The candidates often demonstrated substantial agreement in answers to the questions posed. Jack Boyle presented those questions which came directly from contributors (members) of the four sponsoring organizations. Each candidate presented answers that, often in agreement, helped to distinguish them from one another on the issue - sometimes only through the nuance of personality and tone. I was most impressed by the passion within some responses by candidates Miller and Schiffer. Candidates Renacci and Smith, while articulate and carefully crafted, did not present with the same level of passionate response. On "Earmarks," all candidates were against them, to some degree, as an excess of government "bring home the bacon." Only one candidate thought that earmarks sometimes helped a local business; but, did not let the audience know why discrimination in the favor of a local business demonstrated his respect for equity within the Constitution.

I did attend and was surprised at the turn out. However, one thing I noticed was the lack of younger people in attendance. I think the event was very well organized and beneficial. I was leaning toward a specific candidate going in. I left with the mindset that only 2 of the 4 are candidates that I could vote for.