A more confident Conley takes on Lawler in second NY-17 debate

The themes in the second and final debate between Rep. Mike Lawler and Democratic challenger Cait Conley in the 17th Congressional District – a race locked in a dead heat –  were largely the same as the first. Conley sought to tie Lawler to President Donald Trump and MAGA, while Lawler tried to tie Conley to New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani and socialism. But the lines that at times sounded like a tired crutch for Conley in the first debate landed differently Wednesday night, perhaps because of her more confident delivery the second time around.

Conley once again repeatedly returned to her line that the sitting member of Congress “votes with Trump 100% of the time.” Lawler – and even moderator Dan Mannarino of PIX 11 – pointed out that figure is closer to 90%. Lawler may have been equally exasperated with the line, but this time, Conley largely did not engage with his objections. In doing so, Conley suggested those details didn’t matter to her – and therefore shouldn’t matter to voters, either. And it probably won’t to moderates critical in the swingy seat who are sick of high costs that Conley blames on Lawler’s multiple votes for tariffs, and to continue the war in Iran. Instead, Conley appeared level-headed – and the moments when she did engage with Lawler’s pushback seemed to pay off. The debate’s sole extended back-and-forth ended with an off-hand comment from Conley: “If you wanted to be the moderator, you could’ve volunteered,” she quipped.

The remark was an effort to redeem her weak, and somewhat confusing, answer on immigration leading up to it. Conley danced around a question about her support of the state’s new immigration law that limits when local police should work with federal immigration agents, and was vague about how she thought federal immigration enforcement should be held accountable, even when pressed by the moderator more than once. 

The parents of Sheridan Gorman, an 18-year-old from Yorktown who was killed by an undocumented man in Chicago earlier this year, asked Conley the same question at last month’s debate, and she didn’t give a straight answer then, either – a decision Lawler blasted her for Wednesday night. Conley was quick to condemn Gorman’s death, and said her killer should have been deported, but once again sidestepped the larger question about the law. It illustrated a weak spot for the campaign: Conley’s political infancy shows, particularly next to Lawler, a seasoned policymaker with deep mastery of the issues. 

With less than three weeks to go before Election Day, the race for the Lower Hudson Valley seat remains one of the most closely watched congressional contests in the country, and could determine control of the House of Representatives. 

The pair had their most tense moment while discussing the Cornell University gang rape case. After Lawler dinged Conley for accepting donations from disgraced former Gov. Eliot Spitzer, whom he said trafficked a young woman across state lines, Conley shot back, “I’m sorry, I do not need you to mansplain to me what domestic abuse and sexual assault against is.”

And Lawler’s attempt to group Conley with a progressive like Mamdani didn’t seem to stick nearly as well as it did in the first debate, when he repeatedly asked her to condemn the democratic socialist mayor. Conley didn’t hesitate to denounce Mamdani’s controversial statement he made on the third anniversary of Oct. 7. But Lawler wasn’t impressed. “Great, it shouldn’t have taken you until today to denounce it,” he said.

Lawler did his best to hold Trump at arm’s length. Asked specifically where he differs with the president, he said he objected to the public execution of the Ford Hood shooter and that he disagrees with Trump’s recent decisions in the Russia-Ukraine war.