Congressional Candidate Bob Brooks Cancels Only Debate ith Incumbent Ryan Mackenzie

Bob Brooks, the Democratic nominee in the race for the Pa.-07 Congressional seat, has canceled his one and only debate with incumbent Republican Ryan Mackenzie. 

During the primary, Brooks received no accolades for his rhetorical skills. Mackenzie, on the other hand, did well in debates with former Congress member Susan Wild. 

The Brooks' campaign decided to drop out as a result of criticism over stealing from his own family, cheating his workers by paying no workmen's compensation insurance and lying on two separate applications for $30,000 in federally funded COVID grants. Brooks has issued a "cease and desist" letter to Mackenzie, which is probably sitting in a trash can right now. 

I suspect there would be two good reasons for Brooks to refuse to debate.

One, he is so far ahead in polling that it makes little sense for him to give any visibility to his opponent. Given that Mackenzie is an incumbent Congressman whose campaign is well-funded, he's already visible.

Two, Brooks will do very poorly. That's the more likely explanation. This is a guy who basically cheated his own family and lied about a judgment they obtained against him when he applied for COVID money. That's pretty sleazy. 

I also am disappointed that anyone who believes in our democratic republic would refuse to let the people see him for what he is, bad or good. 

Concerned Dems Want Brooks to Step Aside

Monday was the last day for party nominees to withdraw their candidacies. Now a court order is required. Some of you were apparently hoping that Bob Brooks, the Dem nominee for Pa. 7's Congressional District, would pull the plug on his race. I think that's highly unlikely. 

As you can see above, a group calling itself "Concerned Democrats Against Bob Brooks" formally requested the state committee to request Brooks to withdraw from the campaign., based on (1) pending fraud litigation (which a court recently determined to have merit); 2) His public denigration of volunteer firefighters (who also serve as firefighters in communities with paid fire departments); 3) His alleged violation of a state labor law requiring him to carry workers' comp insurance; and 4) racially charged social media posts that Brooks has since deleted.

These concerned Democrats, whose identities I do not know, claim that Brooks presents "an unacceptable risk of handing this seat and potentially the House Majority to Ryan Mackenzie."

I personally have no intention for voting for any of the three candidates. Blogger Michale Molovinsky succinctly observes that the choice between Mackenzie and Brooks is a "Wizard of Oz choice ... one candidate needs a brain, the other a spine." As for Tupone, whom I suspect will survive the ballot challenges if he hires a lawyer instead of thinking he can represent himself, he's an ethical oil slick.