« Quixtar's National Ad Campaign | Main | Interview with Loki Mulholland - "Believe" Director »
October 3, 2006
Granholm, DeVos Debate in Michigan
By QBlog in Quixtar
I don't live in Michigan so I honestly don't care who gets voted in as the next governor. As they say, I have no dog in this fight. However, since this blog is primarily about Quixtar and Dick DeVos once ran Amway (which later became Quixtar in North America), I'm posting an update on the gubernatorial debates tonight.
The AP reports that the candidates spent the debate "criticizing each other's ads, laying out what needs to be done to spur the economy and saying they would be the best leader for the state."
I didn't watch the debate so I have no opinion on how each candidate performed but bloggers seem to believe the Granholm decidedly defeated Dick DeVos.
- Dick DeVos is a bumbling buffoon
- Granholm Vs. Evil Devos Debate: Live Blogging
- DeVos- He's maybe not as stupid as Dubya
- Oh Man, did Granholm kick DeVos's ass tonight!
- Debate coverage - first wave
- The interview tonight with Dick DeVos and Govenor Granholm sounded way too much like kids bickering
- Technorati - Granholm DeVos Debate
Did you see the debate? If so, what are your thoughts? Who do you think won? Not sure, watch the debate and decide (streaming video).
Comments
According to those blogs, Id say Granholm won
Granholm won the debate. She explained away the criticisms. very convincingly, tha DeVos has slammed her with.
She knows what she is talking about, and made it very clear that she was dealing with the former Republican Governor's mess, and that the Republican state congressional body was a challenge to deal with.
DeVos did not answer questions directly; really seemed to forget what some of the questions were. Good question came up about what role his wife will play in his decisions -- because even most Republicans hate Betsy -- and he said she would have his ear (not a good move).
He came off as slimy, played to the camera -- and has obviously worked on his 'presence' while making a speech, because he has improved since the days he gave the monthly employee meeting. Since he actually shed tears on a couple of occasions during that time, his improvement isn't saying much.
Granholm 1, Devos 0
Granholm 1, Devos 0
I watched the debate. Granholm won by a long shot. Devos reminded me of a cross between a TV evangalist and a stammering GW Bush. Granholm made points and presented examples. Devos whined about how bad the economy is and if he won, things would get better without any fact to back things up... duh!!! If I had turned the sound off... based on only the visual... Granholm looked sincere and convicted... Devos looked like a weasal trying to sell snake oil to 9 year old.
I watched the debate, and Granholm definitely "won" - but that's no surprise since she's a gifted speaker. DeVos DID come across as a little "shrill" a few times; and stutters when trying to come up with an answer.
But DeVos finally explained how he would make up the money lost by Cancelling our Single Business Tax - that seemed to catch Granholm off guard.
The debate was funny, in a sense, because it's two squeaky-clean people trying to throw some "dirt" on their opponent. DeVos blames Granholm for jobs moving out of state (like she can stop that?) and she took a dig a DeVos for investing 12 million dollars in a nursing-home chain that was found to have looked the other way while sexual abuse of residents was happening (like he would have supported something like that?)
Bottom line, in my opinion: Granholm is able to project the image of someone in control of a difficult situation. And I suspect the general public will realize that running a company for 10 years (with a lot of help, I might add) is simply not enough of a resume to run a state.
Deb
I expected DeVos to be more Ross Perot like, but he didn't seem to express himself that way. I guess Perot was a self-made billionaire, and DeVos...well, we know the story there. BTW, I'm a life long republican here in Michigan that's very anti-AMO. I won't vote for the blonde, but it pains me to consider the alternative.
It wasn't even close. This seems like a last ditch effort for Devos to appeal to the public.
He didn't seem prepared or poised to do either and it showed. To me, this was Devos just put his second foot in the grave.
Even though I watched the debate online, I think I'm far too biased to give a fair assessment.
DeVos lost.
PW
WILLY SCORES THE DEBATE
It is clear the AMO's didn't do enough to prepare the boss. If Dick's performance was a monthly seminar tape, it would have NEVER made the cut.
In fact maybe it IS a good thing that the AMO's are teaching instead of Dick and his company. THEY (AMO's) are much more polished and smooth.
Also, he looked a LOT like George Bush 2. Long drawn out words, that stupid "can't you see?" grin, and answering everything with the same "Leadership" reply.
I think Geo Bush-2 MUST have been a former Amway Distributor (and Dick Cheney is HIS smooth talking AMO). They were just TOO much alike.
Also amazing how you are out there selling soap for a 3% commission, and he is investing $200 million in Nursing Homes. He has so MUCH money, he couldn't even remember to mention it on his disclosure.
Funny how , EVERYONE in this organization forgets to mention important numbers. The ONLY numbers you'll hear are the numbers they WANT you to hear. On that, point, the AMO's and the Boss are on the SAME page.
Presentation: Granholm = 1, Devos = 0
Getting Rich off the little guy: Devos = 1, Granholm = 0
Willy
I watched the debate. I caught hell for it, too because my wife said I was wasting our high speed connection on the most boring thing possible.
I think Granholm is definitely the better speaker. Her problem is she inherited a mess and it doesdn't seem to be getting any better. In fact, I would bet the Michigan job situation will only get worse as the automotive companies continue to flounder (which is really not her fault). She really took a hit on the issue of public safety and criminals being released and re-offending.
