Three NH Democratic Governor Candidates Refuse to Debate Dextraze & Freeman

Derek Dextraze and Ian Freeman

Derek Dextraze and Ian Freeman

In 2014’s New Hampshire gubernatorial primary, then-incumbent Maggie Hassan refused to debate me in the Monadnock Debates, put on at Franklin Pierce University. Since I was the only democratic candidate for governor to respond, they graciously gave me ten minutes to speak before the republican debate. I figured this year would be different. I thought for sure that having a full field of non-incumbent candidates would mean there’d be an actual, full debate.

Surprise! Looks like the “big three” candidates Mark Connolly, Steve Marchand, and Colin Van Ostern refused to respond to the invitation to this year’s Monadnock Debates. The only two candidates who did respond are author Derek Dextraze and me, Ian Freeman. As a result, the debate organizers decided to not hold the democratic debate this year, like in 2014.

I spoke with Derek about the development today and he said, “I find it interesting that the two candidates that really aren’t politicians said yes to debate. While the other three candidates that WMUR says are the only three candidates on the Democratic side for governor said no or didn’t respond.”

Derek points out another interesting phenomenon from this year’s campaign coverage, which is that some media organizations have been completely ignoring both the Dextraze and Freeman campaigns. WMUR-TV has reported on only three of the democratic candidates in their campaign coverage so far. Similarly, Manchester’s WGIR-AM has held “debates” but only invited the “big three”.

When Derek inquired with WMUR he says they told him, “because I haven’t sent them my itinerary they did not think that I was running.” Sounds like a lame excuse to me. It’s common for NH media organizations to reach out to all ballot qualified candidates. It’s either pure laziness of these media organizations or a deliberate decision to exclude smaller campaigns, despite the face that both Derek Dextraze and Ian Freeman will be on the primary ballot on September 13th, just like the “big three”.

Meanwhile, the republican gubernatorial debate will be happening at Franklin Pierce on Thursday August 18th, featuring most of the primary contenders in that race: Frank Edelblut, Jeanie Forrester, and Ted Gatsas. Chris Sununu claimed to have a scheduling conflict and Jonathan Lavoie did not respond to the invitation.

So far, the Monadnock Debates were the only debate to which both Derek and I were invited. That means that it’s the only fair political debate held statewide and thus far in the history of the Monadnock Debates, the big name democrats have refused to appear while the republicans debated in both 2014 and 2016. Pretty sad for the democratic candidates – not much political courage there, hmm?

Check out Derek’s campaign for governor here on his website or his facebook. He’s a fine competitor and I’m glad to have had the chance to meet him. To learn more about my campaign, check out my campaign page here on the New Hampshire Liberty Party site.

Now you can subscribe to Free Keene via email!

Don't miss a single post!


12 Comments

  1. You are not a democrat. I don’t blame them for not wasting their time on a phony.

  2. Ian Bernard will be nothing soon, neither a democratic nor a Republican, nor an independent. He is a failed child who is going to be in jail for supporting a child porn site, and accepting all drugs as “OK” in society.
    Good luck with all that Ian, good luck, your going to need it.

  3. BB SIZZLE

    I’m a little puzzled, you seem to be saying two opposing things at once…

    If you don’t like the idea of a person(s) controlling another persons body, we are likely in agreement.    I sure don’t like the idea of people engaging others who don’t consent or are incapable of consenting to an interaction.

    Then I infer from your post, you think some people SHOULD control others bodies, by criminalizing ingestion of certain substances.

    If you could maybe get your inner dialogue under control, maybe that which you espouse wouldn’t be so contradictory.  Thanks in advance.

  4. Why would anyone lower themselves to debate Ian or Derek. They both make a mockery out of the election process and their ridiculous ideas are so off the mark it would be like debating  someone high on PCP.

  5. Big three? More like the establishment three. They are afraid to debate you because you will expose their contradictions and violent tendencies. Just like the trolls on this site they can’t debate because they don’t use logic or principles to back their position. They are against freedom and they don’t want the masses to know how pethetic and cruel they are. Like the big elections they need to control the opposition so they can control the conversation. Can’t let the slaves discuss freedom or the whole scam fails.

  6. WEEDA CLAUS BB SIZZLE I was confused by Michael’s remark myself, WEEDA, albeit for a different reason. For some reason, Michael is expressing his belief that the mere act of speaking out against unjust laws is a criminal action subject to punishment. I’m surprised that Michael doesn’t know better than this. But then again, he is notorious for his heedless nature.

  7. Jumping Jacks

    I think Ian’s ideas might be based in the idea that voluntary consensual and peaceful human interactions are better than involuntary, and coercion based interactions.   

    The election process runs contrary to those beliefs, so it sort of mocks itself.    Lemme see, we need a coercion based “authority” to use coercive means, to ensure nobody else will coerce.   Yup, it mocks itself.

  8. I agree with you in some ways Weeda Claus, but I can be harsh in my commenting because of the hatred I have for Ian Bernard and company, and how they have failed as good children, and embody themselves in this way as adults! It makes me sick, that’s why. They are all that is wrong in this world. Entitled, dumb, dirty, libertards!
    Good day.

  9. BB SIZZLE I don’t think that you put much effort that time into getting your inner dialog under control, Michael dear. Perhaps you should try again. I for one would be especially interested in knowing exactly what it was in WEEDA’s last post that you do agree with. Are you agreeing that you’re confused or that consent is important in society?

  10. WEEDA CLAUS Jumping Jacks You said, “I think Ian’s ideas might be based in the idea that voluntary consensual and peaceful human interactions are better than involuntary” He applies that to sexual relationships between children and adults. The FBI is already investigating him for child pornography.

  11. Jumping Jacks WEEDA CLAUS

    Putting aside your incessant demand for kiddie diddling conversation, would you say that the concept of voluntary and peaceful individual human interactions are a better basis for a society than involuntary and coercion based ones?

Care to comment?