Republicans are making a big deal over Democrat Ron Barber’s dodging of Republican Jesse Kelly’s question about whether he’d support Barack Obama in the presidential race this year during last night’s CD8 debate.
Barber, who is facing Kelly in the June 12 special election triggered by Gabrielle Giffords’ resignation, appeared unprepared for the question and certainly sidestepped it, saying that “My vote is my vote, Mr. Kelly, as yours is to you.”
It was probably Barber’s worst moment in the debate and today, his spokeswoman, Jessica Schultz, sent out a statement that Barber did support Obama:
Ron’s point last night was that the election on June 12 isn’t about president Obama, or any other national figure—it’s about who is going to do the best job fighting for middle class families in southern Arizona. While Ron does not agree with the President on everything, of course Ron has supported and will support President Obama in the election. His primary focus as a member of Congress will be standing up for Southern Arizonans.
It’s easy to understand why Arizona Democrats are cautious about tying themselves too closely to Obama. Just this week, Public Policy Polling released a new survey showing that 41 percent of Arizona voters approved of Obama’s handling of the presidency, while 56 percent disapprove.
Voters in Congressional District 8, which tilts more than 6 percentage points toward the GOP, probably break down roughly the same way.
While Barber sidestepped the Obama question during last night’s debate, though, Kelly has been sidestepping questions for his entire campaign. He refuses to sit down for interviews with the Arizona Daily Star or Tucson Weekly, preferring to deliver canned responses via email to questions that reporters have.
While Kelly is adept at delivering soundbites, he and his team have shown little appetite for actually discussing policy matters. In this campaign, for example, he has refused to say whether he would have voted for the budget that House Republicans voted on earlier this year.
And this week, an interview with KGUN-9 blew up in the Kelly Camp’s face after campaign spokesman John Ellinwood came unglued when Kelly was asked about seeking the endorsement of ALIPAC, a political action committee that has been linked to white supremacists, neo-Nazis and anti-Semites.
I have to give kudos to KGUN-9’s Jennifer Waddell, Forrest Carr and Marcelino Benito, who revealed the behind-the-scenes tantrum that Ellinwood threw when the question came up. (Ellinwood is certainly doing his candidate no favors with his tactics here, given that the story has now gotten way more attention thanks to his antics.)
The KGUN team also deserves credit for continuing to ask Kelly about the endorsement rather than giving up. That led to a rather astonishing exchange before yesterday’s debate, which Carr explained today on KGUN’s Web page:
It’s a fact of life in 21st century politics that some candidates tend to be over-handled by their campaign staffs. No matter what the question, such micro-managed candidates tend to answer with a prefab statement reflecting the campaign’s main talking points for the month, week, day or hour. This is a process known as “staying on message.”
You might also call it the “Chatty Cathy Effect.” Any question of any kind on any topic might serve to pull a ring on the candidate’s back, resulting in a replay of the candidate’s pre-recorded and officially approved central campaign themes.
You could see this effect during the KGUN9 studio interview. When asked why he had accepted that ALIPAC endorsement in 2010, Kelly finally responded, “This election is about jobs, and the economy, and lower gas prices.” He then pronounced the ALIPAC topic “out of bounds.”
You could see the effect again even more dramatically Wednesday night, when KGUN9 reporter Marcelino Benito asked Kelly whether he intended to accept this year’s renewed ALIPAC endorsement. Here is a transcript of that conversation:
Benito: “Do you plan on accepting that endorsement this time around?”
Kelly: “Our campaign is going to stay focused on lower gas prices using American energy, lower taxes, and creating jobs.”
Benito: “Do you plan on accepting that endorsement?”
Kelly: “Our campaign is going to stay focused on lower gas prices using American energy, lower taxes, and creating jobs.”
Benito: “So it that a yes or a no?”
Kelly: “Our campaign is going to stay focused on lower gas prices using American energy, lower taxes, and creating jobs.”
Benito: “So no comment?”
Kelly: “Our campaign is going to stay focused on lower gas prices using American energy, lower taxes, and creating jobs.”
This absurd exchange illustrates how candidates want to manipulate the media, but it also shows how the media, when it tires of manipulation and focuses on doing its job of asking tough questions that candidates would prefer to avoid, can reveal how shallow a candidate really is.
