Free Advice for Karl Rove: Kerry's Inherent Debating Limitation (scoring a debate knock-out)

TBA | 10-12-04 | Jonathan M. Stein

[Moolah]

Bush should and probably will hammer it home that Kerry is indeed a liberal. Kerry has no defense other than to say he doesn't like labels.
I suspect the Bush team has already figured out to put Kerry on defense but sometimes that is a lot easier said than done.

[Tweaker]

Constructive criticism.

"...but I know that that platitude doesn't cut muster.. "

Use either "pass muster" or "cut the mustard"
Combining the two makes you sound like Archie Bunker and totally destroys the statements

"I am also a columnist who knows how to use words effectively. And, to boot, my SAT scores and IQ are higher than both candidates currently running for president (for what that's worth). Not to toot my own horn, but the point is that I'm someone worth listening to,.."

[Xphantasos]

PING

[jmstein7]

LOL! I was typing so fast, I apparently made a few errors like that; hence, I posted it on FR so that y'all could catch and corrent such things.

[RedEyeJack]

Senator, what makes you think that the troops will fight for you? Your fellow Democrats put a draft on the agenda to prepare the way for you because if you are elected many of those in the military will vote with their feet against you and many who would join will walk away. They won't fight for someone they can't trust and we all know that you have a record that will make every man and woman in uniform distrust you. Its not what you say that matters, Senator, it's what you do. You betrayed their fathers once and they know you will betray them if you think it is what your supporters like George Soros and Hillery Clinton want...

[pabianice]

Bush's best tactic has always been to get Kerry to lose his temper. An angry Kerry is a horror show of scowling, red-faced, finger-shaking ugliness. It is to Bush's discredit that he hasn't yet made the real Kerry come out during a debate.

[Cicero]

Over the past year you have posted a number of very sensible and insightful comments on the political situation. They strike me a showing profession competence and good political sense.

This is another instance of that good sense. Kerry needs to be hammered on his liberalism and he needs to be prodded and poked on his sensitive skin. For months he has been shouting, "Bring it on!" yet every time anyone brings it on he has revealed a very thin skin and quick temper.

His handlers will have warned and prepared him for this, but I don't think he has any plausible way to counter it.

[jmstein7]

Exactly. There are certain things that just can't be countered.

[Savage Rider]

If you are trying to get this message to President Bush, edit it severely, like to two paragraphs. He and his people don't have time to read this much copy and they already know the background of the best way to engage in verbal combat. President Bush is great at verbal jujitsu and he knows "The Art of War."

[Lee'sGhost]

"All Bush has to do is warn anyone watching the debate to watch out for the word "but" coming from Kerry"

I like it and I think you are correct. I was thinking something similar. Like at the beginning challenging sKerry to answer all questions by first pointing out the success or experience that makes him qualified. Then Bush could state flatly that he won't be able to do it. I'd love to see sKerry's reaction.

[Imabeliever]

To add, President Bush can also say, "I have a plan and its working." "From what little we know of your plan, its the same one used for eight years by Clinton, and we can all see what that "sensitive plan" led to, which was 9/11.

[1john2 3and4]

President Bush must drive home the point that, at this point in time, we need a Commander-in-Chief, and not a Critic-in-Chief

Anything less will put lives in danger. Anything less will threaten economic growth. Anything less with threaten the very foundation of our country. Hiring a critic to lead the free world would be a critical mistake. If Kerry wants to be a critic, he can join the editorial board of the New York Times. If he wants to become President, he must demonstrate that he can lead. He can't!

Just a small change in wording to give it more '2-birds-with-one-stone' punch, excellent, sir!

[jcb8199]

BUMP

[alex]

I suppose Bush has to start from good well deserved bashing of Clinton economic performance. He did not do it during the campaign and it cal easily knock Kerry out of balance.

[television is just wrong]

"I have a Plan". His plan is to ridicule the pres, and claim to have a plan, but not tell anyone what it is til he's elected? The American people need to demand to know what his plan is. My guess is he is just on a I have a plan power trip, and has nothing going on between those ears that is ever going to solve anything.

[1john2 3and4]

"You just keep planning Senator, I will keep doing"?

WOW! Cha-Ching!

[Morgan in Denver]

Agreed. Once Bush asks the audience to watch for the BUT word, people will be doing just that, and Kerry will be aware of it. Kerry will try to do something else and fail because he cannot stop using BUT to modify his positions.

[CMAC51]

Bush can disable Kerry on Taxes and put him totally on the defensive. Kerry will say he is only going to tax the rich. Bush should respond with...

"In 1993 John Kerry cast the deciding vote on the largest tax increase in the history of the United States. He raised taxes on EVERYONE. He even taxed your social security. That's right, your social security.

The really amazing part is that he will tell you that he is proud of that vote. Oh, he will try to explain it as it did this or it did that. He can try to frame it in a positive light. The thing you need to remember, the next time Senator Kerry talks about raising taxes, is that he was the man that passed the largest tax increase in US history and he was PROUD of it.

The largest tax increase in United States history and he was proud of it."

Add a pregnant pause...

"And he was proud of it!"

[showme_the_Glory]

Excellent post. I am confident that the President will be most effective at Wednesdays debate.

[Salty Cobra]

An excellent analysis, the President stuck it to Kerry in the second debate because he took the offense and was critical of his opponent's past performance. The President's problem in the first debate was that Kerry had him on defense most of the time and he did not often get in a position to attack Kerry's credibility.
Something I observed in the second debate, when Kerry was on the defense and could not explain away the issue, when he got his next question he dropped back to answering the old question. He did this several times after the President's rebuttal giving him the last say on that issue.
I believe he is using this ploy as a form of "one-ups-man-ship". The President could put a negative twist to this if he would respond with something on the order of "My opponent is having trouble saying what he really means". I have sent debate suggestions and concerns to the Chairman of the RNC and have never received a response. While I do not expect him to respond personally I would think that someone on his staff would acknowledge that it was received and would be considered.
Good luck on getting through to some one who advises the President on this upcoming debate. I am running nervous with all the obstacles and bias of the MSM.