So about that debate… Well, there were two, really, miles apart from each other. So I’ll split up the posts, too. (For the unified-field version, my Friday morning story is here.)

Part 1:  In which a gentlemanly panel of three Republicans - Bill Graham, Bob Orr, and Fred Smith - agree that taxes are too high, the roads are bad, the schools aren’t up to scratch, illegal immigration is against the law, and health care costs are hurting people. That said, there were a few moments of interest.

Graham: Dropped a lot of eyepopping stats – so many, I looked a few of them up.

Claim 1.: "We’ve had a 1500% increase in Hispanic illegal aliens into in this state since 1990. 15 hundred percent. And we’ve got to clean up that problem.”

US Census Bureau data compiled by Pew puts NC's 1990-2006 increase at 284%, not 1500%. Granted, it’s hard to get a good count of illegal immigrants, but his number is higher than anything else out there – except, of course, the claims of anti-immigration activists.

(Oh, and..."Clean up that problem"? Whether or not you think they should be here, they're humans, not a toxic spill. Just sayin'.)

Claim 2.: (talking about state budgeting) “Taxes have continued to go up over all these years. Almost 91% in the last ten years.”

Not even close. The Tax Foundation, as cited by the John Locke Foundation, says the total NC tax burden (that’s state and local) went from 9.7 in 1997 to 10.5 in 2006 – an increase of about 8.2%. Other authorities, like Mike Walden at NC state, put the increase anywhere from 8-10% - nowhere near 91%.

Claim 3.: “North Carolina’s roads are the 47th worst in the country.”

Actually, a 2006 study by UNC-Charlotte and the Reason Foundation puts us at #31, not #47.

Okay, I didn’t mean to pick on Graham. But he was the only one up there throwing around stats that were so clearly out of whack that they got my attention.

Orr: had some interesting things to say about education and innovation. He may have finally figured out how to “package” his tax and anti-incentives positions  as ideas voters can understand, like this comment on using incentives money to help businesses that are already here.

"You know, we’ve paid hundreds of millions to bring Google to North Carolina for 200 jobs and a server farm. We want North Carolina to be the place where the next Google starts and grows.  Because that’s how we sustain an economy."

He was also by far the most positive of the three. While Smith and Graham talked a lot about how bad things are in NC, Orr didn’t share their pessimism, though of course he argued that things could be better. (He IS running for office, after all.) He’s also the only one of the three who talked about bipartisanship.

Smith: like Graham, burned a lot of calories trying to wrap his ideas around a few key buzzwords. Like this “what?” moment:

"We need leaders. That’s what the people are looking for. Not a critic, not a politician.  Leaders understand how to predict and look at challenges that are ahead. To come up with solutions. To execute their plan to solve those solutions.”

Okay, sure...as long as you don't think of a 3-term state senator as a politician. 

On the bright side, Smith’s hair color is looking better than ever. Only his hairdresser and campaign consultant know for sure, of course, but it’s a lot less dark than it used to be, and a lot more flattering, too.

Actually, all three of the Republicans looked very nice. Guess that’s what TV does to you (heck, even the camera guys were in ties, which never happens.) Graham was a little shaggy, but his suit was great. Orr was rocking the Carolina Blue under black, and Smith looked rested and ready for primetime.

But – all that aside – what’s really striking, and what you don’t see on camera, is how nice these guys are to each other. There’s nerves, sure, but no animosity. Wonder if that’ll change when Pat comes on board next week?

Part 2: Da Dems to come. Stay tuned. Meantime, you can catch the rebroadcast at 9 tonight 1pm Sunday 1-13 on UNC-TV.

Comments? Drop me a line.

Just a few days ago, it looked like the Perdue-Moore contest would be the hot contest for the governor’s seat this year.  That’s not so clear after last night’s Republican debate.

Don’t get me wrong – the GOP guys didn’t even get close to the Dems’ level of personal rancor last week.  But for the first time, they really mixed it up, thanks to the entrance of Charlotte Mayor Pat McCrory.

You can hear my (short) story on it here.  You can even watch the whole thing at WRAL.com.   But if you’re looking for the Cliff’s Notes version…

Charlotte Mayor Pat McCrory:

Pros:  Really well-prepared, navigated the discussion format well, and came off looking experienced, calm, and ready to lead.  He handled everything that was thrown at him with detailed answers and examples from his time as Mayor.  Plus, he kept his notorious temper under control, didn’t get impatient, and didn’t get rattled (or didn’t show it) when the other candidates went after him.

Cons:  The ability to work with Democrats is great in the general election, but it may do more harm than good with the GOP base.  If this gubernatorial primary is anything like the last two, the Republicans who show up will be a lot more interested in conservative credentials than bipartisan appeal. And about that transfer transit tax…

Verdict: He won this round, but may need to refocus to survive the primary.
 

State Senator Fred Smith:

Pros:  Came out of the corner swinging.  He used far fewer buzzwords and a lot more detail than before in talking about how he’d run the state.  He was engaged, confident, and tough – the most overtly conservative guy on stage, which is pretty much what it takes to win a GOP primary in NC. (see above)

Cons: The roundtable format is not his forte. He’s much better at orating behind a podium than at engaging his opponents eye-to-eye. He came off as overeager, angry, even truculent, as he went after McCrory and Graham time after time.  On the other hand, you can’t fault him for his fightin’ mood, given the polls that showed him losing ground to McCrory before the latter even entered the race. 

Verdict:  Viewers that already liked Fred Smith now love him.  Viewers that didn’t probably still don't. 


