Debates will be a huge impact and be the turning point

[Blue_Roses]

that's why Bush doesn't want the 3rd one. He can't handle being in front of everyday people asking him tough questions. He knows he will look like the incompetent president that he is. Kerry really won't have to say much 'cause Bush will ruin it for himself as soon as he's asked a question. We really need to push for the town hall forum 'cause that is the one where Bush's true colors will be revealed to any undecideds.

[kentuck]

1. It sounds so desperate to put so much stock on the debates....

As if, that is the last straw... I don't think we should be minimizing the rest of the campaign...

[Blue_Roses]

4. desperate as to what?

people running around now saying Kerry is a wimp and this campaign is doomed? The momentum needs to change. Bush is riding on a wave of negative Kerry criticism. It's working and people are falling for it hook, line, and sinker. Right out of the Karl Rove strategy book: when you have an incompetent candidate, push the negative about the other candidate.

Kerry is doing his part. People aren't listening. They are too busy looking at the polls screaming "the sky is falling" and this smells of desperation. I'm sick of people saying Kerry isn't doing his part.

I watched his 1971 testimony in front of congress last night and at 27 years old he was awesome! I saw an "eye of the tiger" in him that resonates today. Sure time has smoothed out the rough edges, but it's clear, he's good at closing the deal.

The debates have always been my favorite part of the election and this year proves to be an especially good one.:)

[Raya]

8. Debates are "negotiated." Unless the race is even debates won't help.

[Gyre]

15. Couldn't agree more.

Don't get too excited. These are likely to get completely eviscerated of any real spontaneous questioning. In a perfect world, they would be dispositive on this race, but not this time I fear.

Gyre

[malachibk]

2. Yeah, right.

"Bush really stayed on message whereas Kerry came across as condescending -- you know, with all those facts. I think Bush clearly came out on top -- the American people respond really well to a leader who strongly supports a position. Kerry just seems incapable of seeing only one side of an issue."

-- any cable newscaster, October 1st, 2004

We'll see how accurate my ESP is in a few weeks.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

3. True! The same response will be given by.....

Every "Pundit" that is. Their "responses" will be sent from the White House (Rove) so that the mediawhores know exactly what to say.

[Blue_Roses]

5. well then, let's just pack it and go home now

fuck it...it's not worth trying...:eyes: geezeee...give me a fucking break. :argh:

[CANDO]

6. They did it to Gore and.........

what makes any of us think they won't do it to Kerry this time? These debates are all about the expectations going in. We all thought conventionally that Gore and Kerry are much smarter and quicker on their feet and better able to handle any scenario. What ends up happening is that Dubya uses his self deprecating humor to come across as any old regular guy and that plays out perfectly to show that the other guy is an obnoxious know-it-all and the next morning we all know how it ends up. I hate to put so much stock in these debates because of the expectations game.

[Blue_Roses]

10. this time the stakes are much higher

than in 2000. people are angry and aren't in the mood to be "toyed" with by smirking chimp.

[AmerDem]

7. you know Rove is worried when he brings in James Baker

To beat back the third debate where everday people ask questions. Even if Kerry and his people ( Vernon Jordan ) are able to get shrub into the debate with common folk don't take it as a good thing. As of now Gallup of all people will be the ones to decide who "likely voters" are and all question will be submitted before the debate and Gallup will choose the ones to use. They say to "avoid repeat questions".

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see past Gallup polling favoring shrub. Their numbers are always over the top compared to most other polls.

The fix will be in!

[Blue_Roses]

9. I've missed the "James Baker" story.

what is this about?

[AmerDem]

12. simple

James Baker is the one heading the "team" of negotiators to have the style and substance of the debates reflect what they feel are best for shrub. As of now they want 1 of the already scheduled debates removed. That would be the one where everyday people get to ask the question. They also want the other 2 debates to be sit down (round table style) because they feel he does best in this situation.

Kerry has said from the beginning he accepts the debate schedule as it is, 3 presidential debates 1 vice presidential debate.

[bushwakker]

11. one of the reasons why i think it's important to flog the awol story

is that it could be devastating to bush to have this out on the table during debate. on the trail he can ignore it - but if it comes up in debate he'll look bad, because the truth is bad. the subject of kerry's service will now ceertainly come up - but that doesn't hurt bush. he'll just say he honors kerry's service while reaping the benefit of the sbl's attacks. if a debate question comes up and it relates to BOTH of their military records it has the potential to be very helpful to jk.

[Dob Bole]

13. Do people pay attention to pundits? They did it to Gore, and Gore won!

I think that people only listen to pundits that they already listen to. I could be wrong, but I think people will be paying more attention to the candidates themselves instead of what the pundits say afterwards.

And Kerry has been in the Senate for a long time, so we don't have to worry about him getting nervous and throwing up or anything.

[hansolsen]

14. Kerry must have a better answer to what would he do differently in Iraq.

His mantra about bringing in more International help rings hollow because it is so implausible.

Here is what I want him to say.

QUOTE
Fellow citizens, hear me: I served in Vietnam and experienced the combat of war. I saw people killed and I killed enemy soldiers. I learned some things from that experience that will profoundly effect the orders I will issue as Commander and Chief. I will keep our soldiers safe from the folly of war. I will not send them on combat missions with no clear objective. I will not send them into battle where they cannot tell friend from foe. I will not ask them to fight for people who will not fight for themselves. I will never send American soldiers on a combat mission with rules of engagement where they cannot fire unless fired upon. I will never ask young soldiers to risk their lives because old men in high places cannot admit their mistakes.

I will go to Baghdad myself and I will meet with the leaders of the Iraqi insurgency. I will end this war on Iraq. I will not fire another shot in that war. I will hold an immediate national referendum in Iraq to determine if the Iraqi people want us to stay. If the people of Iraq want us out of there, I will bring the troops home. If a clear majority of Iraqis want us to stay, I will demand they stand along side American troops and prove it. If they refuse or shirk that duty, I will still bring our troops home. If they want us to stay and will stand with us, I will keep American forces there as true peace keepers.

I believe that God helps those who help themselves, and so do I. That principle will guide my policy in iraq. Please give me your vote and your confidence. Please trust that what I learned in the rice fields of South Vietnam is relevant to what must be done now. I ask for your trust. Quote.

Fellow bloggers: Will this mesage resonate?