Newsom reluctant to debate Nehring

Newsom reluctant to debate Nehring

Gavin NewsomLt. Gov. Gavin Newsom is crusing to re-election victory on Gov. Jerry Brown’s coattails and the general strength of the California Democratic Party. Yet he is reluctant to debate his Republican opponent, former GOP state Chairman Ron Nehring. The Bee reported:

Nehring, in only-somewhat tongue-in-cheek remarks Monday, said he’s even willing to accept a debate moderated by liberal MSNBC hosts Rachel Maddow or Ed Schultz. If the left-leaning cable channel can’t accommodate the request ahead of the Nov. 4 election, Nehring said in a statement, then he could be talked into appearing on Russian government-funded RT or North Korea’s KCNA, “although with that last one we can’t find a bureau for them in the United States.”

Newsom’s campaign is exceedingly unlikely to oblige. Spokesman Sean Clegg said flatly that he doesn’t anticipate the incumbent participating in any debates. In an email, Clegg cited Nehring’s recent salty email to state party leaders in which he bemoaned the disunity among GOP statewide candidates.

“Ron Nehring, who just attacked his own GOP members in a profanity-laced tirade, is out-of-control, reckless, desperate, and we have no intention of promoting him,” Clegg said.

But what about the future? It’s well known Newsom likely will run for governor when Brown’s fourth term ends in 2018; or for one of the U.S. Senate seats that could open up in 2016 or 2018. Possible opponents for any of these seats include California Attorney General Kamala Harris, former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and former Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg.

Wouldn’t debate practice now be preparation for the future?

Even the best debaters fumble on occasion, as Ronald Reagan did in his first debate with Walter Mondale in 1984.

The Gipper more than fully recovered for the second debate. When a reporter questioned Reagan about his age, 73 at the time, he quipped, “I want you to know that also I will not make age an issue of this campaign. I am not going to exploit, for political purposes, my opponent’s youth and inexperience.” He won every state but Mondale’s Minnesota home.

Before that year, Reagan took part in memorable debates with President Jimmy Carter in 2000 and over the Panama Canal in 1978.

The point is you can’t get enough practice in debates. Given that he’s likely to win easily, Newsom should be eager for a dozen debates with Nehring.

By the way, instead of the usual campaign platform, why doesn’t Nehring just campaign on one plank? The plank: Get rid of this pointless post.

Anyway, without practice, in the future Newsom could be surprised the way Carter was by Reagan in the most memorable reply of the 1980 debate:


Write a comment
  1. LetitCollapse
    LetitCollapse 30 September, 2014, 22:01

    Any local, state or federal government incumbent pol who refuses to debate his opponent prior to the election should be disqualifed from holding office. When I ran for a student council position in HS, had I refused to debate my opponent the student body would have laughed me right out of the gym and my opponent would have won by default. Idiots like Newsome get paid a generous compensation and hold positions of power. To refuse to debate in political circles should be considered a sacrilege. What a yellow-bellied coward. But he isn’t the first. That old bat Feinstein refused to debate her opponent when she ran last time too.

    Reply this comment
  2. deanbean
    deanbean 30 September, 2014, 23:22

    If you’ll take notice, Democrats don’t debate. They are afraid they’ll lose. They just lie about their opponents and spend a lot of money on ads about how their opponents want to take everything away while the Democrats take away your freedom and your property and your money and give you Socialism in its place. Pete Aguilar doesn’t debate either.

    Reply this comment
  3. Ulysses Uhaul
    Ulysses Uhaul 30 September, 2014, 23:30

    There was a pugnacious, craggy boxer Carmen Basilio who was the underdog no one really wanted to fight……read up on this guy!

    Times change…..we have presented to us quaffed, packaged, career politicos with nowhere to go but up…….alas…..but only one can be only an old heart beat away from running the California command economy.


    “What difference does it make”.

    Reply this comment
  4. SeeSaw
    SeeSaw 2 October, 2014, 09:40

    The incumbent’s record stands on its own. We have already had a chance to see his strengths and weaknesses. Why should he spend the time and money to debate an opponent that does not have a chance? The recent debate between JB and Kashkari points out what a waste such a debate would be. Kashkari had no record to stand on, and he spent the whole hour pointing fingers at the “failings” of Brown and declaring that he should be ashamed of himself! Kaskari was the one who should have been ashamed! Nehring should stand in place, instead opening his mouth and showing the voters that he is just another fool like Kaskari.

    Reply this comment
    • LetitCollapse
      LetitCollapse 2 October, 2014, 11:14

      So let’s not have any debates at all, seesaw. Let’s just appoint little dictators who are not obliged in any way to stand before the public to justify their positions on critical matters that impact the daily lives of average citizens.

      Based on the opinions I read from you I think you would be much happier in North Korea, as long as the gov would agree to mail your pension benefit there. 😀

      Reply this comment
  5. SeeSaw
    SeeSaw 2 October, 2014, 17:12

    Knock it off LIC! You know darn well what I mean–I have never been out of the U.S. and I am not planning to either. I happen to love my country, which is more than one can say for you!

    Of course, if there is a tight race and the public needs to vet all the candidates, debates should be held. I like them myself, but in these two cases it just gives the opponent an opportunity to embarrass themselves.

    Reply this comment
    • LetitCollapse
      LetitCollapse 2 October, 2014, 19:22

      “I have never been out of the U.S. and I am not planning to either.”

      And it shows. Trust me. It shows. 🙂

      Reply this comment
  6. SeeSaw
    SeeSaw 2 October, 2014, 19:51

    Well, going abroad certainly did you a lot of good didn’t it!

    Reply this comment
    • LetitCollapse
      LetitCollapse 2 October, 2014, 23:30

      At least I have personal experience which gives me a standard of comparison when it comes to the American way of life, seesaw. You’ve got blinders on. Your information comes from the 6 o’clock news. Whatever Brian Williams tells you is gospel! 🙂

      Reply this comment
  7. SeeSaw
    SeeSaw 3 October, 2014, 00:11

    Of course, I’m sure you have been in North Korea–since you wouldn’t lower yourself to getting any information on life in that godforsaken place from TV.

    Reply this comment
    • LetitCollapse
      LetitCollapse 3 October, 2014, 09:45

      TV numbs the mind, seesaw. You’d be doing your brain a favor if you tossed your TV out the window. 75% of what you see there is propoganda. I know you worked in the gov for 40 years and have already been thoroughly indocrinated. At least your comments indicate that to me. So what you see on TV in all likelihood appears very factual to you. At your age getting rid of the TV probably wouldn’t help much. So strike my initial suggestion. Go ahead and keep it. Carry on.

      Reply this comment

Write a Comment

Leave a Reply

Tags assigned to this article:
Gavin NewsomJohn SeilerRonald ReaganRon Nehring

Related Articles

Fiorina's tough blasts at Boxer

Steven Greenhut: Carly Fiorina is speaking now. “This is a ticket that represents the diversity and prominence and the common

Happy Easter

All of us at would like to wish everyone a happy and blessed Easter and Passover. Easter celebrates the

California leads way in emergence of thoughtcrime vigilantes

California continues its emergence as the base for those who wish to enforce thoughtcrime penalties and launch group-hate campaigns against