Did any of you catch the 10th Congressional District Democratic Candidate Forum, hosted by the 10th Dems, on Saturday? It was on the radio as well as open to the public. The debate featured Dan Seals, Elliot Richardson and our very own Julie Hamos. The debate had a lot of back-and-forth between Richardson and Hamos. Why? I don't know. Dick Kay must have had his reasons, though.
However, could Julie Hamos have been any more patronizing to Elliot Richardson? I highly doubt it. She talked to him like he was in kindergarten or something. It would have been fitting if she had patted him on the head as she was talking to him. (For all I know, she did pat him on the head. Since I wasn't at the event in person I couldn't see what the candidates were doing when they were talking. Perhaps someone who was there can clear this up for me.)
Does Julie Hamos think that being condescending and patronizing to another candidate in a public forum will help her win over current supporters of that candidate? I think if I were an Elliot Richardson supporter, I would swear off voting for Julie for the rest of my life.
Is that all I have regarding the debate? No. However, I want to try to find a transcript to pull some direct Julie Hamos quotes before commenting further. There were a couple of doozies.
Seals Beats Dold
15 years ago
I think she was trying to exude warmth, to refute the growing consternation over her reputation for nastiness, and instead came off as phony and patronizing because she is truly out of step and insensitive to normal social behavior. Minutes before the debate, for example, she snubbed two women who were in the washroom with her, whom she knew well as Dan Seals supporters.
ReplyDeleteShe did, in fact, reach over to Elliot, to pat him, or touch his arm or something- and if my memory is correct and not being selectively nasty, Elliot seemed to visibly recoil from her fake, backhanded compliment. I am biased of course, but I liked that Elliot snipped at her a few times, correcting her and in most cases, giving better responses to Dick Kay's questions than she was able to do. Perhaps her whole patronizing was meant to draw attention away from the fact that she simply does not know her stuff.
She name drops, brags about past accomplishments, tries to make excuses for her Springfield style politicking, and works in non sequitur talking points to please her endorsers - except for the unions, that is. They should be having nightmares that they ever endorsed such a chameleon who has abandoned them as quickly as she's conveniently adopted a 'fiscally conservative' moniker.
I did think that Dick Kay showed a bias which was unbecoming- he must have been truly disappointed in the person he thought he knew as Julie- he gave her ample opportunity to show her strengths, even touting them himself, while sometimes making mock of the others in a slightly belittling way. She blew it though, and couldn't make anything of the opportunity - she's had all the advantages and still comes up short.