Dear Montana

A reader named Montana gave an almost instant response to my immediate analysis of the debate - here is my response to the writer.

Dear Montana,

I come to a slightly different conclusion.  One could make a good case that Jerry Brown had his chance(s) and each time proved his continuing role which he demonstrated tonight as a political opportunist.  Go back to what Wally Ingalls said about Brown after the passage of Proposition 13, I think Brown demonstrated then and tonight that he will do anything to get elected.  On Boxer, as the SF Chronicle said a couple of days ago - her record does not justify re-election.  But elections are decided on the options between candidates and as I said in the earlier post, Whitman was unsuccessful in making her case tonight

When you look at the two opponents. I agree with part of the characterization about Fiorina at HP - I do not think she was a good CEO - we would differ on whether her position on outsourcing was good for the company.  I think she did a superb job in the debate explaining why the mantra about keeping jobs in the US at all costs is so absurd.

My point tonight about Whitman was that I believe that neither candidate made a credible case for election.  You can't honestly believe that the AGs attempted rant at class bashing was either sincere or credible.  Some of Jerry's best (former) allies are sitting this one out because of the courage of his convictions.   He demonstrated again tonight that he will constantly reinvent himself to curry favor.  That propensity may be just as dangerous as an inexperienced person in the political realm.

But I would offer one other point.   To the extent that the current governor failed to live up to expectations, and I believe that is correct, the defect was not from inexperience but from a certain inability to stay on task and a constant need to curry favor, a quality that Brown seemed to work on a lot tonight.