It has got to be one of the most stunning questions ever asked in a political debate.
I mean, enough about substance. Let’s get to the heart of the matter here, folks…it’s not driving records or financial entanglements it’s Christie’s weight.
Both Weinberg and Guadagno handled the matter with aplomb. And in fairness, it was in the context of a question about negative campaigning. But what an awkward thing to have to answer. And unfortunately, it sorta overshadowed some of the other answers on topics that were handled thoughtfully by all three candidates.
I agree with Alan Steinberg who felt Guadagno was effective Thursday night in blunting criticism over Christie’s health care proposal that has devolved into a shouting match over mammograms. In fact, where has she been? They mighta sent her out for interviews before independent women started breaking D.
As for Weinberg, It seemed like the deck was stacked against her a bit. The crowd was raucous and clearly not on her side. And she was bullied to give better answers, which came off a little harsh. She was a bit short on substance in explaining what more would be done with another four years.
Esposito was reasoned and measured. He didn’t quite shoot to super stardom with his performance ( a la the romance that blossomed after the Gov debate between the media and Chris Daggett ), but he needed to make a case for an alternative, and clearly managed to do that.
It’s an interesting thing to be adding a new statewide office holder. It truly changes the nature of gubernatorial campaigns in a significant way. It also changes that weird dynamic which put the Senate President in charge on the executive branch should the Governor become unavailable to serve.
So, history was made last night as people got a closer look at the candidates who would fill this brand new position. History was also made when the Democratic candidate for Lt. Governor was asked to assess the lb’s of the man who wants to defeat the incumbent.