Will * pull out of last debate?

[goodwalt]

Judging by the 2nd debate commentary in the media and on-line polls, two things appear to be clearly settled- Bush's performance improved dramatically in the second debate, and that in spite of that improvement, Kerry still emerged as the winner. So what is the upshot?
My theory is based on my perception of Karl Rove as an entirely unscrupulous, and entirely competent political handler. I strongly suspect the Bush campaign is doing some furious internal polling to see if W's new "mad dog" debate persona actually improved his re-election numbers. If the answer is "No Improvement" (and I suspect that IS the answer), then Wednesday's debate presents them with a no-win situation. Bush CAN NOT WIN a debate on his domestic record. If they conclude that volume and bluster won't preserve even the ILLUSION of parity in the last debate, the better tactical move would be to opt out.
With W's "improved" debate performance, they can at least spin that he now has "momentum" in the debates. IF they intend to opt out, they will want to lay the groundwork for their excuse. IF they intend to opt out, we can expect to see an explosion of talking head surrogates complaining about debate rules violations and that the questions themselves have been unfairly biased.
I posted on this theory last week, and was generally dunned as a nutty conspiracy theorist at best- freeper at worst. I SINCERELY hope that I am wrong, and that W shows up for his public ass-whipping next Wednesday; but if the volume of Repug complaining about debate "fairness" suddenly spikes, we all need to buckle up for a ride on the "Media-spin Cyclone".

[lil-petunia]

1. 60-40 that he pulls out. some fake terrra-ist alert

or something along those lines.

It's hard work, after all.

[PurityOfEssence]

2. Pssst...he thinks he won

They's no reality in this reality show.

[ThoughtCriminal]

3. If he does, he might as well use the time

to write a concession speech.

[realFedUp]

4. I'd say yes

This administration has no apologies for doing
anything they do....Bush isn't being helped
by these and his handlers must realize that
a third debate will entirely focus media attention
on how Bush acts and says. Kerry can relax and
be funnier, more personable, more insightful
and not worry as much about the facts.

Bush has to really work to make a case for
his re-selection.

[Shadow30]

5. Well the thing is...

...the Bush people have to see that pulling out of the 3rd debate would be the end of Bush having a serious chance of winning the election.Yes Bush is out of it and has a poor hold on the reality of this situation but George's handlers might see the writing on the wall.The media spin matters but not as much as many think.The media have tried to spin every debate in favor of the Bush/Cheney ticket but the public doesn't buy it,enough people see threw the spin and make up there own minds as the polls show.The pro Bush Media have tried to give the whole thing to Bush but what they have is Bush losing the first two debates and Cheney getting a draw,walking away from the debates with such a dismal record would be a disaster.Kerry is getting the real boost from the second debate as the polls are just starting to reflect,Bush hasn't made any real gains.They have to see that Bush MUST win the 3rd debate.The media can whine about the debates being unfair but a good many will see Bush as a coward that ran away because he wasn't winning.He can sit in the white house, he can stand in front of supporter only crowds and take cheap shots at Kerry but this will just drive home the idea that Bush couldn't take the pressure and that he is a coward.Truth is regardless of what the media says Bush is in serious trouble right now.He isn't done yet I think we all know that but he is in a bad spot.

[goodwalt]

7. Which is worse?

That is the question facing Karl Rove this morning. The Bush campaign IS going to take a hit next Wednesday- the game now is damage control. If "Mad Dog" W didn't play well according to their internal polling, they have to see Wednesday's domestic debate as an impending train wreck. The forum will be less "mad dog" friendly with W chained behind the podium, and he will be on the defensive throughout.

So which would hurt their campaign worse- decisively LOSING the last debate, or a media-spin war over whether the debates were unfair, and whether W was right to pull out.

Repugs have made a science of spinning media bias, and are very good at it. They have NOT however, been successful in spinning the debates- because telling American's not to believe their lying eyes is a much tougher sell.
Once again, I hope I'm wrong- but I fear I'm not.

[tjwash]

9. "media-spin war over whether the debates were unfair"

They can't spin it. It was set up from the beginning with the "no direct questions" format, and the selection of questions and venues, to be nothing BUT Bush friendly, and, as S.O.P. for the chimp, he has managed to get everything handed to him, and screw the pooch on it.

