[music]

Melissa Harris-Perry: Welcome to The Takeaway. I'm Melissa Harris-Perry. With two weeks to go, it was yet another debate night in America with candidates squaring off in key races around the country.

[music]

Melissa Harris-Perry: Governor Kathy Hochul and the Congressman Lee Zeldin played along party lines in New York's gubernatorial debate echoing national partisan messaging. Democrat Kathy Hochul made it clear that even in the state of New York where abortion is not on the ballot, well, it still is on the ballot.

Governor Kathy Hochul: What is so appalling is the general campaign conversion that we're trying to hear from Lee Zeldin who will say, "Oh, no, I really won't change. Nothing changed the day after the Dobbs' decision?" You know why nothing changed the day after the Dobbs' decision? It's because I'm the governor of the state of New York and he's not.

Melissa Harris-Perry: Republican Lee Zeldin painted a gruesome picture of crime and fear.

Congressman Lee Zeldin: Kathy Hochul believes that the only crimes that are being committed are these crimes with guns. You have people who are afraid of being pushed in front of oncoming subway cars. They're being stabbed, beaten to death on the street with hammers.

[music]

Melissa Harris-Perry: Candidates in Michigan's gubernatorial she-election held a final debate between incumbent Governor Democrat Gretchen Whitmer and challenger Republican Tudor Dixon. Governor Whitmer criticized the Republican for being an election denier.

Gorvernor Gretchen Whitmer: I will always accept the will of the people. I think you're asking a really interesting question, though. When you say, "Will you accept the will of the people?" I think that is a question that should be posed to Mrs. Dixon. She refuses to accept the outcome of the last election. She has not yet said she will accept the outcome of the next election, so when she says she will accept the will of the people, she is an election denier and does never ever has said that Joe Biden actually won this last election.

Melissa Harris-Perry: For Dixon, the message was all about pending economic doom and tax cuts.

Tudor Dixon: I do want you to be assured that I feel it's very important that we make sure that money goes back into the pockets of all retirees in the state of Michigan, especially as we head into a recession. We're already seeing this massive inflation because of the Biden-Whitmer policies. The recession is right at our doorstep, and I want to make sure that we get as much money back to our retirees as possible.

Melissa Harris-Perry: The main event on Tuesday night was in the battleground of Pennsylvania, where the outcome of the US Senate race between Democrat John Fetterman and Republican Mehmet Oz could decide the partisan balance in the US Senate. John Fetterman recently came back to the campaign trail in August after suffering a stroke in May. The debate post accommodated Fetterman's lingering challenge of auditory processing with 70-inch monitors installed above the moderators that displayed text of the questions and of Dr. Oz's responses. Fetterman addressed the stroke and accommodations in his opening statement.

John Fetterman: Let's also talk about the elephant in the room. I had a stroke. He's never let me forget that. I might miss some words during this debate, mushed two words together, it knocked me down, but I'm going to keep coming back up.

Melissa Harris-Perry: Though it was clear that Fetterman was battling to process and to respond swiftly, but he managed to land some zingers.

John Fetterman: He has never met an oil company that he doesn't swipe right about.

Melissa Harris-Perry: As for Dr. Oz, his debate demeanor toward Fetterman was far less aggressive in the unrelenting jabs he and his campaign have thrown during the months of Fetterman's recovery. Still, the distinction between the candidates on the issue of abortion, which was central, were quite clear.

Mehmet Oz: There should not be involvement from the federal government in how states decide their abortion decisions. I want women, doctors, local political leaders letting the democracy that's always allowed our nation to thrive.

John Fetterman: If you believe that the choice of your reproductive freedom belongs with Dr. Oz, then you have a choice, but if you believe that the choice for abortion belongs between you and your doctor, that's what I fight for.

Melissa Harris-Perry: Joining me now with more on last night's debate is Oliver Morrison, general assignment reporter for WESA-FM in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Oliver, welcome to the show.

Oliver Morrison: Good to be here.

Melissa Harris-Perry: More than half a million ballots have already been cast in the state. Do you think the debate' i going to make any difference in the election outcome?

Oliver Morrison: Well, the polls are very close, and so I think a lot of people have been saying that this debate could be one of the rare chances when the debate could make a difference, but as you already mentioned at the top, there were a lot of unusual circumstances that drew extra attention to the debate, but that also could change how people respond to it.

Melissa Harris-Perry: I'm interested in how you think that is operating in terms of how people respond to it. Without any context, just watching it, if you were to watch it not knowing anything else about it, you'd think, "Oh, from a performance standpoint," not necessarily a policy standpoint, but from a performance standpoint, it would seem to me, "Oh, clearly Dr. Oz is more polished, more clear." I'm wondering if the fight that was really evident in Fetterman last night would also cause a response of thinking of him as the winner.

