http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/22/politics/thom-tillis-empty-chair-debate/index.html?hpt=po_c2
In
the article "Tillis faces off against empty chair" it speaks of the
senate race in North Carolina. Specifically, it talks of the most recent
debate between the two main candidates Tillis and Hagan. The only
problem was that only one of them decided to show up. Hagan had already
declined the offer for the fourth debate in this race, but that didn't
stop Tillis from showing up and going through the hour long airtime of
the debate talking next to an empty chair. Tillis's campaign didn't stop
with just the debate, they then used the absence of Hagan as a way to
say that she wasn't a capable candidate.
I think that
this is a pretty funny story. I also think that it was genius for the
side of Tillis's to choose to still go to the debate even knowing that
nobody would be there to debate. This article proves that these senate races become extremely heated and each side will do anything in order to win even using something that is completely reasonable like an opponent deciding that three debates are enough as a way to attack him or her.
I see the decision of not showing up to a debate as shooting herself in the foot. They point of these debates is to tell us the voters what you plan to do if elected. It makes no sense why you would skip it if you really want to be elected.
ReplyDeleteIt was a very smart move to show up at the debate even though he knew his opponent would not be there. Even though some may see this move by Tillis to be kind of rude, most will see it as an act of patriotism compared to Hagan.
ReplyDeleteThis story is pretty funny, considering it really hurts Hagan in her running. Tillis was smart to show up because this way more people may think of her as a suitable candidate rather than Hagan. I do feel that this is an open attack, but we will see how the final election roles out.
ReplyDelete