After the debate

or let's discuss the use of words...

I watched Fox news last night at ten and watched all three news sources at 11:00 p.m. While I think too much focus has been made on Ben's Taft/Bush question I think the reporting was done well and Phil Copeland did not face the same level of questions/critiques from the other debate candidates.

I read the Toledo Blade article written by Jim Tankersley this morning. I have to say the impression I had even last night was that it was pick on George night. So it didn't surprise me that Jim Tankersley focused on that aspect of the debate. I don't necessarily agree that George Sarantou was left bruised by it but I do agree with the statement that he was "pounced" on. I also think there was alot of information that I learned from last night that will help me make a decision or at least have me know which questions I'd like answered.

This morning I also got up a bit earlier than usual to hear what Fred LeFebvre's thoughts were on the debate last night. Obviously I need to pay closer attention to the use of words because I didn't do a word count as to which candidate was mentioned more nor did I analyze the article for negative versus postive words used for each candidate. Maybe it's me and the fact that I am a political/news junkie but I didn't expect the Blade to have a glowing article about the debate. This was a really big success moment for the Toledo Free Press, they are demonstrating that while they may be a weekly with their updated information on the website when a story breaks and being the primary force behind not only this debate but one in October for the general election that the Toledo Free Press is a source that people are counting on for news. The same can be said for Fox with their complete coverage of the debate. So even if things were happy and rosey at the Toledo Blade they wouldn't write this as a "Wow Good job at the Debate".

Yet when Fred raised the point about the choice of words, I decided to take a closer look.

Realistically this whole experiment can be changed depending on what the writer wants to focus. I'll demonstrate using only what was in the Blade article to work with:

Here's Jim's lead in paragraph:

The first debate of the Lucas County commissioner's race left George Sarantou bruised - and left voters with few specifics on how five candidates would run the county.

Hypothetical Pro-George:

The first debate of the Lucas County Commmissioner's race was short on specifics but demonstrated that George Sarantou is the candidate viewed as the largest threat by other candidates.

Hypothetical Attack mode:

The first debate of the Lucas County Commisioner's race seemed more focused on individual attacks with George Sarantou on the receiving end of the majority of them.

Hypothetical Pro-Pam:

The first debate of the Lucas County Commissioner's race demonstrated that Pam Haynam is promoting herself as the "Lone Republican" and agressively challenged George Sarantou as well as making it clear she was more interested in serving the needs of Lucas County residents rather than how well she would cooperate with the current Democratic majority in the Lucas County Commissioners.

Hypothetical Pro-Ben:

The first debate of the Lucas County Commissioner's race clearly showed that Ben Konop not only provided more specifics than the other candidates present but was not afraid to challenge the Republican opponents as well; Konop stressed that he was the only one with a plan and a vision for Lucas County.

Hypothetical Pro-Tim:

In the first debate of the Lucas County Commissioner's race, Tim Wagener turned the attacks by his Democratic opponents into a positive message that he was proud of his years as a career public servant rather than a career politician and Maumee succeeded in job growth due to the ability to work together strongly disagreeing with the claim that jobs were "stolen" from Toledo.

Hypothetical Pro-Phil:

In the first debate of the Lucas County Commissioner's race, Phil Copeland, with the exception of a few comments directed at his Democratic opponents demonstrated that his goal is to focus on making Lucas County a better place rather than engage in political reparte.

Now what does this show you besides the fact I probably missed my calling working for a campaign and spinning information? That any person that reads that Blade article will take from it what they want, especially if they did not watch or hear the debate or read this blog. If they don't like George they'll focus one way. If they like George they'll focus another way and the same down the line with all of the candidates.

However, I do have to add that George's statement on WSPD that he was so battered and bruised that he had to visit two Toledo Emergency Room's last night was funny. Whether you like him or not as a candidate, he did handle himself well and laughing it off is probably a smarter option.

I'll be bluntly honest and say this primary is going to be a hard one for me in several races. I have to balance who's ideas I like the best and also to continue to be perfectly blunt decide which is the better option for Lucas County, three Democrats or a Republican that could be ignored and basically left out of the process. Would either of the three Democrats candidates end up being any different? Which one has the ability to get one of the other two to work with them and could George Sarantou do that as well? I am not dismissing Pam Hayman but she made it very clear she has no intention of focusing on working with the two current Democrats. Do we really want another former Toledo City Council person on the Lucas County Commissioners? Those are among the questions that I have to find answers for in the next three weeks so I can make my decision. Ben is still someone who's ideas I think have great promise. Yet will he focus on the burbs as much as I know Tim would...As soon as I decide? I'll let you know.

Then I have to decide Dann or Chandra...that's a whole different blog...

:-)