PS. I did enjoy the part last night where Mr. "blame Bill Clinton for everything" said "I believe in accepting responsibility."

[seabeyond]

6. whine and smirk is all bush has

he did the smirk first debate and whine second debate. he has nothing else. i say he is going to go to the whine again.

hurts my ears, should hurt all mothers ears

[radfringe]

8. unless he gets "fed" the answers

the last debate will be of the same format as the first -- moderator asking questions not the audience

the focus will be on domestic issues -- given the job numbers, gas/fuel prices, and the daily roster of companies laying off/out sourcing -- bush has nothing to stand on

[Grillydad]

10. I agree with your assumptions, but

I disagree with your conclusions. With the magnificent momentum that future President John Kerry now enjoys, I think the President (actually, his handlers) will believe that he has nothing to lose and everything to gain by going out and name-calling, smirking, strutting like a beaten banty rooster and gereally being his most vile Bushiness. It's Kerry's office to lose and I don't think the Republicans will miss a chance (small it may be) to take their negative shot.

[tjwash]

11. How's that different than what he's done the last 2 debates?

nt

[goodwalt]

12. The Topic

The first debate was on foreign policy- W's best opportunity for calling Kerry a flip-flopper, and for wrapping himself in the flag- and he lost that one BAD. The forum for the second debate at least allowed him to look confident and aggressive by launching off of his stool for every answer- and the split issues still allowed for FF charges and talking a lot about "freedom". For the final installment he has the worst of everything- the forum that killed him in the first debate, and the FACT that he has abysmal economic, environmental and health care numbers to defend non-stop for 90 minutes. This could be the worst ass whipping in televised presidential debate history. Do they risk that? Or fall back on the familiar tactic of blaming the liberal media and accuse democrats of playing unfairly?

[lil-petunia]

13. if he does show, even on domestic issues, I predict

"How can you trust a guy who is for 84 millions then against 84 billions, at the same time? Of course he will raise your taxes, because Saddam is a clear threat and you are safer now. And with stem cells, my pro-life tactics mean that Afghanistanitans, those brave voting people now have control over all of Iraq. Which just shows you that my domestics work. Its hard work, but I choose good domestics. But it is serious business and I mean what i do and I say what it is. And don't forget, that my tax policy means that Korea is an axis. But your family is stronger and our economists are never growing like today.

"Just last week, I spoke to Herb Snowman, and he tole me how much my tax cut meant to him. honestly. It is hard work, and I unnerstand hard work. I work hard. Hard.

"Small business. Home ownership. Taxes. And that is the differences between President Kennedy and my plan. Sanctions, too."

[goodwalt]

15. If you aren't already, you should

be writing for "The Onion". Very funny- and frighteningly close to the sort of free association, nonsensical Bush-shit we might actual hear come out of the president's mouth on Wednesday. I sure hope I'm wrong- because I really, really want to watch the melt down. I suspect I'll know if my theory is full of shit by noon tomorrow. Between Meet the Press, Face The Nation and Chris Mathews, there should be plenty of Repug surrogates getting air time. To keep the public from experiencing political whip-lash, they will have to start the excuse machine IMMEDIATELY. If there is no concerted Repug whining about debate "bias" by noon tomorrow- then I have way over thought this. Hope I have. Hope they don't. Forewarned is fore-armed.

[lil-petunia]

16. Why, thank you!

I am deeply honored. Wish I did work for them.

Do you what hard work it is to write like that? It's hard. Hard work. sigh. Hard. I mean, it is hard work. Hard. Hard work. Really hard. :)

[snippy]

18. How in the world did you get a copy of Bush's closing statement for

the next debate. That has to be a verbatim transcript of the script Bush is memorizing right now. Outstanding work.

[Doosh]

14. nope, Bush needs it more than Kerry

[Silverhair]

17. Remember all the DUers who claimed that Bush would not be at any?

Prior to the debate, for months, lots of DUers posted that Bush would not debate at all. I said that he would be there.

Yes, he will show up Wednesday.

[TexasSissy]

19. Yes.