Key Takeaways from Second Debate ahead of North Carolina US Senate Race
Cal Cunningham (D), left, and Senator Tom Tillis exchange an elbow bump in lieu of a handshake after their second debate. Source.
Last week, North Carolina’s US Senate candidates, Republican incumbent Thom Tillis and Democrat Cal Cunningham, met for their second debate of three before the November election. Unlike the first debate, which was largely restricted to discussing COVID-19 and police reform, this debate covered a broader range of subjects and presented a better picture of where the two candidates stand on the issues.
As anticipated, the moderators opened the debate by asking the candidates where they stand on the nomination of a new justice to the Supreme Court before the election (the debate occurred before President Trump’s nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Court). Tillis was asked specifically about his objection to allowing President Obama to place a new justice on the Court.
In his response, he briefly mentioned that President Obama was a lame-duck president “on his way out the door” and then continued to express his confidence in the list of potential nominees on the president’s shortlist. While Cunningham did view Tillis’ position as hypocritical, he seemed to be more critical of Tillis “writing a blank check” to President Trump by saying that he would vote to confirm any of his nominees before any confirmation hearings had taken place.
The second most salient issue raised at the debate was healthcare. The two candidates were asked to name one specific proposal to reduce the number of uninsured North Carolinians. Tillis responded that one proposal is to pass a COVID relief bill to get people back to work and back under their employer’s health insurance. He then accused Cunningham of supporting Medicare for All, a claim that Cunningham denied. Instead, Cunningham’s proposal was to build off of the Affordable Care Act, and he then attacked Tillis for not truly having a healthcare plan.
The debate covered many other topics, and the candidates were also given the opportunity to pose questions for each other. Cunningham used this opportunity to ask Tillis about contributions he received from the pharmaceutical industry. Tillis responded by attacking Cunningham for receiving $80 million from Chuck Schumer. Tillis’s question, on the other hand, was if Cunningham supported packing the Supreme Court, to which he said he did not.
Overall, this debate was far more substantive than the first but also seemed to have more attacks coming from both sides. On a number of subjects, each of the candidates accused the other of being influenced by campaign contributions or by partisan members of their own party. While these types of attacks are always expected as Election Day approaches, none of them felt particularly impactful or convincing in this debate.
This race remains one of the most closely watched and important elections in the country, as it could ultimately determine which party obtains a majority in the Senate. Things have become even more dramatic after recent scandals have come to light and negatively affected both candidates following the debate.
Senator Tillis has tested positive for the coronavirus following his appearance at the Rose Garden ceremony for Judge Amy Barrett where a number of other high profile Republicans are thought to also have contracted the virus. Cunningham, on the other hand, is caught up in a newly discovered sex scandal that has shocked his campaign. Text messages have been leaked showing Cunningham, who is married and a father, sending sexual messages to another married woman. These events have the potential to drastically change the state of the race down the home stretch, and it will certainly be interesting to observe how voters respond to these developments.