BY HOWARD WILKINSON
The Cincinnati Enquirer
If a moment of truth comes in a political campaign, it rarely comes in a 30-second TV spot or a carefully crafted stump speech.
Insight into differences usually comes in a head-to-head debate. "There's always an element of risk involved in debates," said Xavier University political science professor Gene Beaupre. "Sometimes, they can turn campaigns around."
Republican incumbent Steve Chabot and Democratic challenger Roxanne Qualls will have their first opportunity Sunday night at the Cheviot Field House to give their 1st Congressional District campaigns a rhetorical kick-start. It's the first of four scheduled debates.
The candidates in Ohio's 6th Congressional District, incumbent Democrat Ted Strickland and Republican challenger Nancy Hollister, are in the middle of a long series of dates in the small towns that dot the 14-county district.
In Kentucky, voters will have a chance to hear candidates for an open U.S. Senate seat and the 4th Congressional District, in televised debates next month.
But Ohio voters who are hoping to hear the two candidates for governor, Republican Bob Taft and Democrat Lee Fisher, debate the issues are likely to be disappointed. Their debate plans appear to have been scuttled by Mr. Taft's insistence that two minor party candidates be included.
Sunday night's Chabot-Qualls debate, which runs from 7:30 to 9 p.m., will not be televised live, but both campaigns expect extensive news coverage. They hope the debate will energize what is already one of the most hotly-contested congressional races in the country.
Historically, debates have been known to make or break campaigns. Televised debates go back to 1960 between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon. In their first encounter, a haggard, pale Nixon was generally thought to look bad next to the tanned and handsome Kennedy. Polls showed that those who listened to the debate on radio thought Mr. Nixon won, but TV viewers gave a clear edge to Mr. Kennedy. In 1976, a debate gaffe by President Gerald Ford, when he implied that eastern Europe wasn't dominated by the Soviets, helped sink his chances of defeating Jimmy Carter.
Four years later, Mr. Carter's re-election hopes went south when, in a debate in Cleveland, Ronald Reagan looked at the camera and uttered the words, "There he goes again."
Nothing quite that dramatic is expected in the Tristate.
But, Mr. Beaupre said, the debates will give voters a chance to compare candidates on the issues.
In many campaigns, the challenger needs the debates to build name recognition, Mr. Beaupre said.
"That doesn't apply here," Mr. Beaupre said. "Mayor Qualls has 98 percent name recognition. So does Steve Chabot. No one is going to become more well-known because of this."
The Qualls-Chabot contest is unusual because, in this case, it is the incumbent who was the first to call for debates -- only days after Ms. Qualls announced her candidacy in February. Usually, it is the challenger who clamors to debate.
"You could argue that Chabot shouldn't even be having this debate," said Judith Trent, professor of political communications at the University of Cincinnati. "After all, he is the incumbent; he's got the most to lose."
But Mr. Chabot said he's eager to draw the differences on the issues between himself and Ms. Qualls, who he says is "too liberal" for the 1st District.
"I don't expect fireworks or anything like that," Mr. Chabot said. "I expect a cordial discussion of the issues. But there are differences between us and I expect that once people hear both of us, they will realize that."
Both say they want to use the debates to highlight their differences. For Mr. Chabot, that boils down to an argument that Ms. Qualls "firmly believes in big government" and does not share his belief that taxes are too high.
For Ms. Qualls, "drawing differences" will mean that she will try to make the argument that Mr. Chabot is "out of touch with the needs of working families in this district on issues like Social Security, education and the environment."
Debates schedule
