supreme Court would be unsure of herself, unless she’s running for Senate for the wrong reason. Is she running because she was asked to, and dutifully agreed to do it? This is just my wild opinion. She also did appear to contradict herself at least once, regarding the Arizona immigration law (watch the video and see if you can spot it). She got poked a few times regarding her comments in support of nominating Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court (I hope she can get used to that happening but it will continue to haunt her).
I gave absolute last place to Bill Binnie. Bill was the angry candidate. At times condescending, he appeared to be miffed at some of the questions. Sorry Bill, but it’s going to be a LOT more difficult when you (potentially) face the Democratic candidate on WMUR in October. Bill has clearly succeeded as a CEO during his lifetime, but I got the feeling that he has trouble being the one told to do something, rather than telling someone else what to do. I sensed an arrogance that repelled me (like I see in Charlie Bass). He did not have solid command of the issues and I heard the audience groan more than once at his replies; either we all mis-interpreted the AZ immigration law, or he did, since he said that he feels the AZ law "goes too far". I understand that he feels the law could violate some Americans’ civil liberties (I disagree) but he should learn to be tactical when he expresses this. I got the feeling that he was trying very hard to be a Libertarian. It just didn’t resonate with the crowd.
Well, there you have it – my unfiltered opinion. The videos should be available tonight or tomorrow, so you can form your own opinion. I will send out a note with a link when Skip has posted it.
For now, Skip posted a short clip, "I’ll get back to you on that", showing Bill Binnie’s frustration and condescension, when asked about the "separation of church and state" in the US Constitution. He may have “created thousands and thousands of jobs”, but this was the wrong crowd to get uppity with over this particular issue, and that particular document. I saw poor judgment on his part. I learned a lot about Bill Binnie last night.
** The Cartoon below (from John D) highlights the odd interpretation that Bill Binnie appears to have regarding the AZ immigration law.
What was Binnie saying last night (at the 912-sponsored NH debates)? Hmmmm?
