This came in today from the Sheheen campaign:
SHEHEEN CHALLENGES HALEY TO LINCOLN DOUGLAS DEBATES
“ …issue oriented debate like Lincoln Douglas would explain the differences.”
CAMDEN, SC—Today, Vincent Sheheen challenged Representative Nikki Haley to five Lincoln Douglas debates on five different topics in five different regions of South Carolina.In a letter mailed to Representative Haley last week, Vincent Sheheen wrote, “I challenge you to debates on jobs and the economy in Greenville, education in Columbia, governmental reform and transparency in Charleston, comprehensive tax reform in Rock Hill and infrastructure and tourism in Myrtle Beach. I propose the debates follow the Lincoln Douglas format as prescribed by the National Forensic League, the oldest and largest interscholastic forensic organization in the United States.”The guidelines for Lincoln Douglas Debate are:(Speaker A) Constructive 6 Minutes(Speaker B) Cross Examination 3 Minutes(Speaker B) Constructive 7 Minutes(Speaker A) Cross Examination 3 Minutes(Speaker A) Rebuttal 4 Minutes(Speaker B) Rebuttal 6 Minutes(Speaker A) Rebuttal 3 MinutesPrep Time 4 Minutes per debater“These debates will provide South Carolinians with a comprehensive and thorough evaluation of both of us so that they won’t have to make such an important decision based on a thirty-second sound bite. I believe voters need a series of robust examinations of our positions to not only understand our governing philosophies but also begin to rebuild the trust that elected officials will act in ways consistent with their stated beliefs,” Sheheen concluded.“ Voters, with such an important choice at such a crucial time, want the chance to fully know the candidates for governor. They deserve to know who will chart a new course for this state starkly different from the last eight years and who will attempt to carry on the failed legacy of Mark Sanford.”###
The question is, who gets to be Lincoln? Nikki, who in spite of her contempt for many of her fellow Republicans managed to capture the nomination of what was once the Party of Lincoln, or Vincent, who if nothing else is taller?
Then again, you might not want to be Lincoln — who actually lost that election, if I recall.
Related Posts
I’m all for it…
Only rule Haley campaign should demand is the word “Sanford” cannot be spoken. That should cut Sheheen’s argument by about 80%.
Doug, I know you don’t like to hear it, but as I’ve been saying since LONG before we knew who the nominees would be, THE single largest issue in this election has been, since the beginning, the critical need to avoid making the mistake the electorate made in the last two elections. Or the last four, if you want to extend the point. It’s just that the last two were the worst — and as one who shared in that mistake the first time, I am perhaps more acutely aware of it than most.
That the GOP primary produced the ONE candidate who would most clearly be a continuation of Sanford — another four years of counterproductivity — just raises the stakes on that point.
Again, sorry if that bothers you. But those are the stakes for South Carolina.
Yeah, I hope they get into lots of other issues. But the big issue for people who care about South Carolina, regardless of the their party affiliation or any other consideration (apart from radical ideology), is that we not waste another four years.
They ought to hold the education debate in Bamberg or Marion and not in Columbia.
It doesn’t bother me that your opinion of what South Carolina needs for a Governor is not in step with what the majority of voters believe. Apparently they already knew what the stakes were and bet on the candidate who could deliver the goods. The majority of voters want a governor who will rein in the Legislature with what little power she/he has.
If Haley wins will you finally come to grips with that fact?
Sheheen doesn’t have an issue like the lottery to run on. He has no message to drive the black vote and can’t count on Alvin Greene to get the numbers he’ll need. He has no message that can straddle the fence to grab independents and keep 100% of his base. So he and his flunkies keep talking about Sanford like Sanford had anything to do with the state of the South Carolina government. It’s not Sanford’s budget, it’s not Sanford’s tax system, it’s certainly not Sanford’s education system… so running against Sanford means you’re running for more of the same government we already have – the Harrell/Leatherman/McConnell/Knotts/Cooper/et al government.
While not agreeing with Doug’s conclusion; when I read the press release, I did wonder why the Sheheen campaign brought up “the failed legacy of Sanford.”
That’s just tarring Hailey – and makes the attempt to bait her into something that would actually be great for every voter seem to be just another exercise in disingenuous pandering.
It also seems to me the real failed legacy of those years was the Legislature’s “improvements” to our state’s tax raising structure. Sanford may not have done anything positive for the state – but the current tax structure has been nothing short of destructive for us all.
Don’t blame me. I voted for Dr. Oscar Lovelace in the last GOP primary.
I voted for Vincent Sheheen in the past Democratic primary.
