Last Tedisco-Murphy debate is a draw

Democratic candidate Scott Murphy delivered his opening statement tonight in a dumbed-down, condescending singsong, the same kind of Mr. Rogers delivery that Bobby Jindal used in his notoriously ineffective rebuttal to President Obama's address to Congress. It made me think of Murphy's latest positive TV ad, set in Glens Falls, which is less successful than the brilliant ad which opened his campaign, and how come this political novice seems to have gotten less comfortable as the campaign has gone on. But he got better tonight after that opening, and repeatedly tied Republican candidate Jim Tedisco in knots over Tedisco's unsupported position that the stimulus bill contained $300 billion in pork. Tedisco, the experienced professional politician, had a disastrous start to his campaign, including a terrible performance in the first debate. He has gotten better since, but is still making too many mistakes (like still not having figured out how to talk about the stimulus bill). Tedisco did raise one new problem with the bill, citing what he said was IBM's announcement today that it will move 4,000 jobs to India. IBM, he said, is expected to get stimulus money, and the bill should have included anti-outsourcing provisions. He also raised a couple of other objections to current Democratic policies I hadn't heard him make before, including the piling on of debt and and interest payments, the reduction in tax exemptions for charitable giving, and the lack of stimulus support for farms. He said voters shouldn't send "a rubber-stamp" to Washington, and cited issues in Albany such as workers compensation reform that he said he worked on to help the economy.

Murphy did better on a health-care question, giving a wonkish, thorough and reasonable-sounding answer about what reform measures would work.

The two candidates gave similar answers regarding foreign and defense policy, education, small business tax credits, energy and immigration. Murphy again made his wacky claim to be the more pro-gun ownership candidate. Tedisco closed with what seems to me a lame line (maybe because I used to hear him in 2006-07 say it about Gov. Spitzer) that he wants to work to make Obama the greatest president in history, and Congress likewise.

Tomorrow at 9:30 a.m. the last Siena poll comes out, but I'm tied up in the morning so will not be one of the first to comment on that. It's been a short campaign, but long enough to put people on edge. Yesterday at the Capitol, a top Tedisco aide complained about what he termed the "nasty" things I've been writing, and didn't want to hear me telling him it's been good free advice. On the other hand, Mary Tedisco told me the other day she likes the blog. If you want to win, Jim, better listen to your wife.

Comments

[ind_voter]

I respectfully disagree and i also think the audience would as well. Tedisco was the best he has been. He was calm, reasonable, and cited several details relating to the area of how we could improve. He also cited some things that were wrong about the stimulus bill that you wanted him to.

If Jim loses, and there is a good possibility that Murphy will win on the coattails of Mrs. Obama, Joe Biden, and h. Clinton, then at least he can say he went out with a bang.

Jim did great! Murphy actually choked at one point trying to drink down water. tedisco was the clear winner - and I am no "yes" man.