Here's a wild thought -- maybe substance will count most in the debates?

[LawDem]

I understand that Kerry is no Bill Clinton. But he’s a smart experienced leader who knows his stuff. And the substance of the issues break overwhelmingly in his favor. Iraq may well have been the greatest foreign policy blunder in American history. The tax cuts and resulting explosion of the national debt must come close to being one of the biggest domestic blunders in American history. Do we perhaps see a trend here?

The man -- Bush -- truly has the reverse Midas touch: Everything he touches turns to shit.

The problem, as everyone here knows, is that the campaign isn’t being fought over the real issues. Instead, in Will Pitt’s words, so far this has been the stupidest campaign in memory. Screw the issues. Let’s talk about Swift Boat Liars, Inc. and Dan Rather.

And I don’t buy into the theory that it’s mostly Kerry’s fault. He’s trying to talk issues. But the press is ignoring them. The corporate media filter is stopping him cold.

And that’s where the debates come in. Aside from the guy asking the questions, there will be no filter there -- just John Kerry speaking directly to a huge audience of voters. True, Kerry isn’t a loveable teddy bear. He’s not the proverbial guy you’d want to have the proverbial beer with. But just maybe, in this election that’s not what matters the most. Just maybe, what matters most is for Kerry to keep hammering down the facts, the facts and nothing but the facts.

The facts -- Bush has lost over 1 million jobs, the worst job of any president in modern history. The facts -- the new jobs that are being created pay less than the old ones lost. The facts -- Bush’s tax cuts dramatically shifted the tax burden away from the top 1 percent and directly onto the backs of the middle class. The facts -- unless things change, the dream of every generation of Americans doing a little better than their parents generation did will be dead and buried for generations to come. The facts -- Bush started the wrong war, at the wrong time, against the wrong enemy and for the wrong ever shifting collection of reasons. The facts -- Bush has done virtually nothing to increase the quality of homeland security and we remain at least as vulnerable to attack today as we were on Sept, 11.

What the hell do I know, but . . . if you ask me, the Kerry campaign shouldn’t waste a lot to time trying to give the candidate a more pleasing "form." This is an election to win on substance.

[gratuitous]

1. Bwahahahaha!

Good one! "Substance." Bwahahahaha!

Slightly more seriously, there's another thread that says we should be ready for all the pundits to fall all over themselves praising Chimpy's performance. I think that's a lot closer to what will happen.

[tjdee]

2. And may I add BWAHAHAHAHAHA!

Ah... substance. *Oh* the tears in my eyes.

I remember during the town hall meeting last time that Bush didn't even know what Affirmative Action was. "If it's quotas, I'm agin' it," he said. Al Gore was like, uh, it's not dumbass.

And look where the dumbass is now. They so don't care about substance.

[LawDem]

4. At the risk of setting myself up more more ridicule . . .

I make a living as a trial lawyer trying complex technical cases. I've got to tell you, lay juries, made up of the same sort of folks who vote, do a lot better than you might think understanding the complexities of the cases. It has also been my experience that when you respect the jury's intelligence in the way you present your case, it tends to increase the intelligence of the way they decide the case.

[tjdee]

9. Oh, you're a lot smarter than me.

I'm very cynical, that's all. :)
I thought the way you did in 2000. But after the whole debacle went down, I lost the faith.

The big difference between what you do for a living and presidential (and other?) politics is that a jury doesn't have to see you through a filter. When a lawyer argues a case, they have direct contact. When we see Kerry/Bush, we have already been told/know they're liars/"flip floppers" etc.

I'm quite tired now--does that make sense?

[babylonsister]

3. Thanks for your optimism.

It wouldn't hurt if there was a bit more optimism around here! And would be great, as someone else said on here recently, if Kerry can blow the pundits out of the water with his intellectual views AND ability to express himself. That's GOT to be a marked contrast...

[BillZBubb]

5. I think there is only a slight chance of that being the case.

One thing I would like Kerry to do, though, is to start off with some self-deprecating humor about his "wordiness". He could combine that with an expression of optimism about the intelligence of the voters and his confidence that they will bear with him and hear what he has to say. "It may take me a while to get there, but it will be worth the wait!".

If he doesn't do something like this, he's in for a rough go from the media.

[cheshire]

7. Yeah he could say, " I hope I don't talk over *'s head." LOL

Or correct me if I talk down to you.

[ohio_dem_52186]

8. I agree

A lot of people I've talked to just don't relate to Kerry the way they unfortunately do to Bush. Bush puts on the drunk-next-door kind of personna. Kerry is a bit of a "statesman".

A lot of people just relate to the "common" act that Bush puts out.

[cheshire]

6. While what you say is true, truth is not the way the world runs. We are

jaded for a very good reason. I would like to see substance count but it's been long gone for some time now. I still pray. I think we have as much chance with a smack down as we do getting thru to some folks.