We in the newspaper industry are constantly hampered by space. For any given story, there's a general rule of 12-14 inches, at 40 words per inch. At the outside, we can go to 15.
I have routinely broken that rule during coverage of the 7th Congressional District race between incumbent Democrat Joe Sestak and Republican challenger Craig Williams, because many of the issues the two clash on are enormously complex (I defy anyone to explain FISA in 600 words or less).
I broke it again Wednesday, much to the chagrin of editors, I'm sure, in covering the single debate between the candidates at Swarthmore College. But I barely scratched the surface of the topics covered in the two-hour event, choosing to balance at least some of what was discussed with a nearly equal amount of crowd reaction.
People said they were impressed by both candidates Wednesday, even if their stances on the issues differed ideologically from the person telling me so, and it really was an interesting and highly substantive debate, if a little too long.
Williams, I thought, came off very well. He had the dual advantage of a simplified message in terms of what he would do differently as well as being able to criticize his opponent's record, which is the staple for any challenger.
Sestak was therefor often forced to defend that record, also the norm for the incumbent, which I think he pulled off equally well. But explaining why you did or did not do something is almost always more complicated than explaining why you would or would not do something, and I thought at times he was bogged down with that task.
Sestak is incredibly well versed on the issues and there can be little doubt he is a work horse. Even staunch Republicans will admit this.
He is also, I think, more or less universally liked (or at least respected for his record of constituent service) while Williams has had to combat the disadvantage of zero name recognition and far less funding in a political atmosphere already unfriendly to the Republican Party due to problems at the national level.
But Sestak can be hard to follow at times because he gets mired in the details of the bills he's voted on or helped craft, and his sentence structure too often implodes upon itself as the pitch of his voice ebbs and flows. Williams, using short declaratives and a smooth cadence, could easily be seen as the victor here as far as message delivery, which was really what he needed.
All in all a solid debate, I thought, and I highly recommend interested readers watch the full tape on Comcast Channel 76. I haven't received word yet exactly when it will air, but we should know by Friday, at which point I'll let you know.
Peace, and good luck to both the candidates.