California's candidates for governorship finally have the debate on the agenda. Here is what we learned.

LOS ANGELES – The two candidates for the governorship of California, Gavin Newsom, lieutenant governor-democrat, and John Cox, a Republican business leader, met Monday for their one and only planned debate on the campaign. (We'll take what we can get.) Here are some lessons learned from their 60-minute civilian session moderated by journalist Scott Shafer on KQED, a public radio station in San Francisco.

Californians can not complain about not having a choice.

It is rare for two candidates to disagree on so many points. On the sanctuary cities (Mr. Cox opposed, Mr. Newsom is a yes); the tax on gasoline (Mr Newsom argues, Mr Cox wants to repeal it); to become a zero-carbon state (Mr Newsom agrees, Mr Cox opposes it); and more stringent gun control laws (Mr. Cox no, Mr. Newsom yes).

Mr Cox has sent a clear message in the debate: it is time to change.

He has repeatedly said that Mr. Newsom was in government – as lieutenant governor and mayor of San Francisco – for almost 16 years, and that the advanced policies under Newsom and Governor Jerry Brown sent people fleeing the country. California looking for cheaper places to live. "Gavin is part of the political class that has led this state down," he said. "The status quo is not working for Californians who work on average. I represent change. "

Being part of the status quo, however, has some advantages.

Mr. Newsom has shown that he has mastered the details of the politics of the past years in Sacramento – speaking, for example, of how to lobby for the creation of more housing. And he accused Mr Cox of being vague. "What we heard from John is an illusory strategy in which he criticizes and identifies problems, but with all due respect, you do not have details of how he would deal with these problems," he said. -he declares.

It took 43 minutes before these two words – Donald Trump – were spoken.

"Trump would have a lawyer in Sacramento when he became governor," Newsom said of Cox. He highlighted Mr. Cox's support for Mr. Trump's harsh immigration policies, as well as his opposition to the right to abortion.

Mr. Cox responded by saying that it was not the purpose of this election. "We are talking about all these social problems for which I do not intend to change one iota," he said. "I run so that people can have an affordable life."

For those who keep the score, Mr. Cox made no mention of Mr. Trump, although some of his terms may seem familiar to anyone who attended a Trump rally. "I represent change," he said. "We will begin to reform our crumbling political system from the first day."

An interesting proposal on gun control.

Cox urged the media not to publish the names of armed defendants anymore. "More laws will not do the job," he said. "I'm certainly in favor of keeping guns out of the reach of dangerous people with mental illness. The second amendment is an important amendment. "

Mr. Newsom did not weigh in with the idea of ​​the media. But he noted the support of Mr. Cox from the National Rifle Association. "I believe gun safety laws work and save lives," he said. "I want California to continue its leadership. He does not believe that. "

We will let others judge the winner and the loser here.

It seems possible that the Cox team needs advice on negotiation prior to the debate. Mr. Newsom, as appropriate to a person having a significant lead in most polls, did not want a debate at all; Mr. Cox wants all the attention that he can have. What they agreed was a single debate. On the radio. A Monday morning. Did we mention that it was Columbus Day? "I accepted five of these proposals and I can not convince my young friend to do that," said Cox just before the microphones go out.