"Bush has never lost a debate"

[Jack_Dawson]

Is anyone else uncomfortable with the DNC's coordinated "bar raising" this week? Personally I don't know what the pundits were watching, but I thought Bush got trounced in 2000. Doesn't this "Bush has never lost" nonsense validate the talking heads?

[politicat]

1. I've been wondering about that.... Were they watching the same debates I

was?

I thought the snivelling shit dropped through the floor...

Have been wondering what the hell was wrong with DUers too who were parrotting that phrase.....

Pcat

[seabeyond]

2. nevaAH has he lost a debate...........he is godlike in his lightening

responses to any question given. total abreast of what is happening in administration, the nation and the world

damn good thing this isnt really a debate, huh

[BootinUp]

6. LOL n/t

[kixot]

3. I've heard that before too.

I have no idea what debates these people have been watching. He practically LOST HIS SHIT in two of the Gore debates and though I never got to watch him up against Ann RIchards I'm willing to bet the farm she handed him his hat along with his ass since she's such a Lady.

[Kierkegaard]

4. I think it again assumes that people are really stupid.

If you're stupid enough to be influenced by the 'bar raising' hype, you are too stupid to know who is winning.

This could actually be counter-productive. Imagine that the stupid voter this ploy targets might just believe Scrub won just because he/she heard over and over again how he 'never lost a debate.'

[Lefty48197]

5. Bush is a master debater

Don't misunderestimate him.

[Goldmund]

7. No point in ignoring the obvious.

And the obvious is, in this case, the genius of Bush's rhetorical acrobatics.

[olddem43]

10. Bush's vast knowledge and depth of thought will be apparent.

He is so quick on his feet. I can't wait to see him in action.

[Goldmund]

13. Indeed.

I will be wearing goggles for protection.

[Parche]

8. debates

You cant lose debates that you dont have...
how many debates has bush been in?

[eurolefty]

9. Bush won the debates in 2000

He sucks as a president, but he is good at debates. Bob Boudelang and all of his friends can relate to Bush, he is just like them. That's Bush's strategery and he is really good at it. Being intelligent is not as important as some Democrats seem to think.

[MaryH]

11. Yes, but I think he has changed since then

Everytime he is on his own he just stumbles and falls all over his own feet. But, I have read that at one time he was a good speaker - he surely isn't now.

I think he comes across badly on the campaign trail - he is so sarcastic - uses not funny mockery. And doesn't seem to say all that much.

But people there (all hand picked) just seem to love him.

[eurolefty]

12. I don't know

I really don't know what the public reaction to Dubya will be this time. But stumbling can be "cute", too. Seriously.

I live in Finland right now, and the former (left-wing) prime minister of this country was even worse than Dubya in public speaking! Not stupid, but just really really bad at public speaking. Because of this, overwhelming majority of female voters thought he was really "cute". Personally I don't understand it, but some people think that it makes you likeable if you stumble...

[eurolefty]

14. and another thing...

If Bush really screws up in the debates and Democrats criticize him, Democrats will look mean. It looks like picking on a (mentally) disabled person.

[Jack_Dawson]

15. But attacking a war hero is cool...

Fucking Pukes get to have it both ways?

[WoodyD]

16. In 2000

I thought Gore wiped the floor with Dubya, only to listen to pundits and "average voters" say that the smirking chimp had done a great job. WTF? Were you guys watching the same debates? I thought he came across as a moron (not to mention a liar -- "I support patients' rights." If by support you mean veto a patient rights bill. "I support a clean envirionment" if by support you mean gut environmental regulations. And on and on.)

But facts or truth don't seem to have much to do with the perceived outcome. The average voter doesn't know the chimp is lying and the average pundit either doesn't know or won't call him on it. It comes down to who's wearing a nice tie and who seems like a "nice" guy. Not too smart, cause you can't trust the reins of government to some smarty-pants who uses big words.

So it's not so much about having good policies or good answers. A lot of it comes down to making a connection with the voters. Clinton was a master at it. Gore wasn't. Dubya can manage when he has scripted answers to questions provided in advance but can't come up with his own name off-script.

I'd LOVE to see the candidates in an unscripted forum where real people could ask real questions. Kerry can think on his feet and he knows his shit. Dubya would go down in flames.

[Minimus]

17. they had samed debate coach at Yale

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/27/politics/campaign/27letter.html?th

Debate Preparation Began With a Professor at Yale

It turns out that Mr. Bush and Mr. Kerry, two years apart in New Haven, shared the same oratory teacher and debate coach, Rollin G. Osterweis. Their training in speaking and thinking under Professor Osterweis influenced the kind of candidates they became, ...


...Mr. Kerry, as is well known, went one step further and became a star on the Yale debate team, with Professor Osterweis as coach.


So what will happen Thursday? As James Fallows wrote in a recent article in The Atlantic Monthly, Mr. Bush will get high marks for personality and Mr. Kerry for substance, but the spectacle will amount to "asymmetric warfare" between two wildly dissimilar candidates, neither of whom has ever lost a debate.

[Jack_Dawson]

18. But...Bush still got his ass kicked, no?