Posted on 09/19/2004 1:05:29 PM PDT by Tribemike
Jim Baker should begin from a position of NO debates.
Why? Kerry is simply not qualified to be president. First of all, he has virtually ZERO executive/leadership/management experience. Only his two years as LIEUTENANT Governer of Taxachusetts qualifies.
His Senate Experience is a zero. He sponsored no bills; coasted; and demonstrated no leadership. This is Kerry's opinion of his own Senate experience as well. He spent not 70 seconds but just 70 WORDS on his entire 2-decade senate career in his acceptance speech.
In 1993, IBM hired Lou Gerstner as CEO. He did not have a technical background but his executive background was huge - AMEX, Nabisco, McKinsey&Co....
If George W. Bush wanted to be CEO at IBM some day, he would be a shoe-in for his EXECUTIVE experience as 2-time governer of a huge state and President of the USA qualifies him. Kerry's resume would be ejected immediately.
Same goes for Edwards - just a trial lawyer with no executive experience. Cheney has run a multi-billion multinational corporation AND been Sec of Defense for 4 years on top of being VP. If Edwards were trying to get an interview with Cheney in a corporate setting, it wouldn't happen for he is not qualified enough for Cheney to waste his time.....
Lack of qualifications on the Democrat ticket is alarming. Kerry's junior officer experience (according to Wes Clark) and his 4 month stint where he gamed the system are not relevant.
Agreed. Agreed. Agreed! Total waste of W's time and energy. Nothing to be gained by Bush.
True, but for the same reasons, the Republican ticket has nothing to fear from debating. And there is the potential to speak to the American people unfiltered (more or less) through the media. Just my humble opinion.
Will Kerry even show up for the debates?
How many weeks now since Kerry held a press conference?
Is he still not even talking to the pool hacks on his plane?
That crank phone call to the NYT last Sunday, and last
week's appearance on Imus were disasters. Kerry can't
even handle softball questions from friendly reporters.
It's reported that he's now switching from reporters to
variety show hosts, with appearances on Dr.Phil and
Letterman. With any luck, they'll only want to discuss
wind surfing, and the agony of all these "scurrilous"
personal attacks.
The Dr. Phil appearance is taped and editted. No audience
or press was allowed.
At this rate, Kerry will be a complete hermit by the
time the debates roll around.
I agree that kerry doesn't deserve to be on the same stage as the Prez, but with his arrogance and pettiness, I bet he makes some easy pickings and drops even further in the polls - anyone taking odds on Kerry deciding to cut the debates short???
While I agree kerry is not qualified, The President must debate this loser. If he does not people will wonder why,what has he got to hide or worry about. Now we all know Bush should come off looking better in the debates because of his folksy charm and grasp of events and history, and kerry will come off as aloof and elite and as if he is above it all. Remember when Pataki was running against mario the pious, mario refused to show and the voters of NY held it against him.
Should be a cake walk then...... on to bigger and better things.
Don't worry. Kerry will come off as a waffling arrogant snob in the debates.
And that should prove to be the coup de grace.
Regardless of whether we think Kerry is qualified to be president, as the Dem nominee and sole realistic competition GWB has, don't you think it would look bad if the president didn't at least debate him once? Has there been a presidential election in recent years in which there were no debates? I think If GWB declines, Dems are going to try to make it look like he declined because he's scared he'll do poorly.
Since Sep 13, 2004
Don't agree. The public has come to expect debates. Reagan was in a stronger position than Bush is now, and he nevertheless debated twice.
Jimmuh Carter initially refused to debate Reagan, then dragged his feet until public opinion finally forced him to capitulate... there was one debate in the final week of the campaign... and Jimmuh got his clock cleaned by Reagan... and the rest is history.
So I'd say, agree to debates, just make sure they're not too close to the election so any positive effects have time to wear off, in the unlikely even K does well.
I respectfully disagree. I can see your point, but by not debating Bush would be accused of fearing to debate. The Dims would love to do that.
Just remember how Bush cleaned Gore's clock four years ago. And add to that the fact that he's had four more years of public speaking, and it just gets better and better.
Besides, Kerry will make a mess of the debates. Why deny us the laughs?
Agreed. While we here may feel Kerry is not qualified, His Party and half of the electorate is more inclined to believe he is. There are only a few key issues that Bush has to worry about debating, but Kerry has many, including his Vietnam, post Vietnam and Senate activities. Everyone thought that Bush would fall flat with Gore, but that didn't happen. Go for it Dubya!
Nixon didn't debate Mcgovern in '72.
I noticed that, too. But he's been on pretty good behavior thus far.
W will kick the girly-man's ass.....bring it on.
Bush doesn't have to show up for Kerry to have a debate! Kerry argues against his own positions every other frickin' day for gosh sakes.
I tend to agree that Kerry isn't worth Bush's time. The problem is, if Bush backs out, then the news media will swarm and say that Bush is running scared and can't face a debate on the real issues. Bush should debate Kerry. He would absoulutely trounce Kerry. All Bush has to do is ask specifics about his plans for the economy, Iraq, and the WOT. Kerry has no core platforms. All he'll do is bitch that Bush is ruining everything and look like Capt. Queeg doing it. Bring him on.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.