Cal GOP Gov Candidates Promise Jobs

As you can see, New Majority California's Live Stream's is a bit buggy.

Poizner: I will cut taxes across-the-board by 10% & cut capital gains by 50%.

Poizner: Let me be clear: I don't support any tax or fee increases - they're already too high.

Raising taxes chases the tax base out of the state.

We do have to do something about spending, he says - Poizner proposes a 10% cut in spending. Here's his specific plan: span style="font-size: x-small;">http://bit.ly/7HZa4C<

Whitman: I am also not for increasing tax.

Whitman is not for the legalization of marijuana.

Whitman: Sustainable growth? Must put people back to work. Improve the business climate in California.

Whitman and Poizner have very similar talking points when it comes to taxation: it's too high. Let's cut it.

"Another major difference between Meg and Me. I don't listen to NPR," jokes Poizner.

Whitman: When every GOP member of Congress was voting for the Bush tax cuts, Steve campaigned against that.

Howard Jarvis Taxpayer's Assoc looked at both candidates "and decided to endorse me," says Whitman.

Whitman: I will veto any attempt to do away with the 2/3s majority required to pass a budget.

This begins with focus, doing small things well and using the veto effectively.

Yes! Better, working feed from CBS: span style="font-size: x-small;">http://bit.ly/XbYSK<

Poizner agrees with the 2/3s majority required to pass a budget.

Other than the NPR joke, very little seems to differentiate the two candidates at this point. Where will they diverge?

Poizner: Wants a P/T California legislature to eliminate corruption and send citizen-legislators to Sacramento.

The debate has moved to the topic of education.

Poizner: We have to get our economy back on track so we can reform our education system.

No jobs, no growing economy, no investment available for education.

Poizner: As Gov, my first priority will be public safety. But right up there is education.

Whitman: California Public University system is a "gem" - my first priority is jobs, and the education system is our education engine.

Poizner: Not everyone is going to end up at UC Berkeley - we need to put vocational education back in the high schools.

Conan Nolan, assignment reporter for KNBC in Los Angeles, is moderating the debate.

Again, I'm not seeing much disagreement between the two politicians here. Whitman agrees with Poizner on vocational training, charter schools, pride in UC state system.

Whitman: "We largely agree on this subject."

Let's talk about the environment. AB-32: Greenhouse gas initiative.

Poizner: "It's called global warming, not state warming... we are not an economic island."

Whitman: I want a one-year moratorium on AB-32, puts California at a competitive disadvantage.

AB-32 will not create new green jobs - we need to create green jobs by reducing regulation, taxes.

Both are saying that they should harmonize regulatory bodies.

At this point, this is nowhere as contentious as the Fiorina-Campbell-DeVore debate last week.

Poizner: AB-32 "draconian". Wants a moratorium until unemployment drops to 5.5%.

Whitman: Moratorium for 1 year
Poizner: Moratorium until unemployment drops to 5.5%

Not a trivial difference, but not particularly large either.

Immigration is now the topic.

Whitman: 100% against amnesty. We have not secured the border. Border patrol doesn't have the tech they need.

We have to hold employers accountable for hiring documented workers. Must use e-Verify.

We have got to eliminate sanctuary cities.

Poizner: "I agree with most of what Meg said."

On education, on the environment and on immigration, I'm not seeing any decisive moves by either candidate to draw a distinction.

Being behind in the polls, the onus is on Poizner.

Poizner: Whitman's attacks are "nasty", "misleading".

Poizner: You endorsed Barbara Boxer!

Moderator Fact-Check: Both Whitman and Poizner have supported Dems in the past.

Again: their candidacy, at least the way they're presenting themselves, are VERY similar.

The small difference I see is that Poizner is using more aggressive rhetoric - he wants dramatic, radical reform in California, he says.

RT @Kimberly4Meg: StevePoizner says he's "Alex Keating" from Family Ties... not feeling that analogy as strong leader for California!

RT @StevePoizner Fact: Meg Whitman voted for @StevePoizner in 2004 span style="font-size: x-small;">http://bit.ly/cGWtaI<

Final Statements!

Whitman: Our state is in big trouble. Most worrisome is CA's crisis of confidence... I know we can change California - we can make the Golden State golden again. My approach starts with focus: I'm a big believer in doing three things well, rather than ten things in a mediocre way.

Her big three: creating jobs, cutting spending and improving education.

Poizner: "We have differences." Not from what I've seen tonight.

Poizner is FINALLY focusing on differences: he wants across the board tax cuts; Whitman only wants targeted tax cuts.

Strong finish by Poizner. I've been there - I've done that. I've worked in the WH, I've been elected state-wide, I've taught in a California public high school.

It was a disappointing debate - they ended up agreeing on everything, and picking around on the margins.

Whitman hit harder at Poizner; Poizner used more aggressive language to express his vision; both visions appear to differ very little.

If I were a California GOP primary voter, I would have left with my previous biases unchanged, and likely a little disappointed with both candidates.

I think both Poizner and Whitman could have given better performances, given us a little more back and forth, and articulated their differences better.