Team Kelly clearly wants the media in this town to just accept soundbites—typically, ones that make some reference to lower gas prices or the $500 billion cut to Medicare—and not pursue follow-up questions. The last thing he wants to have to do is explain is a policy question such as how you can allow younger workers to opt out of Social Security and continue to provide benefits to seniors.
The crew at KGUN deserves credit for pushing back against that strategy and pursuing a line of questioning that’s entirely within bounds. Kelly pursued the ALIPAC endorsement in 2010. He filled out their questionnaire and took a pledge to the organization. He was endorsed again by the organization last week.
There’s no reason the press should not ask him whether he still stands by the organization or if he now disavows it.
And every media organization in Tucson should stand behind KGUN and keep asking the question until Kelly answers it. That’s good journalism, not gotcha journalism.
Ron Barber may have sidestepped a question last night, but he’s since answered it. When is Camp Kelly going to start answering questions?
For more on the race, read our in-depth look at the candidates here.
This article appears in May 24-30, 2012.
quote:
“This absurd exchange illustrates how candidates want to manipulate the media, but it also shows how the media, when it tires of manipulation and focuses on doing its job of asking tough questions that candidates would prefer to avoid, can reveal how shallow a candidate really is.”
I don’t ever remember you making a comment like this when you were playing cheerleader for Obama. The word hypocrite’s comes to mind…lol
Though I tend to agree with you to a point, my feeling is both of these candidates are very shallow. I don’t think it is fair to single out one when the other is no better. But then I do realize your agenda is so far left your not even in the same ballpark as most people.
Magnum, this article mentioned slip-ups from both candidates, with the point that Barber’s campaign quickly responded and clarified his position, while Kelly refuses to acknowledge the questions placed before him, time and again. There’s no singling out here, simply a contrast on how the candidates respond to conflict.
Kelly is fixated on getting talking points out (“lower taxes, cheap gas and job growth” as well as “despite my lack of political clout I will stand up to Big Government” and “hey guys did you hear that I am a Marine”) over any sort of substance or clarity.
Barber, on the other hand, addressed his gaffe within 24 hours while at the same time having an eye on actual, real policies that would affect Southern Arizona.
The giggling nitwits in the background in this video are a perfect example of what I mean when I tell people the electorate here is the dumbest in the nation. Have a nice day.
I was at the debate last night and Mr. Charles Manolakis made more sense, than Mr. Ron Barber. Mr. Barber seemed asleep at the wheel. He even copied some of Mr. Manolakis’s commentary. Mr. Manolakis, which I was happy to see, took Mr. Barber to task. Mr. Barber on several occasions did not answer the question, so the Moderator had to re ask him to respond to the QUESTION at hand. Also Mr. Barber had trouble answering Mr. Manolakis’s question, which appeared clear to me. Apparently they didn’t PREP him very well, and then when he would not answer a simple question about who he was voting for for President, that was VERY TELLING. Perhaps Mr. Barber needs a TELEPROMPTER. Mr. Barber, I am sure due to his age and physical condition, not like that of Mr. Manolakis is showing signs of Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome
You start out pretty rationally but then you get onto Kelly and start frothing at the mouth for umpteen more paragraphs. There is life beyond your one-sided politics. Breathe deeply, say, “We’re all Americans, after all,” and chill out.
Mr Kelly’s MO is sound bites. No substantive articulation of the issues we have to deal with, in a realistic manner. As far as Mr Barber declining to answer who he plans to vote for – the question is a gigantic red herring in classic Kelly style.
I was dumbfounded when Kelly actually claimed that big oil isn’t taking government subsidies. What planet did the guy fly in from?
What exactly is Kelly’s connection to Tucson? I forget why he is here. I heard he was from Texas. Last time I checked, we’re not Texas.
I took down my Barber yard sign the next day. Come on, Ron, Stand for something!
Barber is a reasonable man who seems quite uncomfortable with being on stage. Kelly is an unreasonable man who can’t get enough of the limelight. Barber better wake up to his inner politician and speak out strongly if he wants to spare Tucson the shame of sending Kelly to congress.
Jesse Kelly for US Congressman from Arizona!
This “Nitwit” from Texas thinks he’s the Savior we’ve been looking for.
He nothing but a carpetbagger in my eyes, he knows nothing about, taxes, oil or government.
