To: Democratic Candidates 3rd District — David Esrati, Guy Fogle, Joe Roberts
Re: Let’s plan another debate

I am hoping that sometime prior to July 13, when Ohio’s 3rd District Democrats choose their candidate to oppose incumbent Republican Mike Turner, that the three Democratic candidates will agree to come together to have a meaningful debate. The June 30 League of Women Voters debate is not enough. The LVW format — two minute answers to random questions — I feel, actually disincentivizes any prospect of serious discussion among the candidates. My own experience as a participant in a LWV forum as a candidate for the Kettering School Board allowed me to see how unsatisfying the experience is from a candidate’s point of view.

The meaningful debate, I am hoping still can come together at this late date, as I see it, would seek to accomplish several goals.

1. Revealing to the public that Dayton Democrats are thoughtful, informed, inspiring, visionary people  — united in their zeal that Mike Turner must be defeated.
2. Revealing to the public that 3rd District Democrats are using technology to create democratic processes.
3. Unifying the party’s base into making a united and vigorous effort to defeat Mike Turner.
4. Raising money to offer for prize money and for funding You-tube type videos centered on making the case of why Turner should be defeated.
5. Helping to clarify for Democratic voters which candidate, among the three, would be the best choice to challenge Turner.

The idea is that the debate would be broadcast live over DaytonOS.com and Esrati.com, and any other web-site that might carry it, and part of its message would be an appeal for watchers to contribute money, via PayPal, to a You-tube campaign.

My idea is that we should bring back a Lincoln Douglas type format, one where, rather than a flurry of questions, the number of questions is reduced to just one, a format where a participant would have sufficient time to develop his or her ideas and time to give thoughtful response to the ideas of the other participants.

I propose that this be the topic for discussion: Why Mike Turner should be defeated and why I should be chosen to be the Democratic challenger.

I like the idea that, although the three candidates are in competition to gain votes, the three would encourage and support each other in making the case why Mike Turner should be defeated.  The whole exercise could simply be a discussion of leadership.  What it means to lead, how, if elected the challenger would lead, and how Mike Turner has failed to lead.  I like the Senate term for structured discussion:  colloquy.

The format I’m suggesting is 57 minutes — which, with breaks, would mean at least a 65 minute program.

1. Candidates decide through a random process who should be Candidate A, Candidate B, Candidate C
2. Each candidate make introduction 2 minutes each (6 minutes)
3. Three colloquy’s, each centered on one candidate at a time, with the other two candidates reacting — each colloquy 13 minutes each (39 minutes)
4. Individual Summaries 4 minutes each (12 minutes)

Here is my suggestion as to how the 13 minute colloquy might work — This one centers on Candidate A:

Candidate A       4 minutes

Candidate B and Candidate C discuss Candidate A’s remarks      3 minutes
giving each other equal time

Candidate B and Candidate C ask Candidate A questions and A gives answers      6 minutes.

David Esrati has posted on his web-site a you-tube video showing of the whole League of Women Voters candidate debate.  The video lasts one hour and 32 minutes.

The debate occurred on June 30 and was held at the Democratic Party Headquarters in downtown Dayton. The debate features Esrati and Guy Fogle and Joe Roberts.  The three are vying to be the Democratic Party’s nominee for Congress for Ohio’s 3rd District in the July 13 special Democratic Primary.  The winner will opposed the incumbent, Republican Mike Turner, in the November general election.

Creating this video and preparing it for You-tube was a big commitment of time and effort on Esrati’s part, and it begins with a written message:  “Only one candidate puts the whole story online.  He’ll do the same when he is your Congressman.”

I made a post about the debate — At LWV Debate, Three 3rd District Democratic Candidates Seek Support to Challenge Turner — and I intend on watching the video carefully later this evening and making another post about its content.

