Refreshing GOP debate
The Republican senatorial debate yesterday on Boston Herald Radio was a healthy political showcase featuring a group of candidates who answered tough questions and promised strong advocacy for the voters of the commonwealth.
Beth Lindstrom, state Rep. Geoff Diehl and John Kingston spent an hour debating the issues and pleading their cases. That is more that can be said for the senator each hopes to unseat. Elizabeth Warren is far less accessible and far more evasive when a reporter is close by.
Yesterday’s debate was a refreshing change. Each candidate brought their own style and approach and each made some strong policy position arguments.
The strongest thread began when Lindstrom went after Diehl — the unabashed President Trump supporter of the group — calling him a “blind loyalist.”
Diehl countered with a quip about Lindstrom losing the convention “overwhelmingly” to him.
Later she attributed that win to him being a Beacon Hill “insider,” to which he responded, “I’m not the one who’s worked for 30 years for political candidates and then ultimately been given six-figure jobs in administrations year after year.”
After Diehl confronted Lindstrom about raising fees during her time as director of consumer affairs under Gov. Mitt Romney, she returned fire, saying, “It doesn’t surprise me that you’re going and railing against Mitt Romney because back in 2008 ... while we were trying to elect Mitt Romney you were voting for Joe Biden. You’ve been a Democrat up until 2008, so it doesn’t surprise me.”
Diehl repeated the charge and upped the ante, suggesting that Lindstrom might be a facsimile of you-know-who on the subject.
“Government can do more with less, and unfortunately for you, you’ve bought into the idea that you had to raise fees because government needs to get bigger and bigger. We already have Elizabeth Warren that wants bigger government and more taxes. We don’t need to have you down there in Washington making those type of decisions.”
On the subject of the border wall, Kingston offered some refreshing perspective: “I’m in support of more wall. It was not at all controversial until this election cycle . ... Many of the lions of the left, Obama, (Chuck) Schumer etc., were all in favor of advancing the wall idea because they know that sovereign nations get to defend their borders.”
When asked about the situation along the Southern border, Lindstrom was clear as day. “I think what the president is trying to do is follow the law. Elizabeth Warren advocates for breaking the law by going around and advocating for sanctuary cities, which gives people false hope to come here.”
The line of the day belonged to Diehl, who quipped that Elizabeth Warren was “a bigger threat than Russia.” Although the joke was meant to equate her radical leftist tendencies to communism, the line will certainly come back at him as Sen. Warren casts him as an unhinged Trump acolyte if he wins the nomination.
At the end of the hour, it was clear that Diehl was in the best “fighting shape,” politically. He repeatedly used his allotted time to answer the question posed with command and then seamlessly address ancillary issues such as protecting our intellectual property from China, prioritizing American victims of illegal immigration and, repeatedly, addressing the plight of the fishermen in the Bay State.
We would encourage you to listen to the debate yourself on bostonherald.com and make your own judgment. We can say definitively, though, that the voters of Massachusetts were well served by these three candidates yesterday. They showed great respect for the electorate by passionately debating the issues and having an impressive depth of knowledge on the topics.
Moreover, they spent over 60 minutes taking questions from our veteran political reporters Hillary Chabot and Joe Battenfeld. It is difficult to fathom their Democratic challenger doing the same, though we’d welcome it.