The tussle between Sharron “earned media” Angle and the press continues.
At 3.19 p.m. yesterday, Nevada journalist Jon Ralston received a press release in his inbox from Kelly Steele, the communications director for Senator Harry Reid’s reelection campaign. The subject read, “BREAKING NEWS: Reid Campaign Accepts 3rd Non-Partisan Statewide Debate, Urges Angle to Commit,” and the e-mail detailed Reid’s decision to debate his opponent on October 21 in Reno—“Sharron Angle’s hometown.” Ralston would be hosting.
For Ralston, host of Nevada TV program Face to Face, it was a coup. On June 29, Angle had appeared on his program and challenged Reid to a debate with Ralston as moderator. “What I would like to see is Harry Reid come into this studio with you and I and have a true debate,” Angle said. The gauntlet clearly thrown, Ralston “pushed and pushed and pushed” to get Reid to commit, but the senator demurred. “Neither of these candidates, I think, is really thrilled about debating for a variety of reasons,” says Ralston upon reflection. “Not the least of which is that each of them is prone to saying things that they shouldn’t say in public.”
Nevertheless, Reid did eventually agree—thus the release—and Angle’s deputy campaign manager came on board too, telling Ralston to announce the debate yesterday. Ralston excitedly Tweeted minutes after Reid’s office released its press release: “So you thought there would only be one #nvsen debate? Not so: Reid and Angle have now agreed to debate on F2F on Oct. 21 in Reno.” Hashtag: “#gameon.”
Within an hour, though, it was game off. Angle spokesperson Jerry Stacy called Ralston a little after 4 p.m. to back out of the debate. The issue was timing and “other crazy reasons.” Ralston was gob-smacked, taking to Twitter to write, “Thought I had seen it all in #nvsen, tweeps: Just got a call from Team Angle spox. Now he says they are not agreeing to debate.” The hashtag this time, was “#shootme.”
Later, he Tweeted: “Remember ‘Scanners’ where people’s heads exploded. That’s how I feel right now. This is a Senate race, not a competition for h.s. president.”
Angle’s campaign issued a press release the same day saying the candidate had agreed to another debate at a high school. Ralston says: “She’s going to be there by herself but they called it a free-flowing debate with Reid, which was totally disingenuous. And it was no coincidence, I tell you, that it came two hours after they backed out of mine.” On Face to Face last night, Ralston briefly told viewers what had happened and added, “I’m not making this up, folks.”
“I don’t think I’ve ever been that angry in my professional life,” he says today. “It was so unprofessional and so astonishing. It made no sense that a campaign spokesperson could somehow overrule a deputy campaign manager. But it confirmed my suspicions, and I am sure those of others, that there has been some kind of tug-of-war going on inside the Angle campaign between the Nevada-based people that she’s known for a long time and the outside professional campaign people she brought in who have really changed a lot of things for the good in her campaign.”
Despite the bad blood, the invitation to debate is still open. “Our goal is to get a debate, I haven’t given up on it yet,” Ralston says. “Not just because I think it would be great for me—these two have avoided being on the same stage. October 21st, five days after early voting starts, two weeks before the election, it’s great timing.”
As for whether Angle—a candidate that has Ralston asking, “Is it possible that the Republicans nominated the only person who cannot beat Harry Reid this year?”, and who has continually managed, dodged, and evaded the press—will be affected by the debacle, Ralston is not so sure. “I don’t know how much people pay attention to the debate over the debate. But doing something in such an amateurish and unprofessional way in public raises the question of whether it contributes to a perception that she’s not ready for prime time. And I would guess the Reid campaign is preparing just such a press release.”
We will be watching his Twitter feed.
This is another typical spin from Ralston who has had it in against Angle since day one. He is so biased against her and is doing everything he can to prevent her election. Reid would only agree to debates after the voting process had already started but finally backed down to one on the 14th, now they are trying to portray Angle as the weird one.
Now, let me be clear, Angle was not my first choice as the contender and I make no bones about my dislike for Harry Reid and wrote about it extensively here: http://www.kellywsmith.com. But I have since met Sharron Angle and I have to say that I really like her and what she stands for and I now back her 100%. She is "incorruptible" and something we desperately needed in congress today. She will not back down from her beliefs; will not be swayed by money or power and will fight for the citizens of our country and not just her home state. Harry Reid is the posterboy for corruption and he needs to be retired and/or impeached (if you can do that for a Senator).
#1 Posted by Kelly Smith, CJR on Sat 11 Sep 2010 at 05:24 PM
...says the white old male Mormon conservative not voting for Reid on religious grounds.
Pardon me if I don't put much (any) stock in what you espouse.
#2 Posted by Evan M., CJR on Sat 11 Sep 2010 at 05:49 PM
I think Ralston hit the nail on the head with "Is it possible that the Republicans nominated the only person who cannot beat Harry Reid this year?"
It shames me to have to vote for the lesser of two evils, because whereas I think Reid could have done a better job being the most powerful voice in Congress as the Senate Majority Leader; I'd give him a 6/10 at best. However, Sharron Angle is so off her rocker that it frightens me. People that still denounce public healthcare show a truly selfish atmosphere, that they are not looking out for the public's best interest. That reasoning only panders to angry white people who haven't retired yet.
I hope Reid sweeps, not so much to keep him in office, but to keep the crazy lady out.
#3 Posted by Thag, CJR on Sat 11 Sep 2010 at 07:35 PM
One would have to be more than mildly retarded to vote for Sharron.
#4 Posted by Derp Derp, CJR on Sun 12 Sep 2010 at 06:36 AM
Angle probably doesn't lose any votes in this dispute.
What's the hangup about 'white' and 'Mormon', Evan? Last time I checked, Harry Reid was both Mormon and possessed of an impeccably Caucasian carcass. Throw in that he has said some embarrassing things about race and ethnicity in his time. The Democrats seem to be obsessed with race and gender. In their fixations, they don't understand that Nancy Pelosi looks kooky (rich left-wing lady style), so such accusations against Angle don't resonate much.
#5 Posted by Mark Richard, CJR on Sun 12 Sep 2010 at 07:25 PM
Now I have to jump in here, just to say please don't call Nancy Pelosi any kind of left wing. The Dems are not left wing. They're only called left in comparison with rednecks like Sharron Angle. This is a media game, which allows them to pretend we have a free and open society.
The left in this country are rarely if ever heard from. No matter how extreme right you are, you can be heard, But the real left, who are for the people, and oppose the oiligarchy, who could actually bring some real solutions, aren't allowed into the discussion.
Nancy Pelosi is rich-wing, that's all.
Let's stop the imperialist wars, spend our money on the US, raise taxes on the rich, tax all their income, not just 150,000 of it, and bring back free college for everyone who wants to go, jobs, and justice, so this country can move forward, instead of back to the 1600's.
#6 Posted by Alice de Tocqueville, CJR on Mon 13 Sep 2010 at 09:25 AM
Alice, who qualifies as 'left-wing' in your book? The Khmer Rouge?
#7 Posted by Mark Richard, CJR on Wed 15 Sep 2010 at 01:06 PM