At the League of Women voters debate last night, I thought all three of the candidates showed poise and were well spoken.  David Esrati, Guy Fogle, and Joe Roberts — all three, to me, presented themselves as credible potential U.S. Congressmen.  The three are vying to be the Democratic Party’s nominee for Congress for Ohio’s 3rd District in the July 13 special Democratic Primary.  The Party’s nominee will challenge the Republican incumbent, Mike Turner, in the November general election.

Lynn Hulsey of the Dayton Daily News sat in the front, and before the debate showed me her new laptop computer, a Dell.  Her article this morning is headlined, “Three Democrats in primary express contrasting views,” and the article points out some differences in what the candidates had to say about such questions as to how to bring jobs to the region or what to do about Afghanistan.

The debate was held at the Democratic Headquarters at Wilkinson Street in downtown Dayton, and I thought the crowd a little thin — maybe 40 people — particularly, since prior to the debate there had been a fundraiser at the same location for party chairman, Mark Owens, Clerk of Courts.

I felt that, during the debate, David Esrati spoke with the most conviction and the most passion. I think David showed the most capacity to be an inspiring speaker.  Guy Fogel spoke in the most personal manner, telling, for example, advice he received from his father as his father lay on his deathbed.  Guy, I think, showed the most capacity to connect with listeners.  Joe Roberts showed a good understanding of the issues, and a good deal of maturity.

At a couple of points in the debate, Esrati referred to the 25 year old Roberts as being “naive.”  But I thought, in terms of how Roberts conducted himself in the debate, that assessment didn’t hold up. Roberts, I thought, showed a lot of maturity in his comments and demeanor.  It helps that Roberts, in his appearance, would probably be guessed more like age 35, than age 25.

The debate format was the usual LWV style:  an opening statement from each candidate, then questions that each candidate had two minutes to answer, the order of answers rotating, and, finally, a three minute concluding statement by each candidate.  The questions came from the LWV, but also from the candidates and audience members.

I particularly liked the question that asked, “What book has most influenced you?” Guy Fogle had the first answer and cited a book in the Bible, Phillipians, saying that in the turmoil of his cancer and bankruptcy, the book’s emphasis on joy had uplifted his thinking and perspective.  Joe Roberts cited a biography of Andrew Jackson, whose title I didn’t catch, and explained his admiration for Jackson.  David Esrati cited a small book written by his father, “Dear Son, Do You Really Want to Be An American,” available free on his web-site, and explained the book’s background and its impact on him.

Of course, in such a format, there will be some contrasting views, as Hulsey’s DDN headline proclaims, but I don’t think most voters who listen to the debate would really focus on the differences. Instead, the debate was an opportunity for listeners to evaluate who of the three would be the most effective campaigner and who could be the most effective congressman.

In my view, just in terms of how they handled themselves, Guy Fogle came out a little ahead of the other two — a little more down to earth, a little more personable.  But, I thought all three did a good job.

Later today, thanks to the efforts of David Esrati, a complete video of the debate will be available on Esrati’s web-site, and everyone who wants to invest 90 minutes in watching the entire debate can judge for him or herself.  I intend on watching the video when it is available and making more comments.

Esrati’s blog this morning says, “If Dayton had fiber for internet service, I’d have the video up from last nights debate already- however, because our country thinks building schools, hospitals and roads in Afghanistan is more important than the critical data infrastructure for the new economy- uploading 90 minutes of compressed video will take all night tonight.”

Esrati makes a strong point that his dedication to and practice in writing about issues on his blog gives him an advantage over the other candidates.  Esrati writes:

This is already at 1000 words and has taken 45 minutes to write. This is the kind of dedication and communication my readers are used to seeing. There may be others of you- who are finding this for the first time. This is the kind of communication- with the ability to comment – and discuss- that I would continue to deliver if you deliver me to Congress. Try commenting on Mr. Robert’s site,  or Guy Fogle’s- or even Mike Turner’s. In fact- note that Mr. Robert’s site main function is a plea for cash- while mine is to inform you.