I think that all three candidates did well. We all had three distinct styles of speaking. I was blunt and to the point. I felt that all of those voters who took the time to attend the debate in person would be shrewd enough to see past any fancy rhetoric.
E85 didn't come up. I so would have nailed them if it did, unless of course their position happens to be the same as mine. I have not heard any public statements regarding E85 by my opponents. While I have been trying to keep track of my opponents' stances on issues, opposition research has not been a priority during my campaign.
Education kept coming up. Both of my opponents supported additional funding. I stressed that, while even though education funding keeps going up year after year, graduation rates keep going down. All that state and federal money keeps coming with strings attached, with new requirements imposed on students. There is only so much information that can be crammed into a student's brain in 4 years of high school.
I'll give you an example. FWCS's class of 1997, my graduating class, was the first to be required to perform 15 hours of community service. Several members of my senoir class failed to meet this requirement, and did not receive a diploma. While I do think that it is important to instill a spirit of volunteerism in a student, I do not think that students should be denied a diploma for failing to meet this requirement. It is far more important that a student get his or her diploma and become a self-sufficient member of society, rather than dropping out and becoming dependent on the spirit of volunteerism that has been instilled in his classmates. There are many other new requirements for graduation that have been mandated with the best of intentions by your humble servants in Indianapolis.
Vote Libertarian, and make them even more humhle.