October 21, 2016 02:58 PM UTC
Debate Diary: Carroll v. Coffman, Round 3
1 Comments- by: Colorado Pols
For what should be our last Debate Diary of the 2016 election season, we’re taking you through what we’ve already speculated would be “The Most Pivotal Debate of 2016” in Colorado.
The third and final televised debate in CO-6 between Democratic challenger Morgan Carroll and incumbent Republican Rep. Mike Coffman took place on Thursday evening and was televised live via 9News on Channel 20 (channel 657 for Comcast subscribers). If you missed the debate in favor of Thursday night football or Game 5 of the National League Championship Series (the Chicago Cubs are now one win away from the World Series) — or for any other number of reasons — we’ve got you covered with a complete question-by-question rundown.
You may have already heard about the biggest news from Thursday’s debate: Coffman’s inexplicable answer to a question about Republican Presidential candidate Donald Trump’s offensive remarks about women. Debate moderator Kyle Clark asked both candidates if Trump’s own comments are indicative of a sexual predator; Coffman responded by saying, “I don’t know” before desperately trying to change the subject.
*NOTE: When we do our “live” Debate Diaries, we normally list the most current update at the top of the page. But because we’re posting this entire Debate Diary at once, it makes more sense to write it out chronologically from the top-down. As always, unless it is in direct quotes, consider all statements paraphrased in the interest of time and the prevention of carpal tunnel syndrome.
7:00 pm
The camera opens with a wide shot from a 9News studio, with moderators Kyle Clark and Brandon Rittiman sitting together across a table from Carroll and Coffman. Clark opens the event by noting that there is no studio audience here at 9News, which is good news. When 9News hosted the only televised U.S. Senate debate in Colorado on October 11, it was staged at the History Colorado Center in downtown Denver; there, a handful of protestors who were literally banging on the walls outside made it difficult for the candidates to hear questions or answers.
Clark opens with a question for Carroll about an earlier statement she made in which she said that illegal immigrants in the U.S. could be punished despite not doing anything wrong. Carroll clarifies by saying that she said most immigrants don’t come to the U.S. with the intention of breaking the law. Clark asks if this plays into charges from critics that she “doesn’t respect the rule of law,” which seems like a pretty big jump. Carroll responds that the law is broken in regards to immigration in the U.S.
Rittiman then jumps in and directs an immigration question at Coffman about responding to critics who say that Coffman lacks compassion in this discussion. Coffman replies by saying that he thinks both Democrats and Republicans are wrong on immigration reform, but with a strange explanation; Coffman says Democrats want a comprehensive reform policy, while Republicans want to do things step-by-step, and he doesn’t like either approach. If you don’t take a comprehensive approach or a piecemeal strategy…what else is there?
Rittiman follows up by asking Coffman what he has done “personally” to advance immigration reform. Coffman answers by talking about immigrant children and a bill he sponsored that would provide a pathway to citizenship based on various academic and community-service related metrics.
7:03 pm
We’re moving on to another question for Coffman. Clark frames the question in terms of how Coffman uses his military history as a primary talking point about his re-election, asking Coffman if he has demonstrated “personal courage” in his reaction(s) to Republican Presidential candidate Donald Trump. Clark says that Coffman went back-and-forth about support for Trump for months before finally abandoning him “once a bunch of other Republicans did the same.” Ouch.
Coffman begins his response by claiming to be “the first one” to air a commercial critical of Trump, then says he was the first Member of Congress to call on Trump to drop out of the race (neither assertion is true). “So I’ve certainly been consistent on my positions on Donald Trump,” he says with a straight face.
Coffman then returns to a silly false-equivalency example he has tried repeatedly against Carroll. Coffman says he is willing to stand up to Trump, but that Carroll hasn’t done anything to indicate she would “stand up” to Democratic Presidential nominee Hillary Clinton. Coffman starts flying through a bunch of examples about why Clinton is bad before Clark/Rittiman (they often sound alike) cuts him off by saying that he has used up his time for this answer.
Rittiman then turns to Carroll with a question about whether or not she should embrace the fact that Coffman did, eventually, speak out against Trump. Carroll says Coffman’s response was “too little, too late.”
