U.S. House debate makes an impression on audience

NEWARK —Fiddling with notes, 18-year-old Ryan Bradley sat on the steps of the University of Delaware’s Mitchell Hall. Clad in jeans and a green shirt, he took little notice of the ties and heels of campaign staffers and TV production people flowing past him. Bradley was more interested in being one of the first through the door for Wednesday night’s televised debate between U.S. House of Representative candidates John Carney (D) and Glen Urquhart (R). For the UD political science major, watching the debates was training for the job he hopes to get in a few years.

“I want to run for Congress,” he said. “I’ve always loved politics.”

Bradley was one of hundreds who flowed into Mitchell Hall Wednesday night to watch the debate. They came for a variety of reasons. They left with a variety of opinions.

A few minutes later three women in their early 20s approached the debate hall. Liza Melms, a 21-year-old UD student and a member of the Republicans Club, wanted to see if Urquhart’s message before a bipartisan audience would be consistent with his remarks to partisan crowds. ”I want to see if Urquhart will say anything different between just Republicans and a whole group together,” Melms said.

Pam G. Green also wanted to hear what the candidates had to say, but she admitted it won’t change the way she votes. She was there in hopes of seeing Glen Urquhart “put his foot in his mouth.”

Afterward, some Carney supporters said that’s just what happened. ”I think Mr. Carney was a slam dunk,” said Jean Samuels of Wilmington.

Other attendees said Urquhart stole the night. ”I felt Carney just gave career politician answers,” said Matt Revel, a 21-year old UD senior. “I was impressed with Glen Urquhart. He had a strong hold of the facts.”

A few debate goers said the debate swayed their opinion of the candidates, and many said they found the information provided by the candidates helpful.

“It was very informative,” said T.J Jurgens of Smyrna. “I’m glad I came. I think it brought some issues to the front of my thinking. Both sides have valid points.”