DeVoss looked really uncomfortable and it was annoying how he played to the camera early on. If I have to hear about "leadership" or being "disappointed" with Granholm I'll scream. I think he scored points on pointing out how Michigan has gotten worse (when compared to other states) since Granholm took over and on the issue of public safety. Unfortunately, DeVoss lied on a campaign ad (she did meet with Honda company officials on her first trip to Japan) and she called him on it. He also lied about his 1% interest in Alterra. Its very rare that a $200 million investment yields only a 1% share. He was really good about deflecting criticism for the $19 million tax break Amway received. He also did well with turning a bad piece of information (Amway cut Michigan jobs while he was CEO) and turning it into Amway is selling products in 80 different countries, securing Michigan jobs and bringing money back to Michigan. That was clever.
In the debate, I would say Granholm barely edged DeVoss. She has a serious problem, though. She is running against her own poor public record. Even the debate moderators were giving the impression that things were not good in Michigan. She's saying it's all the previous guy's fault, which I think is weak. She does seem to have good ideas to improve things in Michigan in the long term, but she's going to need at least another term or two before those ideas bare fruit. I suspect things will get worse in Michigan before they get better. So, even if she gets one more term, there's no way she'll get another.
She may be saved by the fact the Republicans put up a weak candidate. I can only assume he was chosen because he could pay for his own campaign. He seemed really devoid of ideas and only talked about the magical term of "leadership." If he wins, it will be because people are fed up with how bad things are in Michigan. It's not that he's a good leader or candidate. Michigan is in a bad situation and many politicians are going to catch hell from the voters for it.
That's just my opinion, though.
Thanks for your analysis, Doug_G. It was very helpful.
I second that. Thanks Doug, since you are republican (aren't you) so we get a neutral perspective.
My political leanings are more Libertarian than anything else. I typically vote with the Republicans just because they "seem" to give away my freedoms and money a little slower than the Democrats. I'm not saying that is true, I'm just saying it seems that way. ;)
Wow!! I must start off by saying I'am completly new to this State. Having recently moved here from WA. State, my fiance, 12 yr.old daughter and I relocated to the great state of Michigan for employment/education reasons. I watched the debate tonight and I must comment on how rightly blown away I was with Mrs. Granholm's presentation. She delivered confidence and strength and I have no doubt she will put this state back on track. She has alot going on for Michigan-it's all in the works and she dropped some high profile names of Companies that she is involved with-BIG NAMES-She knows what she is doing-It is an obvious thing when you come across a woman who is confident and does not stumble in her speech or dance around questions with mud slinging-as did her opponent-he is not genuinly interested in Michigan-he has an agenda-that was obvious. With a govenor like her in the Driver's seat I feel confident we did not make a wrong move. She definitly has our vote!!! :)
I was very intrigued by the fact that DeVoss really had no solid footing in his arguments. He seemed to dance around direct questions and seemed to be very uncomfortable throughout the whole debate. The only thing he seemed to want to do is sling mud at Granholm, and in doing so, he just made himself look desperate and insecure in his own beliefs. I feel that Granholm had a much better presentation and I am confident that she has Michigan's best interests in mind. All and all, a very good debate for Granholm, and a very weak and pathetical attempt on DeVoss's part!
I just finished watching the second debate.
DeVos improved greatly in his presentation from the first debate. However, he really doesn't seem to have many "answers" or firm plans. His answers seem vague. That kind of goes hand-in-hand with being a challenger. You really don't know what you can do or is possible until you get into the office. However, this guy has no political experience. He has no idea what kind of challenges and realities he'll face.
That being said, DeVos did do one thing fairly well. He hung the last four years of crappy Michigan economics squarely around Granholm's neck. The "buck stops here" so to speak, and he said she promised improvements that just haven't come. The idea of "are you better off now than you were 4 years ago?" is going to be tough for Granholm to fight. DeVos gave the impression things have gotten worse in Michigan every year she's been there, and she didn't adequately fight that.
For Granholm, she is still much better as a speaker. She does have plans in place that sound viable, but I really don't know if they can save her. Her opponent is a lightweight but her lousy record is giving him a political life he really doesn't deserve. I wouldn't vote for this guy to be the county dog catcher, but how do you justify giving someone 4 more years in office when things have only gotten worse since they first came into office?
Best of luck Michigan, you guys are going to need it.
You are obviously a BUTT HOLE democrat! Granholm has run this state into the ground and Devos will turn it around and fix her crap!!!!!!!!
Obviously someone has forgotten what Mr. Engler in his many years as governor did to this state.
And that a governor doesn't have the power to control GM, Ford, Daimler Chrysler.
I was told recently that if you subtract the auto jobs from the equation, that jobs in Michigan have actually increased, it is our dependence on auto jobs that is killing us. I have not been able to document that yet. Those jobs have been leaving since the mid 1970s - how come no one has fixed them yet?
My My, we have sunk so low we have resorted to name calling? That doesn't help the future of Michigan.
Who is "Smart Woman" calling a "BUTT HOLE democrat?" Sheesh, if "Smart Woman" resorts to name calling, what does "Dumb Man" do when he's upset? Pull out a shotgun? Pop a beer?
Both? :)
I wonder if these bloggers generally have a political slant, like if more bloggers are left wing than right wing. Anyone know?
Posted by: Brad | October 3, 2006 4:46 AM