How convenient. How very very convenient. The Democrat candidate for governor of Ohio, Amy Acton, has refused to debate the Republican candidate, Vivek Ramaswamy.
Normally such a refusal to engage in public debate would be seen as detrimental to the chances of such a candidate. However, the political editor of the Washington Monthly, Bill Scher, leaped into the fray Friday to declare that refusing a debate can be a positive in, "Amy Acton Won’t Debate. It’s Worked Before.":
Soon after Ohio’s Republican gubernatorial nominee Vivek Ramaswamy publicly accepted two debate invitations and called on his Democratic opponent Amy Acton to do the same, she did not oblige. Instead, her campaign released a “Statement on Debates” which declared, “Dr. Acton’s focus is on talking with Ohioans, not platforming a scam artist…” It’s a hair short of a flat declaration that Acton will never debate Ramaswamy, but only that.
Cue the predictable reactions. The Ohio Republican Party posted on X, “Why is she afraid? What does she have to hide?” On the Today in Ohio podcast, Cleveland Plain Dealer editorial board member Leila Atassi chided, “I think she really risks making a strategic mistake here because she’s handing Ramaswamy something he has not earned, which is the mantle of the candidate demanding openness and scrutiny.”
Scher's shtick is that Katie Hobbs also refused to debate and that seemed to work:
We saw a similar debate over debates play out four years ago, when Arizona Democrat Katie Hobbs refused to share a stage with Republican Kari Lake. Typically, the only candidates who refuse to debate are those coasting to victory and with no incentive to give their opponents free media exposure. But Hobbs was slightly behind Lake in mid-October polling when she made her refusal known, and many pundits thought ducking debates would seal her fate. Hobbs ended up defying the polls and winning by less than a percentage point. This year, Hobbs is sticking with what worked and isn’t debating her Republican challenger, Representative Andy Biggs—except this time Hobbs is leading every poll sampled in the last month by an average of seven points.
Hoorah for hiding from the voters!
Scher went onto slam the concept of debates as important for the public discourse...at least when it comes to explaining why a Democrat candidate would refuse to debate.
A debate isn’t the only way to press a candidate, and it isn’t necessarily the best way. Even setting aside the problems associated with debating a bad-faith candidate, the inherent time constraints allow candidates to rely largely on scripted talking points and rarely reveal more than what’s on the issues page of a campaign website. If Acton maintains a healthy schedule of public appearances where she handles unscripted questions, attempts to tar her running scared won’t stick.
Keep in mind it was only due to Joe Biden's disastrous debate performance in 2024 that prevented the until-then-self-deluded Democrats from nominating him again since his handlers had tried to hide his true lack of cognition. Thus, that was a huge example of the necessity of debates.
Finally, the Washington Monthly politics editor wishef for one of the main things that keep political races interesting to go extinct: "While debates have not completely gone the way of cursive yet, a debate-free Acton victory will be another step in that direction."