Oliver Morrison: Well, I think there's a couple things to parse out here. I am going to get to your question here, but I think one thing to think about is who was watching the debate. If it was more the traditional debate watchers, people who have already been paying attention and know a lot, anecdotally, we hear that they've already taken into account Fetterman's condition and most of them haven't really been persuaded by that. If that was who was watching the debate last night, it may not change things that much.

A lot of Fetterman's people or supporters have already said that it's almost made them more defensive of the candidate, but if last night really did draw in some undecided voters, people who have maybe mixed positions, maybe believe one way on abortion and in a different way on the economy, and they were seeing Fetterman for the first time and maybe hadn't been paying attention to how he had been doing, I think it's possible that that could have had an impact on some of those voters.

Melissa Harris-Perry: In what direction?

Oliver Morrison: There's two things to think about here, again. One, I think that if you were just to think about the debate in terms of who won and who lost, I think most people would come away in a traditional sense and think that Oz came away. The more Polish speaker was able to just say more things, respond more swiftly. I think there has been a running debate in this election about how are you supposed to think about your vote for someone who is running with a disability? That has gained a lot of attention, particularly with an NBC news interview a couple weeks ago.

There are a lot of people who think that you should factor in how Fetterman is able to do the job, and that should be the major to most important factor rather than the feelings you have or the appearance of how he did during the debate. In a lot of other settings, like when Fetterman's been doing one-on-one media interviews, he's been able to put together a more cogent and coherent response to his platform maybe than he did last night. There were obviously moments where he chimed last night, but if you were just comparing the two, it was a little easier to understand Oz's positions a lot of the time.

The debate wasn't very illuminating in terms of getting new answers or new issues. On the issue of fracking, both candidates were given a chance to talk about why they changed their records. They both have a documented history of changing their positions on fracking from being more skeptical to running for office in a state where there's a lot of fracking and then suddenly becoming lovers of fracking. Neither of them could explain it. Instead, they just denied it and said that they've always loved fracking. That happened on the issue of abortion and a couple of other things.

In the case of Fetterman, the interpretation is a little bit different. It's possible that he just couldn't quickly enough respond to the question to give that more nuanced answer that would be required of explaining the change in position.

Melissa Harris-Perry: You just name-checked the position on abortion. Tell me how that felt unclear, because as we just heard a few moments ago from Dr. Oz, his language about, "I don't want involvement of the federal government," it was an interesting position where often we hear, "We don't want the government in it." For those who support abortion rights, reproductive choice, we'll hear, "I want doctors and women to make these decisions." Dr. Oz said, "Women doctors and local political leaders letting democracy do this work." It almost sounded like a pro-choice position, but then, in fact, clearly is not.

Oliver Morrison: Yes. That is the fine line he's been trying to walk as he tries to moderate some of his stances towards the general election. I think if you were to say it plainly and trying to say what the candidates really believe, Oz has been clear that even though he won't say yes or no and be pinned down, he would vote against a federal ban on abortion. That's been clear. He wants to leave it to local leaders, but he also supports the Republican candidate Doug Mastriano for governor who is proposing a six-week ban on abortion with no exceptions. Oz stays away from talking about what the implications are in Pennsylvania for Pennsylvania women for his stance and tries to just frame it in terms of local control. For people who do care about abortion, if you want to read between the lines, it's not too hard.

Melissa Harris-Perry: There was also a conversation happening here around inflation and the economy, which, of course, makes sense because these are core issues facing voters across the country and we know [unintelligible 00:10:29] voters across the country. We did see Fetterman regularly talking about his own working-class Pennsylvania roots and framing Oz as he has throughout the campaign as a wealthy outsider. How is that argument landing?

Oliver Morrison: At least according to the polling, that argument has been strong, it's been one of Fetterman's strengths. He presents himself in a lot of ways, as an outsider, as an everyman, he rarely dresses up. This debate was an exception. He lives across the street from a steel plant. He's built his image on relating to working-class people and says he's expanding his coalition across the state because of that.

Obviously, the gaff that people remember of Oz worrying about the price of crudité, all that stuff has hit home with voters. I will just say, again, even though this is a strong point for Fetterman, it is another issue where the candidates have been heavy on criticism and light on substance. Neither of them talk about the main mechanisms for dealing with inflation, they don't talk about the Federal Reserve and changing interest rates, they don't talk about changing tax policy. Even some of their stances that they do have might have a light impact on inflation, but some of them could have a reverse impact on inflation.

It felt like it was true in the campaign so far and was definitely true last night that a lot of this campaign has been about attacking the other person, trying to frame the other person and less about a substantive debate about how to deal with some of the major problems affecting people here in Pennsylvania.

Melissa Harris-Perry: Oliver Morrison is a reporter for WESA-FM in Pittsburgh. Thanks so much for joining us.

Oliver Morrison: Thank you.

Copyright © 2022 New York Public Radio. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use at www.wnyc.org for further information.

New York Public Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline, often by contractors. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of New York Public Radio’s programming is the audio record.