{"id":3547,"date":"2008-08-08T07:56:00","date_gmt":"2008-08-08T13:56:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.nmpolitics.net\/index\/2008\/08\/to-debate-or-not-to-debate\/"},"modified":"2008-08-08T07:56:00","modified_gmt":"2008-08-08T13:56:00","slug":"to-debate-or-not-to-debate","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/2008\/08\/to-debate-or-not-to-debate\/","title":{"rendered":"To debate or not to debate?"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a> <\/p>\n

Sanitized format, Tinsley\u2019s rule-breaking characterize CD2 event, but candidates say more debates are coming<\/span><\/p>\n

Thursday’s joint appearance by Democratic 2nd Congressional District candidate Harry Teague<\/a> and Republican opponent Ed Tinsley<\/a> was so sanitized that it barely met the definition of a candidate forum, but both candidates say they will participate in additional forums and debates before the Nov. 4 election. <\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

By many definitions<\/a>, the word forum means \u201copen discussion.\u201d It\u2019s a stretch to say that\u2019s what happened at Thursday\u2019s event in Las Cruces<\/st1:place><\/st1:city>, which was sponsored by the Association of Commerce and Industry<\/a> (ACI).<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

First the background: Teague isn\u2019t the most articulate public speaker. Apparently sensing an opportunity, Tinsley has challenged Teague to debates in every county in the district. Teague hasn\u2019t responded to Tinsley\u2019s request, but has pointed to a July 27 forum in Mescalero, Thursday\u2019s forum in Las Cruces<\/st1:city> and an Oct. 19 forum in Albuquerque<\/st1:place><\/st1:city> as evidence that he isn\u2019t afraid to appear in public with Tinsley.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

While Tinsley has said he wants substantive discussion of the issues and accused Teague of ducking debates, Teague and Democrats have repeatedly hammered Tinsley<\/a> for what Tinsley calls a second home but what they say is his primary residence. It\u2019s an issue because it\u2019s located far outside the district, in Santa Fe<\/st1:place><\/st1:city>.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

A sanitized format and some rule-breaking<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

In front of that backdrop, the two agreed after some back-and-forth to attend Thursday\u2019s forum. The format: Each candidate would give a 15-minute speech. Then each would be asked one question and have two minutes to answer. The questions came from the opposing campaign, but the moderator, ACI President Beverlee McClure, asked them.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

McClure said it was Tinsley who proposed the question portion of the event, while Teague proposed the speech portion.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

The candidates also agreed to not even name each other during their speeches, let alone attack or directly address each other. Each violation would result in the other candidate getting an additional minute to speak.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Tinsley, who gave his speech first, had no intention of holding up his end of that agreement. Seven times during his 15-minute speech he broke that rule, and he joked about doing it. The first violation came while Tinsley was explaining his opposition to amnesty.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

\u201cHarry supports amnesty. You get another minute on that one, I think,\u201d he told Teague.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Teague sat still through Tinsley\u2019s speech, facing the audience instead of Tinsley. He showed little emotion.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

At the end of his speech, Tinsley directly challenged Teague by asking him if he would attend five additional debates. McClure cut Tinsley off, reminding him that the candidates agreed to not ask questions of each other.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Teague, like Tinsley, used his speech to regurgitate his oft-used talking points on health care, immigration and amnesty — topics ACI asked the candidates to address. Tinsley faced Teague while the Democrat spoke and often smiled and nodded.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

One question apiece<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Then came Teague\u2019s single question for Tinsley, relayed by McClure: Tinsley\u2019s Republican opponents in primary races for the House seat this year and in 2002 accused him of not living in the district. Teague asked: If fellow Republicans don\u2019t think Tinsley lives in the district, why should anyone else?<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

\u201cHarry, are you telling me that all with all the challenges we just talked about\u2026 you want to focus on a second home?\u201d Tinsley asked. \u201cI think the voters of the 2nd District deserve more.\u201d<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Tinsley said he wants to talk about issues, such as the candidates\u2019 differing stances on the Iraq<\/st1:country-region> war, and said voters care \u201clittle to nothing\u201d about his Santa Fe<\/st1:place><\/st1:city> home.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Tinsley\u2019s question: Teague\u2019s Web site stated that he favored an immediate withdrawal from Iraq<\/st1:place><\/st1:country-region> and the ending of funding for the war. What would Teague do if, after abandoning Iraq<\/st1:place><\/st1:country-region>, it became a safe haven for terrorists?<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Teague, who recently fired his campaign manager and brought in a new team, said he has \u201calways supported the troops\u201d and \u201cfunding for the troops.\u201d He acknowledged that his Web site, until recently, stated otherwise about funding.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

\u201cMy new team has corrected the Web site,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Teague then went on to defend his call to end the war. He listed things the $3 billion being spent each week in Iraq<\/st1:place><\/st1:country-region> could instead do, including catching Osama bin Laden, building new schools and lowering gas prices.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

More debates coming<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Never during the event did Teague address Tinsley\u2019s debate challenge, but afterward Teague said in a brief interview that he\u2019s already planning to attend five additional debates \u201cand we may do more.\u201d A campaign staffer added that three of those debates will be televised.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

One televised event will be held next week in Clovis<\/st1:place><\/st1:city> in the 3rd District. Another will be held in October in Albuquerque<\/st1:city> in the 1st District and broadcast on Albuquerque<\/st1:city> television, which doesn\u2019t reach Do\u00f1a<\/st1:placename> Ana<\/st1:placename> County<\/st1:placename><\/st1:place>. The third, Teague said, will be broadcast on KRWG-TV in Las Cruces<\/st1:place><\/st1:city>.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

\u201cOh good,\u201d was Tinsley\u2019s response when told following the event that Teague had agreed to participate in five debates. Tinsley added that he thought Thursday\u2019s event was \u201ca great dialogue.\u201d<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

You can listen to the entire ACI event from Radio of Las Cruces News by clicking here<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Sanitized format, Tinsley\u2019s rule-breaking characterize CD2 event, but candidates say more debates are coming Thursday’s joint appearance by Democratic 2nd Congressional District candidate Harry Teague and Republican opponent Ed Tinsley was so sanitized that it barely met the definition of a candidate forum, but both candidates say they will participate in additional forums and debates […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3547","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3547","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3547"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3547\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3547"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3547"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3547"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}