The Sheriff's Debate

ABC24 News aired the debate between Democrat Randy Wade and Republican Mark Luttrell tonight. Kudos first to ABC24 for recognising the importance of the next sheriff to the community and giving an hour of air time to this debate. One hopes they will conduct similar debates for other offices in the Fall.

Anchor Renee Malone was the lead, but she seemed to defer most tough questions to WREC AM600 talk-radio host Mike Fleming. Unfortunately, Fleming, rather than following his style on his public affairs program "Impact," used the rhetorical style of his radio show. His very first question, to Randy Wade, was more an accusation than a direct question, calling Wade more an African-American liaison than a true administrator with real credentials. It opened him up to return fire, which Wade provided, flatly telling Fleming, "That's your opinion."

Best question of the night came from a caller who wanted to know if either candidate would welcome the endorsement of current sheriff, AC Gilless. There was a long, uncomfortable pause as neither candidate spoke. Lutrell was finally asked directly and he waffled until admitting he'd accept any leader's endorsement. Wade quipped that he'd take Gilless' vote, but not his endorsement, then immediately called for the next question. It was a deeply telling moment for Gilless.

Wade played an interesting bias card. He noted to a question from Fleming about an appearance before a deputies' meeting that Fleming's information was wrong. Wade also noted that the show's official description of him as a GED recipient failed to also note his attendance at Shelby State and the University of Memphis! The way he called this to attention seemed calculated to echo the race card, without clearly doing so. One imagines that his intended audience, the black community, read his comments clearly enough.

The presentation of each man was a stark contrast. Wade was forcefully, but informally, spoken; he did seem to have a sore throat. He frequently used a style of speech similar to that of black ministers, though more personal. He was clearly nervous but remained cheerful and engaged. He managed to get in several good quips, especially one about being the first African-American "good old boy." Lutrell, on the other hand, was cool professionalism. He constantly referred to plans, management, etc. He never varied from a calm pacing, never joked. If one sees this debate through the prism of the black/white divide of Memphis, then each man was definitely speaking to his race.

Overall, a winner cannot be called. Lutrell definitely came across as the "man with a plan." Mostly, though, that plan was just "more and better management." Wade did not really offer up any clear plans, other than to "surround himself with good people." We suspect that neither may have influenced voters across the racial divide. Black Memphians and Shelby Countians just out-number whites now. And though Wade can rely on that to a certain extent, Lutrell may have an advantage. As Bobby O'Jay has said, blacks prefer their own unless its crime control; then they trust whites more.

Again, ABC24 must be credited with doing this. It gave Shelby Countians a clear view of the candidates. Their format also included emails from viewers and questions from callers (filtered through the moderators) which proved a good resource, though only used lightly. They would do well, though, to replace Fleming as a moderator and find someone more proper to the style of the forum and with better judgment.

UPDATE 07/17/02:The Commercial Appeal has a story here. It covers some of the policy points mentioned above in better detail. Amazingly, it completely fails to mention the "endorsement from Gilless" question and the embarrassing silence that followed. Why?

Until next time, that is all.