By the way does he really live here in Pima county with his family?
The ONLY candidate in this race saying anything substantive or useful is Charlie Manolakis…
Barber is another blue-dog clone of Gabby who will continue to pander to the status-quo of war and corporate control…
Kelly is an idiot, but a useful idiot to the status-quo of war and corporate control…
As for KGUN, they are to lauded for continuing to ask the question in the face of Kelly’s stupid non-answer… However, they are well known to have continued to ask the “question” even when GIVEN the answer by a candidate. So they are primarily “attack dog ‘journalists'” looking to create controversy to pump up their ad revenues…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubk88tASMe…
Chet, and other Charlie Manolakis supporters,
Mr. Manolakis might have quality ideas, but they’re buried under the stigmas of 1.) being a third party nominee, 2.) being incredibly unpolished and therefore seeming unprepared or unorganized (a “knight of Camelot”? Really?). He has a few good ideas, but there’s no way they’ll gain traction anywhere outside of his head.
You can call Ron Barber a Giffords policy clone, but I’ll take that twice over before I took Jesse Kelly’s sound bite politics or Manolakis’s ideas that are bound to stall and fail.
Mr. Kelly’s family’s company is based in Montana. He was in Texas running a project for them. His wife and kids moved back to Tucson with him when Rep. Giffords resigned her position. If he loses this race I would expect them to move wherever his dad tells him to move to manage the next project.
Mr. Kelly’s father’s company (Don Kelly Construction) is based in Montana. Mr. Kelly was in Texas managing a project for the compnay. Mr. Kelly moved back to Tucson with his wife and children after Rep. Giffords resigned her seat in Congress. If Mr. Kelly loses the election I would expect his family will move wherever his father sends him to manage the next project.
Not long ago some lady named Mrs Clinton moved from Arkansas to Washington DC. Later, she moved to New York for a short stay & ran for the senate & won! Then she moved back to Washinton DC. I would hate to see her called a carpet bagger – but – then again I am a moderate.
Mr. Mendez and Plain Jane seem to be repeating the same identical propaganda from Democrat headquarters. You two seem to know everything, why should we even bother to vote?
Voters, just fact check before you vote, Jesse Kelly has flip flopped so many times for this election. He is needing votes, so he will say anything. Vote smart and lets kick out the Republicans who are out to destroy this nation and state.
Yes, most of the radical Republicans are from another state. Can’t get elected In their own.
Really who cares who he votes for. At least he can still vote. Republicans are taking away the right to vote in Republican controlled states. Gov. Scott in Fla, just sent out thousands of letters to voters, tell them he was taking away their right to vote. These are blacks, Hispanic and the poor. In some states college students cannot vote anymore.
Voting Republican will certainly lose your vote, voice and freedom.
Jesse Kelly is nothing but a hack for the far right wing of the republican party. he has done nothing of any importance to deserve a national office.Clearly the giggling idiots in the background are the people who could possibly think that man could be a viable candidate to represent Arizona. Ron Barber may not be the perfect candidate but he has shown depth of thought and years of community service. Jesse is a rich mans son who has never accomplished one real thing of any virtue or value. Arizona needs a reasonable person to represent them…we do not need another extremist to embarrass us even more!
It does not matter what Barber may or may not want to do. Even if all his supporters want him to represent them & vote a certain way – it won’t happen. You say what? When the party sends out a note ordering people how to vote, Barber will have to vote the way the party wants him to. (ie; Obamacare those democrats who objected were browbeaten and/or bribed until they voted the way the party wanted them to. Remember Pelosi; you have to vote for it to see what’s in it). So Barber may be a fine guy – but – that does not count when it comes down to the line where you don’t tell the party no.
To amplify and reiterate, think of Sen. Joe Lieberman;
For his willingness to be principled: Lieberman refused to toe the party line, says Jennifer Rubin in The Washington Post, in favor of “being true to his own deeply held principles.” Of course, that means he became a villain to the left. But Lieberman “put country above party, practiced civility, and represented ‘no labels'” better than any lawmaker in the U.S. “He’ll be missed — by the Senate and the country,” if not the still-bitter Democratic party.
I could see Barber also standing up for what is right & being crucifed as well. Because in this day and age you must rubber stamp what the party dictates not what you believe in.