Former state Supreme Court Justice Bob Orr:

Pros:  Still the most positive candidate, especially on education.  He’s the only candidate to land a punch that got a visible rise out of McCrory – the “weak mayor” argument. Plus, he had the best line of the night – a hacker joke.  And Rob Christensen says he looks the most gubernatorial. (Who’s gonna argue with that one?) 

Cons:  As far as his own message goes, it wasn’t his best night.  Got lost in the shuffle, and within his own answers, too, sometimes, lacking specifics on how he'd implement his long-term ideas.  And with McCrory’s entry, he’s no longer the only positive candidate.  In fact, he may have a lot in common with McCrory, especially in terms of policy, which could make it tough for Orr to hold onto the small niche he's managed to carve out for himself.

Verdict: Probably the smartest guy in the field, but still not the most electable.

 
Salisbury attorney/gas-tax activist Bill Graham:

Pros:  Did an excellent job of staying out of the McCrory bashfest and sticking to his own message.  Far fewer iffy stats and buzzwords, a lot more detail about his plans for change.  Made the most of the camera time he got.

Cons:  Pretty much disappeared in the shadow of the drama between McCrory and Smith. Probably didn’t pick up much new support, thanks to his negativity. If life in NC was that bad, we wouldn’t need the new roads he wants to build, because everyone would be moving away, not in.  Then there was his solution to drought: not conservation or policy changes, but consumer “watermaking technology” that’s “been available for several years.”  (For a minute there, I thought I was watching Dune.  Or maybe Living with Ed. ) 

Verdict: Rob Christensen says he won.  I’m not sure I understand why.

Comments? Drop me a line.

One down, 23 to go. And CA polls don't close till 11pm EST, so it's going to be a long night.

Meantime,

• Play along at home! Politico has a fabulous cheatsheet.

• CQs Greg Giroux has the strange history of Super Tuesday here.

• CBS's Bob Schieffer says Super Tuesday is a better reality show than American Idol. (I agree, but they sure seem a lot alike sometimes.)

• Who's been where and spent what? The NYTimes' ST page has all kinds of cool widgets - even cooler than the ones at the Washington Post's ST page, which is usually saying something. Tonight, though, not so much: WaPo's going with a talking head webcast, just in case there aren't enough pundits out there already.

Back later...

Say what?

During his speech today to the Joint Boards of Education, Governor Mike Easley made an interesting pronoun choice.  Here’s the quote:

“I hope the federal government will play a bigger role as we move into the next presidency.  And I think she will.  [Crowd murmurs.]  You gotta try.”

I asked the Gov’s press office whether a) that was an endorsement, or b) he’s looking to line up a job.  I was quickly assured that no, it was a slip, that there’s plenty of time between now and May for such things, and that when the Governor makes an endorsement, it will be clear.  (And it might even matter. See below for more on that.)

Assuming all that’s true, there’s still the speech itself.  Not just what he talked about (like his educational initiatives), but how he talked about it.

When Easley gives a speech, it's usually either conversational (for friendly groups) or executive/prosecutorial (for everyone else).  But his stump style is entirely different – more animated, more rhythmic, almost like a preacher.  It’s hard to explain here, but if you’re in the room when he shifts into campaign style, it’s as palpable as a transmission shifting gears. It happened today, just for a minute or two. But it was clear enough to leave some of us press types wondering (again) what he might be running for.

People who know Easley tell me he’s sincerely passionate about education, and that, in a lame-duck year dogged by a likely recession, he’s trying to rally the troops to protect his legacy programs. That’s probably true.  But I understand there’s a cabinet post or two opening up, too -- like, say, Education? 

So about that endorsement…

Now what?

The Ds:

As one campaign consultant put it, “It’s like Groundhog Day.”  For the Dems, at least, Super-Duper Tuesday didn’t live up to its hype, thanks to all those “proportional” primaries.  Neither Clinton nor Obama came out much better than s/he went in.  So now they get to do it all over again – in the Potomac Primary, and PA, and OH, and TX – and maybe even here.

If that happens, it’ll be deliciously ironic.  Last year, some lawmakers made a determined but unsuccessful bid to roll back NC’s primary to give us “more influence and attention” – the same argument made by the other 16 or so states who moved their primaries up to Super Tuesday.  That might have worked for one or two.  But in the resulting scrum of two dozen states, no one got more attention than usual. Most got less. MI and FL even lost their delegates over it.

NC’s May primary, on the other hand, could garner more attention than it has in at least twenty years.   We’re a gold mine in terms of conference delegates, and in a close race, we could be one of the last true jackpots.

The Rs:

McCain’s better than halfway to the nomination in terms of delegates won, but that may not be the end of the story.  Even though most of last night’s GOP contests were “winner take all,” more than half of the delegates McCain won came from “asterisk” states – states that reserve the right (in the fine print, of course) to "award delegates through allocation methods other than winner take all."

Would they do it?  It probably depends on just how many GOP voters threaten to stay home.  There’s an incipient revolution among hard-core conservatives, some of whom are threatening to vote for Hillary rather than back McCain.   That's got some state-level conservatives worried about the down-ticket effect of depressed base turnout. Those are the same folks who decide how to allocate state delegates.  You’ve got to figure they’re doing the math.

Tune in

UNC-TV’s second gubernatorial forum is Thursday night.  This one’s on health care.  Orr, McCrory, Graham, and Smith will face off for half the show, and Moore and Perdue will get the other half. 

I’m expecting some fireworks on both sides. Bill Graham is a trial lawyer, so it's a pretty safe bet one of the other three GOP hopefuls will talk about tort reform and malpractice. On the other side, Richard Moore’s pretty much bound to critique Bev Perdue’s track record as chair of the state Health and Wellness Trust Fund. 

You can catch the show at 10pm in the Triangle on regular UNC-TV. 

Comments? Drop me a line.