Posted on 10/07/2004 5:19:50 AM PDT by Timeout
I believe I've figured out Kerry's strategy, especially in the debates. Actually, it's Schrum's stategy...he tried it with Al Gore, but Gore couldn't carry it off. With Kerry, I think it's working. Kerry is a better actor.
THEIR STRATEGY: Take the "likeability" card out of contention. Create an atmosphere where Bush has to choose between hitting back hard or appearing weak if he doesn't respond to harsh lies about him and Cheney.
Kerry trails in the "likeability" category, so take away the president's trump card: his connection with ordinary Americans.
THEIR TACTICS: Show disdain and disrespect. Take away any atmosphere which would play to GWB's class, his folksiness, his ability to connect with ordinary people. Force him into the gutter with Kerry. (Think: punk rock culture where "dissing" garners respect).
In the very first answer, call Bush a liar (misleader). Lie about his record, misquote him. This happened in both debates so far. Call him a stubborn warmonger, "out of touch with reality". After totally insulting Bush/Cheney, Kerry AND Edwards then went on to answer the question in a way that demanded a response. This took viewers' attention off the insults at the beginning. And it forces Bush or Cheney to choose between dealing with the insults or answering the policy challenge.
This can be a win/win for Kerry:
1. If Bush & Cheney get angry but don't rise to the bait, their anger shows and it takes away the likeability factor.
2. If they do rise to the bait, they look angry, weak, and defensive. (Also accomplishes #1). __________________________________
I think this is a very real danger for Bush.
I'm no debate coach, so I don't know the best way to counter them. I'll put my suggestion in my first post. But surely out in the blogosphere there must be lots of debate coaches and strategists who can tell us how Bush and Cheney can escape this trap.
I think President Bush should right at the start point out how negative Kerry is and that it is because he doesn't have a record to run on. He should challenge the audience to keep track of how many negative things Kerry says versus positive. He could than use Reagan's line "There you go again".
I must say, if little ole me can recognize the Kerry strategy, Karl Rove is surely right on top of it.
Go get em, Karl! (And get Peggy Noonan writing that one liner!)
In the VP debate when Edwards kept harping on the, I wanted Cheney to bring that up.
Bush is in the back pocket of the WTO and multinationals...NEITHER side in this political debate is going to help."
Not nearly enough of a case to aid and abet the stench of Kerry and his freakshow cabal of mutants, anti-Americans, and ethical satanists.
Yeah, I know, it won't happen but I just had to get that out! More later...
Dude, send that to the Whitehouse post haste...
Bottom line:
BUSH HAS TO TURN KERRY'S NEGATIVITY INTO A LIABILITY.
Bush wants viewers to come away from this debate thinking: "All Kerry does is tear down. He hasn't offered us a vision for the future". Kerry is practicing like crazy for this debate...and I guarantee you he ain't practicing positive lines.
Tough assignment for our guy. Bush's people need to get to work on this.
Well thought out response, but it's very close to Kerry's game of Bush-on-the-defense. All JK has to say is "more of the same...blah blah...twisted distortions...blah blah...".
After listening to Glen Beck this AM, Bush just needs to hand a door key over to Kerry and say, "Here's the key to Saddam's cell. You're the lucky one who gets to go let him out."
Lots of troll posts here today. To see how to respond to the "my opponent is a liar" gambit, you need look no further than the Cheney Edwards knockdown Tuesday night.
Kerry hurts himself whenever he opens his mouth; for example, he's now carrying "global test" around his neck like an albatross from a debate he's widely believed to have "won".
Four years ago, Algore went for the kill after W fumbled early and wound up making that nut-job staredown gaffe. If President Bush stays focused and prepares a little better than he did last Thursday, he'll be fine. His opponent will have to pander to his base and won't be able to help coming across as the liberal so much of America has come to fear and loathe.
Bush is Daddy, Kerry is the petulant kid.. Parents look like idiots when they are not in charge of their children.. Actually it plays into Bush's style.. STOP, think as in responding to a child, speak slowly and patronize.. Kerry is just no debaiter, he is really a master baiter trolling lies as bait exactely as Edwards did.
Patronizing him will infuriate him.. and cause him to carry on as the petulant child he is.. Kerry's bravado will look childish not manly or Presidential..
For demotrolls are just kids gone wrong and are out of control.. choose your words carefully and see through the bravado cause that is exactly what it is.. Out of control kids are clueless or they would'nt be out of control.. Thats why Cheney won.. He's a good father... And Bush can win too if he sees whats happening clearly.. By the way Terry Kerry looks like a man... maybe he had an operation, ya think ?
Bush isn't losing.
BINGO!
In my mind, Bush has to treat this differently than Cheney.
Cheney is "gravitas", "competence", "experience". His serious answers underscored those traits.
Bush, on the other hand, is all those things, but most importantly he is "likeable" and a "strong leader". And this is a town hall format. So Bush has to handle the attacks differently from Cheney. He has to turn Kerry's negativity in a liability. Make it so that every time Kerry starts his diatribe, the people think "There he goes again".
Well I don't think he should attack him in that way. I think Bush has got to stop looking like a deer in headlights, have more than 30 seconds of information in a 90 second time slot and state what he can and has done for the american people in his folksy manner. Talking over peoples heads will get John Kery in trouble. Most people do not want to hear that. They want a leader that appears strong and decisive yet smart enough to show humbleness when necessary. Bush can do this. He does not have to talk like a Harvard graduate to appear intelligent but he must stop the uhh and mms. He must delete the time frame in starting to answer a question. He must appear presidential and stop the looks of confusion on his face. He must also have an answer to the John kerry lies and stop saying the same thing over and over. It makes him look dumb. And that was his failing point in the first debate he looked dumb. The undecided voters are looking for strength and a person that they believe has a plan. Not even if its the best plan, just a plan.
On the other hand I disagree with you about Cheney. Dick Cheney won the debate against John Edwards and Cheney looked fantastic. He could not have done any more.
If Bush would take a clue from Cheney and follow his lead he will win this debate.
Dude, Dubya can't say "nuclear" . . . what makes you think he's gonna try for "vitriol"?
I agree that Cheney won his debate!! He was reassuringly tough and competent. (I happen to think he's fabulous, but that's probably expecting too much of the wishy washy swing voters.) Cheney could afford to appear dismissive toward Edwards.
Bush's strengths though have a lot to do with his personality: likeable, cares about me, good character, humble. It's a lot harder task to show those traits while you're eviscerating your opponent. Bush has the harder task, in my mind.
Sheesh, I've said from the beginning of this thread that mine are poor words. I'm no speechwriter.
I'm trying to get people's thoughts on the CONCEPT. Bush knows how to express it...the question is whether his campaign advisors agree with this assessment of Kerry's strategy.
I think that no one will ask about illegal immigration.
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.