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.
2) Quite the contrary, I think Bush's "anger" was, in fact, quite staged. I know I'm alone on this, but I think it was focus-grouped by Rove who showed a HUGE difference in "emotion-quotient" between Bush and Kerry. First debate, anger. Next debate, compassion, who knows what?
3) I don't see anything in the "likeability" numbers that has changed one iota.
I agree with that 100%. The American people have seen this President get trashed for nearly 4 years...........yet the dems keep getting away with saying that HE is dividing the country, and "poisoning the discourse". Time to take the gloves off, Dubya!
I'm on hourly pay, and I found a new job this year that paid 2.25/hr more than my previous job.
> The trade deficit is a meaningless number.
NOW who is unqualified to vote?! What kind of an argument is that?
And how do you know what "gonewt" means? How do you know it's Newt Gingrich?
Keep chugging the Kool Aid.
Bush is NOT "losing."
This election will be a landslide. Bush will be re-elected and it will not be close.
skerry will never be likable. the American people have had a rapist as President, do you really think they want a lazy gigolo during a time of WAR?
That's exactly the opposite of what's being proposed. Bush is being encouraged to respond with strength and firmness - not whining and not negativism - to Kerry's bashing.
At least you should have added "in debate." A lot of people around here are edgy enough already.
If he can get the "Bad News for America is Good News for Them" theme out there and then use a variant of "There You Go Again" whenever he starts in, I think that would work.
"And how do you know what "gonewt" means? How do you know it's Newt Gingrich?"
True...could be too much 'Eye of Newt'
Let me put this in words you will understand.
Nah nah nah nah nah ...
As an Aussie, I am an outsider here so please take this with a grain of salt.
Australians have stood side-by-side with Americans in every major conflict since we became a nation. Not because we always believe what the USA believes, but simply because we are mates. If a mate gets into a fight, we don't care who started it or why, we just start swinging, and ask questions later. That's what mates do.
You should all be very proud. Despite your differences, Republicans and Democrats are anything but apathetic about the future of your great country. These presidential debates, with massive support and a record number of viewers, shows that your democracy has never been healthier.
More than ever before, most people already know who they are voting for. Only the undecided voters matter. And they will not be impressed by partisan mud slinging on either side. Nor will they care about facts or detail - else they would not be undecided.
My advice.
Ignore the negatives.
Celebrate your achievements despite troubled times.
Detail the problems still faced.
Outline a simple plan for the future.
Bush must win this next debate for the sake of us all.
Likewise, your recourse is a good one. I would personally love to her/see that happen. But, it presumes that Bush actual did lose the first debate, and that the people listening are not paying attention to what is being said. I think that this assumption is incorrect. I've explained this conclusion on my blog, as you can see with this excerpt.
From Navarone-ing the Debate...
Much has been made about the debate performances. Less has been offered in terms of the substance. Pundits on both sides of the political aisle conferred victory on Kerry. He looked and sounded good. President Bush maintained a concise message that was consistent with his policy and played like a slogan. To the 'Old Media' that values symbolism over substance, issues were irrelevant; as is Kerry's failed Senate record, and a schizophrenic foreign policy persona. Consensus proves that 'Old Media' still maintains some influence over the 'New Media,' where content was subordinate to style yet again. But, the content of the debate involved the question of US sovereignty and security. It is a critical issue in the minds of serious Americans across the spectrum. On that, President Bush prevailed without question, as indeed he did with the debate as a whole. Hugh Hewitt is in a clear minority of journalists that get this one right. The President managed his opponent like Alistair MacClean tackling a dam. Which takes us back to Force 10...
When the remains of the team finally got around to the task of destroying the Nazi bridge, they found that they needed to drop a mountain reservoir on top of it. Miller, the pompous British explosives expert that successfully sabotaged the great Nazi fortress of Navarone, rigged the Yugoslavian dam similarly to crumble. One expected the same fantastic firestorm of explosions and fire, to rip through the massive structure blowing to pieces before the wall of water plunges through the remains. Waiting on the edge of my seat, the charges were set as instructed with no time to get away. KaBOOM!
Nothing happened. The object stood firm.
Everyone cursed Miller. (Joe Scarborough would no doubt have called his performance "pathetic."). Miller sat quietly on the hillside overlooking the dam through the early morning mist, calmly smoking his pipe in good bloke fashion. Finally he said, "Give it time. You've got to let nature take her course." Miller knew his opponent, and capitalized on its weaknesses and the fundamental flaws inherent to its foundation. He didn't need the fireballs and massive ordinance of Navarone to topple this foe. He merely used a couple of rucksacks full of the enemy's own munitions placed accordingly. His meek assault, however, fractured its inner structure, mortally wounding it against the massive potential of cataclysmic destruction. The behemoth began to give way - pipes blew, walls shifted, concrete cracked. The inevitable truth poured through the breaches, infiltrating and undermining any resistance or argument the object had offered. Water pouring down its face, the great barrier collapsed.
Its a good topic for discussion, and I applaud you for initiating this thread. But, I urge everyone to ignor the pundits and give the 'so-called' undecided voter credit for seeing through Kerry's facade. He is a miserable candidate, and a reprehensible human being. The more he talks, the more people know it. Bush doesn't need to work too hard to make him crumble.
Atos
Amen Mate!!!
A new idea:
After Kerry's first bitch-slap, simply turn to the audience and say,
"I can understand why Senator Kerry and his party have to stoop to such dishonest and negative language. From the time I came to Washington, they haven't had any constructive proposals for addressing problems. All they have offered was skepticism and name calling. Even after 9/11, when it was apparent we were facing very difficult times, they've continued to act as if my administration was more the enemy than the terrorists. Americans want---and I want---a political atmosphere where we can debate IDEAS without the gutter talk we hear today from Senator Kerry and his party. So tonight I'm going to talk to you about my plans for the future and ignore the Senator's insults."
Something like that? (But done in a way that reflects his strength while putting Kerry in his place.)
My only suggestion for The President is that he needs to present himself in these debates as he does when he has a prepared speech. When he has to make on the spot remarks and responses, he doesn't do as well. This is a difficult thing to learn but it may determine the outcome of this election.
Perception is everything.
bush is better in a speech though. i may have to have a drink to get up my courage to be able to watch this debate.
I don't know why they never adopted the Rumsfeld approach to describing the situation on WMD. We know he had'em, we don't know what he did with them, we're going to find out.
Yeah. I did notice that. The first thought I had was its usage. I think he meant to say 'furiously'.
'Vociferously' worked in that sentence, but just barely.
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.