Deposit photo
OP ED: There is campaigning, and there is governing. They are two different things. Let’s not get confused when it comes time to vote.
By Nelson Morgan opinion contributor || The Arizona Republic
When there is a close campaign for a prominent office, there are often disputes about competitive events like debates.
We’re witnessing that now with the Arizona governor’s race, where Secretary of State Katie Hobbs has objected to the debate format with her challenger. The race is tight, and her choices could make a difference.
We should also note that there are number of other races where candidates have rejected a debate; for instance, Republican Nancy Barto has declined to debate Democrat Christine Marsh in Legislative District 4. But I digress.
There is campaigning, and there is governing. Two different things.
Candidates can make campaign mistakes
The candidates that we support sometimes make unforced errors. They make strategic or tactical choices that reflect badly on them. They may get bad advice from political consultants, or simply might not be very good at campaigning.
They might be less effective speakers than their opponent. They might emphasize the wrong issues, or the right ones at the wrong time. They might have made plans for a media splash on a night when an unrelated event takes public attention away.
These things matter, because, for better or worse, one cannot function in an elected office unless you are elected. Campaign choices make a big difference, and the public cannot be expected to follow issues as closely as political professionals.
And yet …
In the end, it is governing that really matters.
