Debate dramedy

To begin today's comic narrative about debates in the epic battle for the U.S. Senate, we must introduce the two main characters in the context of debating.

U.S. Sen. Mark Pryor, the Democratic incumbent, is a nice man, meek and moderate. Those generally admirable qualities can impair him in televised political debates. His positions tend to be nuanced; his explanations of those positions tend to be soft-spoken.

Sometimes his mild and polite manner can work. He won a debate in 2002 against Tim Hutchinson. What I recall is that Pryor held his hand to his chest and said something to the effect that he knew he risked incurring Hutchinson's wrath, but that he simply had to disagree respectfully.

The audience was amused and charmed, and Hutchinson disarmed.


But Pryor's disadvantages are especially acute in the current climate.

We don't do political nuance very well right now in Arkansas. We don't listen too closely to the soft-spoken.

Pryor has a reasonably high gaffe quotient. He once told Bill Maher that there is no IQ test for a senator. He told a television reporter a few months ago that his Republican challenger, Tom Cotton, almost acts as if he has a sense of entitlement owing to his service in military combat.

Like his popular dad before him, who agreed only to a radio debate against Ed Bethune in 1984, Pryor would prefer to limit the frequency and exposure of whatever debates he inevitably will find unavoidable.

Cotton is not particularly glib or compelling as a communicator, but he is studied and direct and tough. He has the great advantage of issue simplicity: Obama bad; Obamacare bad; Pryor voted for it.

And as the challenger still moderately lesser known than Pryor, he enjoys more of an upside in televised debates.

Cotton faces risks as well. He can make gaffes, too, such as saying Pryor was no real Christian. And he could come off as mean.

But, generally, he wants debates more than Pryor wants them.

So the comic narrative began with Cotton calling a news conference months ago to challenge Pryor to "Lincoln-Douglas" debates, which he knew Pryor would reject, which was a good thing.

There were seven Lincoln-Douglas debates in 1858 in Illinois. One candidate spoke for an hour; the other for 90 minutes; the first for a 30-minute "rejoinder." Cotton's campaign is famously disciplined about its message. One way to lose your message discipline is to talk for an hour-and-a-half seven times.

The point was to appear willing and assert that Pryor was unwilling.

So Cotton said he would debate anytime, anyplace.

At that point the Pryor campaign sensed a snooker. It ignored most debate proposals but announced its happy acceptance of the safest two.

One was an AETN debate to be taped for later broadcast, which somehow lessens the tension. The candidates of the Libertarian and Green parties would participate and thus insulate Pryor from man-to-man combat. The public television audience presumably would be minimal.

The other was proposed by the Fayetteville Chamber of Commerce--headed by David Pryor's old gubernatorial chief of staff, Steve Clark--but only on three issues, those being economic development, transportation and education.

So when the Cotton campaign stalled on those, hoping for something better, the Pryor campaign said it was done with debate negotiations. It said it had agreed to two debates and that Cotton, despite having said anytime and anywhere, seemed to be afraid.

Then Cotton managed to get the Fayetteville debate's agenda expanded to all domestic issues. But the Pryor campaign declined to allow foreign policy also to be brought up.

Why? Apparently for one of the more brazenly imaginative spins of the season: Cotton hadn't yet agreed formally to the AETN debate, mainly because he wanted to know the names of the questioners. So a Pryor spokesman said the Pryor campaign was denying foreign-policy discussion in Fayetteville to try to entice Cotton to stop ducking the AETN debate, where foreign policy would be discussed.

The Cotton campaign was mildly suspicious of the proposal from Fayetteville Chamber of Commerce, headed as it was by an old David Pryor ally and offering as it did to limit the agenda. But I am satisfied the Fayetteville chamber is simply trying to increase its political education activity to get certified as a higher-status chamber.

So we await the no-foreign-policy debate on October 14 from Fayetteville, which will be aired prime-time on commercial television stations statewide.

The AETN debate, with or without Cotton, but surely with him, is scheduled for the day before, October 13, with taping in the afternoon and airing that evening.

It is unlikely these debates will be remotely as revealing as the comic narrative preceding them.

------------v------------

John Brummett's column appears regularly in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. Email him at jbrummett@arkansasonline.com. Read his blog at brummett.arkansasonline.com, or his @johnbrummett Twitter feed.

Editorial on 09/16/2014

Upcoming Events