[Lnc-business] [Statechairs] US Senate candidates debate replay (North Carolina)

[Daniel Wiener]

Brad, thank you for the link.  I just finished watching the replay of the
debate, and found it most interesting.  I thought Sean Haugh did an
excellent job.  Since I'm not a North Carolina resident, and I'm also
naturally biased in Sean's favor, it's really hard for me to evaluate the
impact of the debate on the election.  But trying to be as objective as
possible, here are my guesses/impressions:


   - Just by participating on an equal basis with Hagan and Tillis, the
   debate should significantly boost Sean's campaign.  It showed that he is a
   credible, knowledgeable, intelligent, and personable candidate, not some
   fringe ideologue as our opponents often try to paint Libertarians.  As
   election day nears, the "wasted vote" syndrome regarding third-party
   candidates typically kicks in, and their poll numbers dwindle as voters
   reluctantly choose the lesser of two evils between the two major parties.
   Sean's debate appearance should at the very least mitigate that effect.
   - Hagan and Tillis were also articulate, and sharply focused on their
   campaign talking points and appealing to their voter bases.  Hagan
   emphasized all of the government goodies she favored but Tillis opposed,
   while Tillis concentrated on tying Hagan to Obama's unpopular policies.
   Tillis several times expressed his agreement with Sean on economic issues.
   Not having seen him before, I was surprised at how tall Tillis is.  That's
   an advantage in politics, where images matter.  My guess is that Tillis
   expanded his lead among men more than Hagan helped herself with women.
   - The main area in which Sean differentiated himself from both Hagan and
   Tillis was in the area of foreign affairs and anti-war sentiment.  I can't
   see him cutting too much into Tillis' hawkish base, but he might attract
   some dovish Independents and Democrats who are experiencing cognitive
   dissonance over Hagan's pro-war attitude.  Combined with the Elon
   University online survey data (http://tinyurl.com/kxrtg8m), this looks
   like another instance in which the LP candidate will hurt the Democrat more
   than the Republican.  That's good, in that I think it's very important to
   puncture the conventional wisdom that the LP is a "spoiler" for
   Republicans.  For one thing, it helps us separate ourselves from the
   Republican Party and the view that we are just another flavor of right
   wingers on the two-dimensional left-right scale.  For another thing, it
   might blunt future Republican dirty tricks and other efforts to keep us off
   state ballots if they begin to realize that their stereotypes are invalid
   and that in many cases they could actually benefit from the presence of our
   candidates.
   - Overall, the debate solidified Sean's candidacy as a major factor in
   the election (and by extension the control of the Senate).  He'll be
   getting a lot more earned media between now and the election.  Before the
   debate, the various polls were showing Hagan with a narrowing lead over
   Tillis.  My impression is that her lead has now gotten even narrower or has
   completely disappeared.  It should make for a riveting election night, and
   a big step forward for Libertarians in North Carolina.


Daniel Wiener

On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 7:05 PM, Brad Hessel <bhessel at lpnc.org> wrote:

> In case you missed the debate—or just want to see a replay of Sean Haugh,
> Libertarian for US Senate <https://www.facebook.com/HaughForSenate>
> giving serious, thoughtful answers to WECT-TV moderator Jon Evans’
> questions while the other two mostly recited prepared talking points and
> traded petty personal accusations—here is the replay:
>
> http://www.wect.com/story/26748355/3-nc-senate-candidates-debating-in-wilmington
>
>
> Brad Hessel
>
> Executive Director
>
> execdir at lpnc.org <kpenkowski at lpnc.org>
>
> 1-919-846-5227
>
> www.lpnc.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Statechairs mailing list
> Statechairs at hq.lp.org
> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/statechairs_hq.lp.org
>
>


-- 
*"In general, we look for a new law by the following process. First, we
guess it (audience laughter), no, don’t laugh, that’s the truth. Then we
compute the consequences of the guess, to see what, if this is right, if
this law we guess is right, to see what it would imply and then we compare
the computation results to nature or we say compare to experiment or
experience, compare it directly with observations to see if it works. If it
disagrees with experiment, it’s WRONG. In that simple statement is the key
to science. It doesn’t make any difference how beautiful your guess is, it
doesn’t matter how smart you are, who made the guess, or what his name is.
If it disagrees with experiment, it’s wrong. That’s all there is to it.”*
-- Richard Feynman (https://tinyurl.com/lozjjps)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20141010/57a9953e/attachment-0001.html>