Thursday, September 30, 2004
9/30/04 Presidential debate blog
I’m writing down my thoughts on tonight’s presidential debate before watching any “expert analysis” or pre-fabricated spin by the campaigns to give a more honest, gut-level view of the debate.
I did not detect any major flubs. The candidates were there normal, unspun, unfiltered selves. Kerry: polished but occasionally robotic. Bush: home-spun, but occasionally halting.
Kerry’s responses sometimes seemed to trip over domestic soundbites. He threw out the “outsourcing” line regarding the Afghan warlords on a couple of occasions and had several health care/tax cut rabbit trails. Why? Doesn’t he have more positive things to say about his foreign policy agenda? These soundbites were a distraction that did not do anything to address his image as a flip flopper….an image Bush repeatedly reinforced tonight. Over and over again, the President hammered the theme that the War on Terror and War in Iraq needs certainty from the US and not limp-wristed “wrong war, wrong place, wrong time” squishiness.
That’s not to say that Senator Kerry did not expose some Bush weaknesses. The best line Kerry had was in response to the question about his specifics of US withdrawl from Iraq. He said “you don’t back off in Fallujah”. Here is a Bush weakness: Team Bush has been too weak in Iraq in the past. Not forcefully quelling insurgency in Fallujah last spring is causing some of the problems now. Kerry has a point here. Unfortunately for him, he and his supporters are such peaceniks at heart, they can’t press this attack to any meaningful advantage.
But Bush did press some key points to his advantage:
- When Kerry complained that terrorists were now flooding into Iraq, Bush ably noted that fact makes Iraq central to the War on Terror. Thus, the airheaded frat-boy highlighted that Kerry not only made his argument for him, but also flip-flopped yet again, as Kerry earlier indicated that Iraq was not part of the War on Terror.
- Another powerful statement by Bush is that fighting the terrorists in Iraq means there’s less probability we’ll have to fight them here. World events continue to work against Kerry on this point. Just today, 35 children ….children!…were killed by terrorist bombs in Iraq. Can Kerry be as effective at preventing these atrocities on mainland USA as Bush has been?
- Once again, Bush listed the many positions Kerry’s had on the authorization for the war, support of the war…usually after Kerry set the table for him!
- Kerry: Our soldiers don’t have enough body armor
- Bush: But you voted against the $87B for it to pay for it
- Bush seemed to show true emotion and compassion in response to the question about whether Iraq war was worth the cost of the lives it has taken. The President’s story about Missy Johnson in North Carolina was moving and convincingly delivered. But it also stealthily conveyed other key Bush points: Hussein was a threat, our mission is noble, and we must spread freedom. Kerry by contrast, seemed aloof in response to this question.
Red herrings…
- The skinny on “alliances”: The sad fact is that there just are not very many Western democracies that can field a numerically significant, effective, overseas fighting force. What we have now is probably all we’re going to get for quite some time, no matter who is president.
- Russian nuke material: Who has the best plan for corralling Russian nuclear material is a bit of a red hearing because….the Russians might have some say in the matter! With Putin reverting to his KGB habits, just how much openness and co-operation can we expect?
Predicting the spin
Kerry did not do much to change his nuanced, Euro-appeasing, flip-flopping image under Bush’s whithering, mechanical recitation of the certainty theme. Bush did not blow up or obviously bomb. Thus, the post-debate spin will probably follow the current trajectory of the campaign messaging, which is currently favorable to the President. Advantage: Bush.