Coffman interjects a moment later by saying, “first of all, it wasn’t ‘too little, too late,'” as though this is a fact that can be disputed. Coffman then claims he is not a Republican first, but “a Marine Corps Veteran first.”
7:07 pm
Clark asks a new, though related question of Coffman about whether or not the Congressman in some fashion helped pave the way for Trump with his previous claims that “President Obama is not an American” and his infamous “public flirtation with birtherism” in 2012.
Asks Clark: “You don’t think it strengthened Trump’s presence to have an elected Republican like you promoting the same lie that he was promoting?” Yikes! Clark is not pulling any punches tonight. In fairness to Clark on this question, however, Coffman does have a detailed history of tripping over his own feet on this topic.
“No, absolutely not,” answers Coffman. “That was a statement I made at one time, assuming it wasn’t public. I was wrong for making that statement; I said so.”
This is a very strange answer from Coffman, particularly when you consider that he botched this question in nearly identical fashion during an interview with Clark on 9News just a few days earlier. I didn’t think anyone outside of that room was paying attention to what I said in front of a microphone is a bizarre way to try to defend saying something stupid.
Clark then asks Coffman about the contradiction in this response in that he and other Republicans have been critical of reports that Clinton says one thing in public and something different in private.
“It was a mistake I made four years ago, and I admitted it was a mistake,” answers Coffman succinctly. Hmmm…this sounds familiar. Where have we heard this before?
7:10 pm
Moving on to another question, Rittiman asks Carroll about her support for Clinton being at odds with the fact that many Colorado Democrats supported the Presidential campaign of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders. This is a dumb question because it leaves so little room for an interesting response. Carroll replies exactly how you would expect, by talking about how Democrats have different opinions on issues and candidates before mentioning that Sanders is now actively campaigning on behalf of Clinton. That was a waste of 30 seconds.
7:11 pm
Rittiman asks Coffman about how the process for choosing a Presidential nominee could be changed to prevent having two fairly unlikable candidates opposing each other for the top job in the land.
Coffman ignores the question and says that the first vote that will be cast by the winner of this Congressional race will be about whether to support Democrat Nancy Pelosi or Republican Paul Ryan for House Speaker. He then spends 20 more seconds complaining about Pelosi and Obamacare. Coffman has always had a weird obsession with attacking Nancy Pelosi.
Coffman finishes up, and Rittiman asks again about how Coffman would suggest reforming the Presidential Primary process. Coffman says that he thinks the nominating process “needs to be longer.”
Rittiman directs the same question to Carroll, who says that both political parties need to understand the need to reinvent themselves for a new generation of voters.
7:13 pm
Apparently the candidates get to ask each other a question now. Carroll goes first.
Carroll: “Do you accept any responsibility for the VA boondoggle in Aurora?” (Note: Coffman is the Chair of the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee on the House Veterans Affairs Committee).
Coffman stutters a bit and mumbles before saying something about how Rep. Ed Perlmutter represented Aurora before the last redistricting process. Coffman then starts listing off things that the Veterans Administration has done wrong, before Carroll interrupts and asks again, “Do you take any responsibility?”
“I take responsibility for exercising leadership,” says Coffman. “We would not be where we are today…without my leadership.”
Where we are today? Well, “today,” we still don’t have a completed VA Hospital in Aurora and the projected cost has nearly tripled. This is another strange answer from Coffman to a relatively straightforward question.
7:14 pm
Now it’s Coffman’s turn to ask a question, but he seems a bit discombobulated. He stutters a bit and then says…this:
“Uh, in 2009, um, you took a vote after representing the Hispanic community for four years…” Coffman smiles slyly here as though he just said something clever and not unintelligible. “And the children…that wanted to get an education…higher education…and oftentimes are working…under the DACA program you voted against it. You were the deciding vote against the DREAM Act. Do you regret that vote?”
Carroll pauses for a moment to try to understand whatever the hell Coffman just said. “The DREAM Act we passed in Colorado passed under my leadership,” replies Carroll. Coffman interrupts and mumbles something about voting against a bill. Carroll then continues by saying it often takes more than one year in the state legislature to pass a major bill, but that unlike Congress, the legislature actually got it done and got it passed.”
