Matthew Tully

John Gregg was the clear winner in Monday night’s gubernatorial debate, and that victory wasn’t just about the clarity of his message or his command of the stage. What the debate did was suggest that Gregg has a better grasp of both how he wants to lead Indiana and of the issues facing it.

In a way, that shouldn’t be surprising. After all, Gregg has been running his current campaign for about two years, and he also ran a close but unsuccessful race for governor four years ago. All that running, all those speeches and meetings, not to mention the self-reflection that comes with losing an election, has resulted in Gregg being a stronger candidate today than he’s ever been.

“I’d like you to imagine having a governor that shows respect for all Hoosiers and doesn’t promote discrimination,” he said. “Having a governor that focuses like a laser on the economy, on high-wage jobs.”

Repeatedly, Gregg talked about “taking the best ideas from Democrats, Republicans and independents,” about “taking the politics out of education,” about investing in preschool and infrastructure, and looking not just at the number of jobs Indiana has but the quality of them.

On the other side of the stage was Republican Lt. Gov. Eric Holcomb, who has been running for governor for not even three months. He is currently the state’s second-in-command, but he has had that job only since March. As a candidate for governor, he is still finding his way, and on policy he quite simply has not impressed in the weeks since replacing Gov. Mike Pence on the ballot.

Policy depth, in fact, provided the night’s most glaring differences. Gregg has released a series of detailed policy proposals; Holcomb has not. And it showed. For instance, Holcomb at one point said, “I am all in favor of expanding preschool.” Still, five weeks before Election Day, he has not offered one idea on how to do so. On infrastructure, he said “nothing should be taken off the table,” but he didn’t put even one proposal on the table.

There’s still time for Holcomb. As I have written many times, he is an impressive public official who has contributed to state politics in important ways over the past decade-plus. It’s a shame he hasn’t had more time to build a campaign, and to make the mistakes and stumbles that mark every campaign’s early days. And let me be clear: It’s not as if he had an embarrassing performance Monday.

But here’s the reality. While Gregg was confident, clear and detailed, and focused on exactly the right issues and messages, Holcomb’s performance made clear he has not yet synthesized a message or crafted a deep policy agenda. The debate left me feeling that Gregg, a former speaker of the Indiana House, is ready to step into the job of being governor, while Holcomb would have a learning curve.

The two candidates sparred, in the most civil ways possible, about where Indiana’s economy stands. Holcomb pointed to Indiana’s low unemployment rate and suggested the path forward is more of the same policies that have dominated the past 12 years. Gregg pointed to Indiana’s age-old problem (wages that badly lag the nation) and talked about families whose incomes have remained flat in recent years.

“The jobs are coming here,” Holcomb said when a young man asked about the need for more high-quality jobs in Indiana. “It’s happening.”

Gregg, on the other hand, pointed the questioner to his “35-point economic plan” as he talked about proposals to encourage more venture capital and small business growth. He said wages in Indiana cost Hoosiers mightily and said his administration would focus on five specific areas of “high-growth, high-wage jobs.”

“That’s where I’ll stay focused,” he said. “If we stay focused on those areas, if we take politics out of education and better align our education system with our job demands, we can fill the skills gap that we have.”

Ultimately, he said, “The status quo isn’t getting it. We can do better in Indiana.”

Gregg was clearly the more comfortable candidate on a stage that also included Libertarian Rex Bell. He praised the Pence administration’s program to encourage more regional cooperation among cities and used the humor he is known for effectively, if sparingly. He had the benefit of a series of previously released policy papers on which to draw.

Part of the problem for Holcomb, a former state Republican Party chairman, was that he repeatedly claimed credit for state successes over the past 12 years but never explained the role he played in achieving them. And on issue after issue — as Gregg offered details about the need to empower local government, to invest in preschool and infrastructure, on LGBT rights — Holcomb offered few details and seemed to be playing defense.

Holcomb summed up his message toward the end of the debate: “I will continue to focus on the things that got us this far,” he said.

That might be enough, if Hoosiers feel the state is on the right path. But it didn’t offer debate viewers much insight into the bold style Holcomb has insisted he would bring to the governor’s office. The debate didn’t bring out the impressive and thoughtful politician I’ve seen in a decade of conversations.

If you watched the debate, and I don’t know that many people did, you were left with a clear idea of how Gregg would lead Indiana. His policies aren’t perfect, and he is among the many politicians declining to ask voters to accept sacrifices for the sake of new programs. But he knows why he wants to be governor and, on Monday, he most effectively made his case to the voters of Indiana.

Tully: Evan Bayh is in political race of his life

Tully: Our race for governor has been Trumped

Tully: 5 most critical questions for Gregg, Holcomb

You can reach me at matthew.tully@indystar.com or on Twitter: @matthewltully.