When Candidates Refuse to Debate

As the day of the primary election in Mississippi approaches, we are seeing the same ole tale that seems to come up every four years: candidates, mostly incumbents, who refuse to debate their challengers. 

More often than not it is liberal candidates who decline to debate, mostly Democrats, but some Republicans also take the road of cowardice. But it is never true conservatives who refuse; it is always Establishment Republicans who do so. This is one way to determine who they really are. Anyone who will not stand before the people to debate important issues has something to hide, and that’s never good.

In one of the biggest races in the state, Senator Chris McDaniel has challenged the sitting Lt. Governor, Delbert Hosemann, to a series of debates across Mississippi so that the people can see each candidate, hear what they have to say, and make an informed decision. Hosemann has refused every invitation.

In McDaniel’s Senate District 42, Don Hartness is running to replace him, battling State Representative Robin Robinson, who is seeking to leave the House, after only three years of service and a terrible attendance record, and move up to the Senate. Hartness has also challenged Robinson to debate and an invitation was tendered by the Buck Naked Truth Show. Robinson refused, going so far as to use her husband’s illness as an excuse, all while she attended other events. That was a downright despicable move and says a lot about one’s character, or lack thereof. 

There’s also a great State Senate candidate in Lee County, Lauren Smith, who is in a battle with an incumbent, Establishment hack named Chad McMahan. Like McDaniel and Hartness, Smith has challenged McMahan to debate, and like Hosemann and Robinson, he has steadfastly refused to do so. In Senate District 6, he is known as “Crooked Chad,” and he was caught on camera not saluting the flag during the national anthem at an event, disrespectfully choosing to carry on a conversation with a supporter instead. Like McDaniel and Hartness, Smith has been endorsed by the Mississippi Freedom Caucus and Mississippi Patriots for Vaccine Rights and Medical Freedom.

Why do candidates refuse to debate? According to any basic campaign strategy, there are three reasons. 

For one, money is always a big issue. Establishment candidates tend to outraise conservative challengers. But debates level the playing field, giving a challenger free airtime on major news outlets. Writes one campaign strategist, “This is a particular threat to well-funded campaigns with the ability to outspend an opponent. If campaigns can kill debates, they can keep their opponent from public view, avoid potentially unflattering comparisons to a competitor and leverage their financial advantage to control the scripted environments of radio, TV and online media.” 

Second, debates disrupt targeted messaging. Candidates, most particularly incumbents, like to target their messages to certain groups, so as not to offend anyone. Debates disrupt this delicate balance because everything is showcased at one time and in one place. But true conservatives don’t have this worry, for they are proud of their principles and have nothing to hide. 

Third, a debate can destroy a candidate’s well-crafted image. “Candidates have to express and defend their beliefs in a live, unscripted environment without the support of a teleprompter or staff. They can easily make mistakes, forget facts, go off-script, or react emotionally.” And this can be particularly unsettling when facing a smart, savvy, well-versed candidate who will force the incumbent to answer tough questions and challenge that well-crafted image. Hosemann, Robinson, and McMahan want to portray themselves as conservatives, when in reality they are not. 

Debates have a long, storied history in our republic. They are vital to our election process. The voters, who are doing all the work in society and paying all the taxes, have a right to know where each and every candidate stands on issues, as well as how they differ from one another. To deny them this, is to shield them from truths they have a right to know.

These are three of the most important races for Mississippi’s future. And the people have a right to see debates between these candidates. 

On the one hand we have three incumbent officeholders. Three RINOs. Three candidates with sketchy records and terrible ratings with conservative groups. Three selfish cowards who are thumbing their noses at the people. 

On the other we have three principled challengers. Three solid conservatives. Three unselfish servants who are not afraid to talk to the voters directly and lay out their vision for Mississippi.

Cowardice, Theodore Roosevelt once said, “is the unpardonable sin.” If these candidates refuse to publicly debate their opponents, then how can you trust them to fight for you, to fight for a better Mississippi? Refusing to debate simply means they are afraid of their records and don’t want their past exposed to the people. They are hiding who they really are. All the more reason to distrust them and back their principled, conservative opponents.