Coffman immediately responds by saying, “In 2009, it did not pass because of your vote,” then wheels on his chair with a triumphant look.
“But it is law today because of me and because of allies who got it done,” finishes Carroll.
What the hell is Coffman doing? This is the best question you could come up with — criticizing Carroll for one particular vote on something that was later amended and passed with her support?
7:15 pm
Clark: You have both pledged to be bipartisan leaders in Congress. Can you name a bill that your opponent supported that you would have been proud to support yourself?
“Ouch,” says Coffman with a nervous laugh. “I’m sorry, I don’t know one.”
Seriously? The only wrong answer to that question is the one Coffman just gave. The whole point of the freaking question is to demonstrate that you can actually act in a bipartisan manner. This is a softball question and Coffman struck out.
Carroll gets the same question and pauses for several seconds of silence. Clark asks if she would like to give a “no answer” to this question. Carroll replies that she agreed with some recent criminal justice reforms in Congress, as well as legislation to reform “No Child Left Behind.” Carroll says she doesn’t know exactly how Coffman voted on specific bills related to this issue — and, really, nobody should expect otherwise — but she answers the question in the obviously correct manner by not just demonstrating that she hates everything about her opponent’s record.
7:17 pm
We’re going to some quick-response questions, apparently. First question from Rittiman: Have you ever done government business through your personal email account?
Huh? Who gives a shit? We understand, sort of, where Rittiman is trying to go here on a topic of transparency, but this question is not the way to do it. Average voters aren’t likely to understand the subtext here, and the question is an oversimplification of a broader issue anyway.
Carroll responds by saying that she has done government business through her personal email account; like everyone else who has more than one email account, most state legislative email accounts are forwarded somewhere else so that they can all appear in the same inbox.
Coffman also replies “yes,” but then goes on a weird tangent about how Congress doesn’t deal with classified information. He then takes another 30 seconds to make the same point Carroll just made about email accounts being forwarded to one central location.
7:18 pm
Oh, here’s the big question of the night (as we mentioned earlier). From Clark: “Based on the claims that he has made, do you believe Donald Trump is a sexual predator?”
“Oh, I don’t know,” says Coffman. “But I do know this…” Coffman then starts talking about how he has worked in Congress on sexual assault issues, etc., before Clark cuts him off by saying that only a short answer is required.
Same question for Carroll, who doesn’t hesitate in her response. “Yes. The definition of grabbing people without their consent is the definition of sexual assault and sexual harassment. It’s his words, not mine.”
7:19pm
Next question from Rittiman: Do you support statewide measures to amend the Presidential Primary process? Why didn’t Rittiman just say exactly this a few minutes ago instead of that convoluted question about choosing Presidential candidates?
Carroll says she supports moving to a Primary election but that she has problems with both measures on the current ballot.
Same question for Coffman, who (again) seems confused. He pauses and looks up at the ceiling for a moment as though trying to recall the name of his 5th grade teacher. It is not at all clear that Coffman knows about these ballot measures.
“I think, the Presidential primary I support,” says Coffman. “The other one I’m not real comfortable with.”
7:20 pm
Question for Coffman: Is there a Democrat in Congress that you deeply respect?
Coffman doesn’t screw up this bipartisan question, saying quickly that “there are quite a few” before naming a couple of Members of Congress.
Same question for Carroll. She cites Bob Dole and John McCain.
Bob Dole! We have a Bob Dole mention!
7:21 pm
Clark takes four days to ask the next question of Carroll, about whether it is good for America to have all chambers of government controlled by the same political party.
Carroll says that it is good to have a mix that reflects America, but that Republican partisanship in Washington D.C. has created paralysis and obstruction.
7:22 pm
Rittiman has the next question for Coffman: How do you explain your repeated votes to repeal Obamacare to a person who has benefitted from the new health care law?
