Murray was more subdued and cautious in this debate compared to the aggressive counterpunching she flashed in the first debate. This debate was in Western Washington, which is much more Murray-friendly turf than Eastern Washington. She may have felt less of a need to attack Rossi, preferring to just focus on touting her record.
Rossi, in contrast, was much more aggressive here than in the first debate. He had the reverse situation that Murray did. Since the Puget Sound Region is hostile to the GOP, he probably felt more of a need make Murray unacceptable since he is catering to a less receptive audience than the first debate. Or perhaps he just realizes that he is behind. He did better here partially because the questions the moderators brought up were more nationalized, which probably benefits Rossi. In the Eastern Washington debate, there were many questions about local issues. Murray showed a good grasp of those issues. Rossi did not.
Nothing game-changing happened in either debate, which benefits Murray.
I voted murray, but it was probably a toss-up. I CAN'T STAND ROSSI!!!!!!!!
Many other (Washington) posters here also feel that way. Hopefully we will kill his political career once and for all.
Notable is that in both debates Rossi said he would defer to the military on DADT and refused to give a clear opinion. Well, he was much clearer when filling out a survey for conservative groups:
How odd that he didn't mention his opposition during the debates. We've been watching this sort of bulls
hit from him for years.
http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20101017/BLOG13/101019821
Poll
