The mayoral debate they saw
Re “Caruso and Bass sharpen attacks,” Sept. 22
I watched every minute of the debate between Los Angeles mayoral candidates Karen Bass and Rick Caruso, and I was so disappointed
to see that your article focused on how they attacked each other. Sorry to say this, but you need look no further than your mirror to see who is contributing to voter apathy, the distrust of politicians and deepening polarization.
What I recall was different. I was glad to be watching a reasonable discussion of policy approaches for the first half of the debate and pleased at the way the debate was structured to allow that. It sometimes lapsed into the attacks that are made necessary by the way the media cover politics.
There was nuance in the candidates’ approaches to homelessness. Caruso seems to think he can build his way out of it, and Bass has more of a social work approach. Both agreed that there should be a relaxation of environmental regulations to build more. Bass has a specific approach to that, and Caruso seems to think he could do it via a bully pulpit.
Our nation needs reporters to care more about substance than sizzle. I don’t put this article in the category of sensationalist journalism, but it was too close for comfort.
Paula Daniels
Los Angeles
I watched the whole debate, and it fell well short of my definition of “rancorous.”
We in Los Angeles are lucky to have two mayoral candidates who are as levelheaded, articulate and intelligent as Caruso and Bass.
We live in a nation full of crazies and incompetents running for office to a degree that’s scary. We should be thankful for the choice we have in L.A. between Caruso and Bass.
Bruce Quinn Los Angeles