| Submit your comments on this article |
| -Election 2012 |
| Sen. Feinstein explains decision not to debate |
| 2012-11-01 |
| [OC Register] U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein said Wednesday that she hasn't faced off in a debate against her Republican opponent because she's heard nothing from her challenger, Elizabeth Emken, that she needed to debate. "There's just nothing constructive coming out of their campaign," said the four-term Democratic senator following a meeting with the Register's editorial board. She added that she's been accessible to the public and the media. U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., sits down with the Orange County Register editorial board at the Register's Santa Ana headquarters Wednesday. Discussion ranged from the Iranian nuclear program response to the attacks in Benghazi and the state of the US economy. "We've been on the road five days last week, two days this week," she said. "I do regular constituent breakfasts, a couple hundred people a week." Emken front man Mark Standriff scoffed at the explanation and continued to criticize the incumbent's failure to debate. "That's unworthy of the office she's been holding for two decades and disrespectful of the people she claims to represent," Standriff said. Feinstein noted that she has debated in the past – John van de Kamp and Pete Wilson when she ran for governor in 1990, and Tom Campbell and Gray Davis in two of her Senate races. Polls show Emken posing less of a challenge than those four. A September Field Poll put Feinstein at 57 percent and Emken at 31 percent, a 26-point margin that grew from a 19-point advantage in July. Feinstein has a huge financial advantage as well, having spent $12.4 million through Oct. 17 while Emken has spent $745,000, according to federal disclosures. |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #5 In 1972 Richard Nixon gave George McGovern the same treatment. Truth is, if I was Feinstein I wouldn't debate either. Debates are for candidates in a close race where each one sees it as a chance to gain an advantage. It's not Feinstein's job to help Emken's campaign. That's Emken's job. You might argue that a debate would be in the best interest of the voters. But as long as California voters are dumb enough to keep reelecting Feinstein why should she care? |
| Posted by: Ebbang Uluque6305 2012-11-01 17:22 |
| #4 Detroit Tigers explain decision not to play in the World Series. "There's just nothing competitive coming out of their postseason" said triple crown winner Miguel Cabrerra. "We have solid pitching, an explosive offense able to score at will, and besides we already have defeated a West Coast team. They are a team which had to go seven games against a wildcard entry, we just swept the New York Yankees. The fans know who will win this, so why risk grave injury to any players or fans?" |
| Posted by: swksvolFF 2012-11-01 15:35 |
| #3 Senator for life. |
| Posted by: Ebbang Uluque6305 2012-11-01 14:33 |
| #2 Artful Dodger? |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2012-11-01 09:32 |
| #1 The arrogance of power is not taken, it is freely given! Why should she debate? She is not called to debate by her constituents, and it only provides visibility to the challenger. So why bother ? |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2012-11-01 05:07 |