Lincoln Douglas–wasn’t that a Paul Simon song? Oh, no–Lincoln Duncan. Never mind…
I’d have written it with a hyphen between the two names, myself.
I would love to see this kind of debate. We could bar Mr. Sheheen from making direct “Sanford” references, and bar Ms. Haley from talking on topics that are not germane to the govenorship.
A Sanford walk-back?
Karen, to bar the name “Sanford” would be to ignore the greatest issue before the voters — whether we will waste another four years.
But to help out Nikki, in keeping with what Kathryn pointed out, there should be a pop quiz on hyphenation. That should pull up her relative grade, if that release is an example of Vincent’s skills in that area…
OK, Doug, I’m really trying to understand. Sanford made himself irrelevant with his ideogical narrowness and lack of flexibility, lack of depth, lack of imagination. You seem to get that he was irrelevant since you point out that there is very little of anything he wanted in the current government. If the problem with our government is the power in the legislature and the abuse of that power, which I think we might be able to agree on, then the question becomes what approach from our weak governorship can have any effect on this problem? And we have two choices – cooperation and communication or more of the same. What on Earth makes you think that Haley would be any more successful than Sanford was at curtailing the legislature. They have the power. If the governor is too confrontational or extreme, he/she will just be ignored. I’ve seen nothing to dissuade me from thinking that that would be Haley’s path with the legislature. On the other hand, the language and ideas behind this press release alone re-affirms for me the sense that Sheheen believes in communication and sees problems with more depth. If anything is apt to work in reining in the legislature, I tend to think it is more likely this approach.
Oops…it should be “reaffirm” not “reafirms” up there. Sorry.
Hyphens are vastly underutilized tools for clarity in writing. They aren’t used enough.
Like the difference between
Man Eating Shark
and
Man-Eating Shark
So what you’re saying, Scout, is that Sheheen would do what Sanford had no interest in doing, and something that Haley is no more interested in doing (and possibly less) than Sanford: LEAD.
None of this really matters anyway, since Haley may have an insurmountable lead and advantage at this point.
A well-connected Democratic public opinion pollster based in Columbia essentially says that barring any cataclysmic event, there is really little to no chance that Sheheen can win. In fact, Haley’s candidacy and appeal make him the least likely to win among Sheheen-Cooper-Holleman-Barber. Most of the political class Dems I talk to are more concerned with electing Holleman, keeping Spratt in Congress, and maybe knocking off Eckstrom for Barber.
@scout
What lack of imagination? He offered all sorts of new ideas. Anything that involves making government more efficient and stopping the growth IS a new idea with the current bunch of career politicians.
What I am saying is Sanford tried MIGHTILY to lead according to the platform that he was elected on TWICE. The Legislature chose to ignore him. If you think they are going to listen to Sheheen in any way, you’re living in a dream world.
Why doesn’t Sheheen come out with some specific policies and run them by Harrell and Leatherman to see how far they get? What he’ll get is a pat on the head and “run along, son”.
Do some googling of Governor Christie in New Jersey. See what happens when you combine a confrontational governor with the power to do something about it. And see how the people of the state LOVE him for it. Just this week, he fired the head of the Department of Education for misleading him on why New Jersey failed in the recent quest for federal funds.
The governor of South Carolina has no power. He is not a leader (no matter how many times every brings up Carroll Campbell, all I can ask is “if he was so good, what did he actually accomplish in eight years? Was South Carolina BETTER then???).
@ Burl–Eats, Shoots and Leaves, eh?
Brad, I it wasn’t Sanford qua Sanford that was the trouble. It was his ideas and his approach. Those are legitimate topics without referring to Gov. Sanford.
Well, Matt, it’s not even Labor Day yet, so I think the race still has just barely begun. The debates could have some impact. The “cataclysmic event” the Sheheen campaign is hoping for would be either for Haley to appear out of her depth in the debates or for her to dig too overenthusiastically into the Tea Party playbook and wind up channeling her inner Michelle Bachmann.
Matt, also don’t forget the Rob Miller-Joe Wilson race, which was fairly close last time and could be tighter in this year of anti-incumbent fever.
“Sanford tried MIGHTILY to lead according to the platform that he was elected on TWICE.” Doug, I suppose you could call it that; what I’d call it is acting superior to the people whose support you need and then being offended when they don’t jump to do your bidding. If Carroll Campbell could get bills through a General Assembly dominated by the opposing party, what’s Sanford’s problem?
