Let’s start with obvious facts we can all agree on: The coronavirus pandemic has totally upended our communities, economy, security, and social norms. This pandemic has totally changed our day-to-day lives.
So then why should the way we approach this election cycle not also be different? The Left, and frankly some of our friends in the media, comparing this election cycle to 2018 or previous campaigns is like comparing apples to oranges.
The Kelly camp uses the “new norms” when it advantages them—providing that as the excuse for keeping Missing Mark scripted and tightly controlled. But when they get scared it may not be to their benefit (See: our 7-debate challenge), they decry calls for more dialogue and transparency for voters as an act of desperation.
The gaslighting is astonishing.
Debates are arguably the safest, most COVID-friendly way to campaign. They are naturally socially distant. They give voters the chance to hear directly from candidates and compare their positions on the issues.
Who could reasonably be against that?
Apparently Mark Kelly.
Our proposal is simple: Accept the three debates already proposed by Arizona media outlets (AZ Republic, AZPM, Arizona PBS, et al.). Senator McSally has already accepted all three debates and has proposed four more in order to reach rural Arizonans and speak to the national stakes of this race.
Given that COVID has limited voters’ opportunities to hear from candidates, we MUST give them more opportunities. Especially when Mark Kelly is a “first-time candidate who has no voting record.”
It’s time for Mark Kelly to buck up and debate.
By: Caroline Anderegg