Tuesday, September 19, 2006

Lynch May Have Been Right : Stacked Deck Debate

Radio personality Pat Lynch, after interviewing both men, said that in the Lt. Governor's race Bill Halter's best bet would be to avoid being seen in places where Jim Holt was. Maybe he should stick to electronic media.

According to reports we have heard from the debate last night, the cantankerous broadcaster Lynch was right. Holt walked into the most stacked deck I have ever heard of for a debate and still seems to have come out with the most chips.

The Lt. Governor's debate was held not in neutral territory but in Little Rock, which is Halter's home town, to the extent he has one in Arkansas. But more than that, it was held at the "Bill Clinton School of Public Service", run by partisan Democrat Skip Rutherford. But more than that, the general public was not invited. Holt was limited to taking 15 people into the room. The rest were Halter's people and law school students from the Clinton School of Law, Lyons College, and UALR- not exactly groups with a Republican bent. Questions would be taken from that left-leaning group and filtered by left-leaning newsman Don Elkins, who was the "moderator". Halter even got to stand on a platform, so that it would not be apparent that he is much shorter than Holt. The event was not televised. Even if Halter broke down in tears and admitted that Jim Holt was more qualified for the job we would never know it unless the handful of reporters there chose to tell us.

In spite of all that, initial reports indicate that Holt connected better with the room than Halter. If Halter cannot get a win over Holt in a format like that he had better go hide himself and stick to electronic media like Lynch suggested. One report I got said that even Holt felt comfortable about it afterwards. Believe me, Jim Holt is the kind of person who thinks he did terrible even after he did well. If he thinks he did well, then it was not that close.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Halter was on a platform?! In the only photo I've seen, Holt looks smaller!

Dirty rats!

9:45 AM, September 19, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What is the Clinton School of Law? Never heard of it. Is that something else Mary Mann made up for Jim Legrone?

12:58 PM, September 19, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

UCA was also in attendance, and was quite fair to both candidates. To suggest that the entire crowd and the moderator were "out to get" Mr. Holt would be a gross misrepresentation. Both candidates did well in their respective niches. Mr. Halter had facts prepared and was very organized. On the down side, he came off as pedantic and a bit stuffy. Mr. Holt was not quite as well prepared, but did a better job of "being an Arkansan." I was in attendance and felt that both candidates were given a fair playing field.

4:21 PM, September 19, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey 12:58, are you at Charlie's office typing that on a taxpayer funded computer? And is your boss actually at work or is he at home with a hangover? You people are pathetic!!! You don't have the intelligence to debate the issues so you have to attack your opponent. I wouldn't start that debate if I were you, because I have plenty of ammunition to throw back. You WILL NOT win that debate, you loser.

4:25 PM, September 19, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks for the report, 4:21

5:23 PM, September 19, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Did anyone say "out to get"? The point was the crowd would have a liberal way of looking at the world that could color their actions even if they were trying to be fair.

6:21 PM, September 19, 2006  
Blogger terrymcdermott said...

If Daniels could stay sober, we could have a debate between him and LaGrone.

8:40 PM, September 19, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

On the "out-to-get" matter:

I think anyone critically reading the post would infer that the "deck-stacking" was targeted. For example:

"Questions would be taken from that left-leaning group and filtered by left-leaning newsman"

"run by partisan Democrat Skip Rutherford"

"Holt walked into the most stacked deck I have ever heard of"

"Holt was limited to taking 15 people into the room"

To begin, Halter was also limited to 15 campaign workers. He was not allowed to bring any more than Mr. Holt. If a deck is stacked, then the logical inference is that someone stacked it to harm the opponent. You can refer to my previous post to see why I believe that the deck was not stacked as the author asserts.

10:51 AM, September 28, 2006  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home