U.S. Rep. Mike Coffman and Democratic challenger Morgan Carroll on Thursday, in their final debate, sparred over their approaches to immigration reform, their records as legislators and GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump’s comments about women.
In one of the more direct questions posed during the mostly cordial exchange, KUSA-Channel 9 anchor Kyle Clark asked about Trump: “Based on the claims that he has made, do you believe that Donald Trump is a sexual predator?”
“Oh, I don’t know,” Coffman said.
Carroll, an outgoing state senator, said: “Yes. The definition of grabbing people without their consent is the definition of sexual assault (and) sexual harassment. It’s his words, not mine.”
That was not the only time Trump came up. Coffman, who is seeking a fifth term representing the 6th Congressional District in the Denver suburbs, has distanced himself for months from the Republican standard-bearer, sometimes in awkward ways borne out of necessity in a district with large immigrant populations.
This week, Coffman told 9News in an interview that after withholding his endorsement all year, he likely would not vote for president at all.
On Thursday night, the Marine veteran was asked whether he had shown personal courage in his handling of the issue.
“First of all, I think I was the first one to put out an ad separating myself from Donald Trump,” in early August, he said. “And then, certainly after the video, I was the first member of Congress to ask Donald Trump to step aside.” (He was among the first, but not the first.) “So I’ve certainly been consistent on my positions on Trump.”
Carroll replied: “This was too little, too late. What we saw (that) was dangerous in Donald Trump was obvious and repeated and overt a long time beforehand. What we’re seeing is political expedience. …
“If Donald Trump was up in the polls, I think we’d see a very different reaction (from Coffman).”
The 6th District, which now arcs from Denver’s south suburbs through Aurora and up to Brighton, was redrawn into a much more diverse — and cutthroat — district before the 2012 election. Coffman has held onto his seat, winning re-election handily in 2014, and Carroll’s run is the third serious attempt by Democrats to defeat him.
The third and final debate, also moderated by political reporter Brandon Rittiman, was a fast-paced 30 minutes. The candidates also discussed Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s email scandal (Carroll said she doesn’t defend Clinton’s actions); touched on whether to repeal Obamacare, as Coffman has supported, or to make changes to it, as Carroll wants; and took positions on Colorado’s twin ballot measures that would create open primaries, propositions 107 and 108.
Coffman said he supports the measures for presidential primaries, but wasn’t comfortable with mandating other state primaries. Carroll opposes both, she said, because the way they are written would give “enhanced rights” to unaffiliated voters.
Both were caught flat-footed when asked to name a legislative accomplishment by the other that they respected.
“Ouch,” Coffman said, laughing. “I don’t know one.”
Carroll, for her part, could cite only bipartisan bills passed by Congress this year dealing with criminal justice reform and changes to education law — and not anything directly connected to Coffman.
A recurring theme, as in previous debates, was immigration reform. Both support it — but for Coffman, his evolving stance advocating a piecemeal approach toward granting some legal recognition to people in the country illegally has been at odds with his party’s widespread opposition. Carroll and Democrats portray it as political posturing, with nothing to show for it.
But Carroll was put on the spot first by the moderators when she was asked whether she stood by her comment that immigrants who are in the United States illegally haven’t done anything wrong. “The question is: Does it not then confirm what your critics would say, which is that you don’t respect the rule of law?” Clark asked.
“Sometimes the law is unjust,” Carroll said. “And that was true during Jim Crow, that’s true while we’ve got a broken immigration system that’s there. So we must uphold the rule of law, but the bigger and more important moral imperative, from my perspective, is to make sure the law is just, that it is right, that it is humane and that it is not hurting families. Immigrant rights are human rights. The law is part of the problem.”
Coffman faced a question about his comments advocating for a more robust use of deportations.
Coffman said the country first needed to address the millions of people who are here now after years of “de facto amnesty,” especially for young people brought by their parents, with some accommodations.
“But I would like to see us move to a much tougher system after that point in time,” Coffman said. “We have to get tough on our borders.”
