In case you missed the 2nd presidential debate held between John Kerry and George W. Bush last night in St. Louis, here’s a handy summary:
George W. Bush:
- A leader must send a clear message to allies and enemies.
- My opponent is a tax-and-spend liberal.
- My opponent’s Senate career is lackluster.
- I don’t know what the Dred Scott decision was about.
- Do you want to buy some wood?
John Kerry:
- Bush lied!
- He went to war without a plan to win the peace.
- The real terrorists are in Afghanistan.
- I have a plan.
- What do labels mean, anyway?
My take: a draw? possible slight advantage either way?
I found this one very difficult to call. The format of the debate was peculiar. It was rather as though someone had taken a townhall meeting and had it bronzed. The pseudo-townhall format was surprisingly well-suited to Bush. I can’t say he was at ease but he did give a strong performance. Kerry also gave a strong performance but seemed less articulate as the evening wore on.
I admit to tone deafness on the paralinguistic features of the debate but I don’t see how anyone can construe this debate as a solid victory for either Bush or Kerry although that’s what the true believers on either side of the aisle e.g. Atrios and Hugh Hewitt are doing.
Bush’s performance was better than at the last debate and that should stiffen the spines of some of his base. I’d say neither of the candidates did themselves any real harm last night.
We continue to see a campaign strategy emerging for the Bush/Cheney campaign. Bush was able to keep Kerry’s “global test” gaffe in the air for a while longer; he introduced Kerry’s Senate record into the discussion for essentially the first time; and he painted Kerry as a tax-and-spend liberal. Kerry employed an approach in this debate similar to the phlegmatic approach that Edwards used in the vice-presidential debate—get back onto your stump speech as quickly as possible. Does Kerry have a campaign strategy?
UPDATE: Scott Ott has more on Mr. Kerry’s plans.
UPDATE: Joe Gandelman of The Moderate Voice gives his typically fantastic, balanced roundup of opinions around the blogosphere on the debate. Joe’s roundup supports my contention that this debate was a weathervane: Bush supporters (or leaners) thought Bush won, Kerry supporters (or leaners) thought Kerry won, the rest of us thought it was too close to call.