“Most of the people who were helped were under the Medicaid expansions,” says Coffman. He goes on to say that most of the health care regulations that were implemented by Obamacare were already in effect in Colorado because of laws he sponsored when he was a state legislator 25 years ago. This seems unlikely.
7:23 pm
Similar question for Carroll: What is the solution for the health insurance price increases that some people are facing now?
This is a tough question to answer with specifics in 15-30 seconds, so Carroll doesn’t really try. Carroll says she supports a public option, and says that health care is a right for all Americans.
Clark then asks another question of Carroll: Is there any part of the Hillary Clinton/Nancy Pelosi Democratic agenda that you would not support?
This is a stupid question.
Carroll says she has some specific concerns related to legislative proposals dealing with universal background checks and terrorists watch lists.
7:24 pm
Question for Coffman from Rittiman about Trump supporters who are mad that Coffman is not (currently) publicly supporting the GOP Presidential nominee.
“Oh, I know that there are people who are upset,” says Coffman. “God Bless ’em.” Coffman concludes with another diatribe about how the CD-6 race is about Nancy Pelosi. No, really.
7:25 pm
Clark asks Carroll a question about which rights she believes are “absolute,” noting that she has long been a supporter of abortion rights. Carroll cites equal protection rights and laws against cruel and unusual punishment.
Clark then moves back to Coffman, asking what he says is a follow-up to an earlier interview with Coffman about immigration reform. Clark’s question is basically this: Why do your current immigration reform proposals sounds like Donald Trump’s proposals for mass deportations? This is overwrought and unnecessary by Clark; in fairness to Coffman, he didn’t need to phrase the question in this manner.
Coffman responds in his typical undecipherable immigration language by saying that we have a system of “de facto amnesty” and that he supports a more aggressive deportation strategy. He adds that he thinks children of illegal immigrants should have a pathway to citizenship.
7:26 pm
The candidates get to ask each other another question. Coffman goes first, again mumbling and stumbling as he asks Carroll to take a position on Hillary Clinton’s email scandal.
Carroll says that Clinton apologized for it, and that she agrees that it was wrong. Coffman tries talking over Carroll with two follow-up questions about whether Clinton broke the law and whether the FBI investigation into her email controversy was sufficient. This is a dumb move strategically by Coffman — he’s giving Carroll an easy exit here by shouting out several different questions at once.
Carroll says again that she thinks Clinton made a mistake.
7:28 pm
Carroll makes an awkward segue into a question about transparency and why Congress exempts itself from certain public records laws. This is wayyyy too far in the weeds. Carroll should have just asked Coffman another question about Trump.
Coffman replies that he thinks Congress should comply with the same laws and rules as other government agencies. Then he talks about opting out of Obamacare and lists a half-dozen different figures that are apparently related to how much his insurance rates have increased. Dude, quit while you’re ahead.
7:29 pm
Closing statements!
Coffman gets to go first. He talks about “leading the fight” to reform the Veterans Administration, then fires off a bunch of bumper sticker slogans about cutting spending and reducing debt and working with both parties in Congress.
Then Coffman stops and stutters a few times as though he forgot what he was going to say. He tries to pick up where he left off on the topic of standing up to both parties. Here’s how Coffman finishes up: “When they’re…uh…when their actions don’t reflect the values and the priorities of Colorado…and, and [mumbles] our country.”
Is he drunk?
7:30 pm
Carroll concludes the debate with a closing statement about how Congress is broken…obstructionism…etc.
FINAL THOUGHTS
Welp, Coffman just went 0-fer-3 in televised debates. Carroll wasn’t particularly impressive in this debate, but Coffman came off like a blathering idiot. On multiple occasions Coffman appeared confused and unsure of the question he was answering. Coffman completely whiffed on both opportunities to ask Carroll a question, and he made stupid mistakes like missing obvious cues to sound a bipartisan tone. And, of course, there was the Trump answer. All in all, Coffman might have been better off just repeating, over and over, his infamous Spanish-language closing statement. Carroll wasn’t great, but she did fine; this debate was about Coffman imploding once again in front of a live audience.
Thanks for the summary.
Might be interesting to check back with 9News and see what sort of audience there is and whether anyone is streaming any of the debate.