Doug, I’m not sure you want to use Governor Christie as an example of the virtues of a powerful governor. He accussed Obama’s commission of failing to give his state a chance to provide additional information concerning a grant request for funding education, calling them a bunch of bureaucratic obstructionists. Turns out the committee he target DID provide him ample opportunity to provide the information they needed to complete the ranking process. And he was unable to do so. In effect Christie’s administration was incompetent in filling out the paper work. But rather than admit as much Christie flat out lied about the matter. Not something we need to emulate.
@Steve
What bills? People talk about the Caroll Campbell era as if South Carolina was an economic powerhouse with a great education system. What was so different then? I lived here and don’t recall anything being any different. Oh yeah, taxes were lower. Government was smaller. We wasted less money on education and got the same results. Hmmm.. those seem like all the areas Sanford wanted to return to.
@bud
You are wrong. Christie blamed the Obama administration because he was told that was the case by his head of education. When the truth came out, he admitted he was wrong and fired the guy. That’s what true accountability looks like.
In South Carolina, the governor has little power to control the government. And when he does use his power (i.e. vetoing budget items), all we hear is whining and moaning from everybody that he’s not playing fair and doesn’t work well with others.
Anyway, everyone should get their heads around having Nikki Haley as Governor and the Democrats losing the U.S. House and Senate.
Today’s Gallup poll..
http://www.gallup.com/poll/142718/GOP-Unprecedented-Lead-Generic-Ballot.aspx
Republicans are ahead nationally by more than 10 points – an unprecedented margin in a mid-year election.
Obama / Reid / Pelosi have screwed up a sure thing. They had complete control and clear majorities and blew it.
Did I read the poll last week correctly….47% approve of Sanford’s job performance..and only 51 % disapprove?
When I read that, my optimism for Sheheen dropped 75%.
PT Barnum was wrong.
Simply unbelievable.
There was an interesting tidbit on page 2 of the front section of today’s WSJ: Our own Joe Wilson is one of a number of solons whose accounting (or lack of same) for funds drawn for overseas is being investigated.
@Doug,
I suppose I was using “imagination” in the sense of finding creative solutions to problems. I didn’t see much of that from Sanford. He just created roadblocks for himself by the approach he chose.
So aside from that, you didn’t answer my question – What makes you think Haley will be any more successful than Sanford was at getting any of her ideas implemented if she uses the same approach he did with the legislature?
Also, how is Governor Christie relevant – if he is a “confrontational governor with the power to do something about it” then he is not relevant to SC where the governor does not have much overt power – hence the need for more subtle approaches.
@ Doug, I can’t agree that Obama/Reid/Pelosi “blew it.” I think our current economic situation was going to be bad no matter what, and whoever was in power would be held accountable for the failure of the economy to recover fast enough. Had McCain won, I think the economy would be in still worse shape, plus we would not be pulling troops out of Iraq, and we’d probably be in three other wars by now. As the St. Petersburg Times Pulitzer-Prize-winning Politifact.com site indicates, Obama has already delivered on a far greater number of campaign promises than one might suspect from focusing on the dominant media narrative:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/rulings/promise-kept/
As far as “blowing it” goes, that story may go another direction. The election is still over two months away. It may yet turn out that by nominating too many extremists, the GOP will have blown a chance to recapture several key Senate seats (Nevada for example, and now Alaska may be in play for the Democrats). The Republicans will likely take the House but the overall story day-after-election-day may well be the landslide that didn’t happen.
Sorry Doug but you’re not telling the whole story here. Christie was and still is mostly blaming the Obama administration for mistake that HIS administration made. That’s not accountability, that’s playing the blame game and it’s partisan politics at it’s very worse. Rather than shouldering some responsibility for the matter Christie lashed out at everyone in sight except for his own sorry self.
As for Haley, I can see her doing pretty much the same thing. She’s demonstrated time and again throughout the campaign that she’d rather play the blame game than work long, hard ours with the general assembly to get things accomplished. The woman scares me.
Sheehen on the other hand comes across as reasonable yet tough when he needs to be. We don’t need a cowgirl running around trying to pick fights. What we need is a leader.
@scout
“So aside from that, you didn’t answer my question – What makes you think Haley will be any more successful than Sanford was at getting any of her ideas implemented if she uses the same approach he did with the legislature? ”
I’m not sure she will be. But if she can do anything to stop the Legislature from continuing its policies of spending more money and spending it on things the government should not do, I’m all for it.
I read a quote recently that said “It’s more important for a President to stop a bad bill than to enact a good one”. That’s the way I feel about the role of Governor in this state. If she can’t convince them to be smart, it’s better to keep exposing them when they act dumb.