Don't worry about Bush winning any debates

[Doosh]

Kerry doesn't let an opponent off the mat, EVER. Look how he handled Bill Weld in 1996. Go back to the democratic primaries, once Kerry seized the momentum(as he has now) he kept John Edwards and Wesley Clark at bay, and those 2 are 100x the man George Bush is, Edwards was being hailed as the next John Kennedy with a stump speech that Carville claimed was the best ever, while Clark carried about 2 tons worth of foreign policy experience plus was handsome and likable himself. And they couldn't lay a glove on Kerry.

This is how he closes a race, Kerry grabs the momentum, takes a lead, and never looks back. There is nothing Bush can do in the debates anymore, this Friday will be an even uglier slaughter. If Weld, Edwards, and Clark couldn't beat this guy, what makes you think Dumya will? Even in town hall format, don't underestimate his ability to connect and loosen up a crowd. Who delivered the most memorable line of the democratic debates? It was Kerry, in town hall format.

"There are 2 ways to get cheap prescription drugs in this country, you can either hire Rush Limbaugh's housekeeper, or elect me president"

[graywarrior]

1. Yep, I remember the Weld debate

Kerry has killer instincts.

[annabanana]

2. I'm not even worried about Kerry winning the election...........

What I'm worried about is that we'll never know that Kerry won.

join:
http://www.votewatch.us/

and read this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=2441021&mesg_id=2441841

[pacalo]

3. I'm not worried at all.

The next presidential debate is of Kerry's choosing: the townhall meeting format, in which Kerry shines. This is the one the coWard didn't want.

And what's left to discuss? Domestic policy, which is as weak an area for the coWard as his foreign policy.

For Kerry, it's almost like going up against a special ed candidate.

[ollie3]

4. Lowering Expectations for Bush again?

Come on! Bush did not "win" any of the debates in 2000 on points. He only "won" because everyone called him an idiot, expected him to lose, so when he went through the debate in one piece, everyone thought he did better than expected, and he was declared the "winner". Don't "mis-underestimate" Bush. That's what he wants us to do! I think Bush this week looked like the USA Olympic Basketball Team--expected to win, over-confident, cocky, didn't bother to prepare, whupped. Expect Bush to be more on his game during the next two debates. I hope Kerry wins, but I don't expect Bush to be as lame as he was Thursday, and we are only helping him by predicting that he will.

[pacalo]

9. I see more of the same for the coWard. I believe his mind is fried &

he's not capable of clear articulation in spontaneous situations. I also think he's not capable of effective memorization, either. This man has to have a teleprompter or notes, & both of those aids aren't allowed in the debates. He's toast. :)

[Jade Fox]

5. Yes, and as long a Bush has to think on his feet....

he will never win a debate. The man just can't do it. Maybe he could
in the past, but those days are over.

[louis-t]

6. I've heard some great excuses

from the right for dumbya's poor performance. "he was tired, he was shook up from seeing all of the hurricane damage that day," C'mon, his meds were off. Er, did I say that?

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

7. And the better Cheney does and the more he appears in command

of the facts in his debate, the more it will look like it is Cheney who is the real President and running things instead of the hapless Bush. No matter whether Cheney does well or not, it will put more pressure on Bush in his next debate against Kerry. This is a no-win for Bush/Cheney. If Cheney screws up against Edwards, they lose. If Cheney does well, Bush looks bad by contrast and only reinforces the fact that Bush needs to sit on Cheney's lap to be able to do or say anything.

[arewenotdemo]

8. Why his handlers ever let him debate Kerry in the first place

is the real mystery to me. In 2000 he didn't have anything to defend but his record as the Death Penalty King. And in 'Murica that don't need no 'splainin. This time around he had plenty to defend and Kerry executed him.

Even the best MediaWhores couldn't spin that.

[Jane Austin]

10. Like everyone else, I was a little aprehensive before the debate Thursday.

As I dried my hands in the kitchen before heading into the bedroom to watch the debate, a very clear thought came to me:

How could Bush beat ANYBODY in a debate now? The economy is a shambles, Iraq is a mess, Afghanistan is a mess, the military is stretched thin and demoralized, civil rights are being dismantled, the environment is being assaulted, health and insurance costs are soaring, and more.

Bush would have to be on the defensive on every subject.

Kerry did his part superbly by conducting himself perfectly and by pretty much ignoring every bait that Bush put out there to try to hook him, and it went without saying that he had the superior intellect and grasp of the issues.

So I have to say I had more confidence as we turned on the TV than I had had prior to that.

I think we can have that confidence in the other debates, too.

Bush can only get away with his BS when he has no one around to challenge him.

[indef]

13. Bush will have Kerry AND the undecideds

to challenge him in the second debate. Could it be that the audience may gang up on him in front of a national audience?

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[helpisontheway]

12. Something I noticed on the Capital Gang

is that Melman looked sick when one of the panelists said it was a big mistake for Bush/Cheney to have the timed light thing on the podium. They said that HELPED Kerry keep it short and concise. I hope they have that timed thing for the town hall and the final debate too! Anyway, when the person said that Melman looked ill (like he knew it was a mistake).