Watched the debates in a packed room in Ann Arbor last night. I had a couple pints of Old Style in me, so take this with a pretzel, but I feel it's pretty strong.
I was very surprised by the debates. This is not what I expected. As you can read below, I was pretty pessimistic about the format, and fearful that Kerry would eat it on style. I was wrong on both counts. The format kept things focused -- no interruptions -- and against all odds, Bush fell flat on his face in the style contest. Make no mistake; this debate will alter the dynamics of the race. It will demoralize Republicans and energize Democrats. It should also bring some independents and progressives into the Kerry camp.
Substance
Look at what the candidates repeated. Bush repeatedly talked about "what kind of message" his un-election would send. "Don't send mixed messages" he repeated. The only remotely positive statements that Bush pushed were, "it's hard work" (though this seems more like aqn ill advised excuse, considering that Bush has spent 27% of his time in office out of the office) and "we're gonna win," though he didn't explain how.
Kerry emphasized a "fresh start, with new credibility." He didn't repeat these key words as often as Bush hit his talking points, but those were clearly the words he wants to emphasize. He also had a devistating attack in the "we didn't use the best trained troops in the world to go after Osama; we outsourced that job to Afghan warlords, and bin Laden escaped." It only came up twice, but it's the kind of line that works like a serious political shank to the kidney. You only need to land it once and then stand back while your opponent bleeds out.
Beyond the Talking Points
The president at one point asserted "I know how the world works" but he displayed the confusion evident in his administration. The room I was in erupted when he verbally mixed up Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden, but the far more telling moment was when talking about the war in Iraq he said, "we were attacked. We had to respond."
To his credit, Kerry called Bush out on this. I thought it was the most poignant moment in the debate, because this is exactly how many Americans look at the situation, and that Kerry was able to point out the flaw may resonate.
The other big things that jumped out at me were Kerry's insistence that the US should have no long-term designs on Iraq -- calling out the 14 "long-life" bases that are under construction -- and that bringing in the international community will mean ending the profiteering deals the Pentagon made with corporations like Halliburton and Bechtel.
Those are strong statements. He's certainly not saying "bring the troops home now" he is talking about the steps that need to happen for the winning of the peace in Iraq to become an international project, which is the only way it will ever succeed.
Conclusion
Kerry won this debate. Most surprisingly, he won on style as well as substance. He seemed calm, assured, assertive without being menacing or aggressive. Bush on the other hand took too many long pauses, seemed hunched, pinched, uncomfortable, even snippy at points. Kerry looked like somebody who knows what he's doing, whereas Bush looked like he'd rather be anywhere else. The effects will take a couple of days to set in, but I would expect the polls to reflect some kind of shift by mid next week.
Bush's reliance on talking points made him sound repetative. In an election which most people are giving half an ear to (e.g. vs Gore), this might work -- the repetition gets something across -- but in these serious times when bars and living rooms are packed with people paying close attention, the inability of Bush to project substence makes him sound childish, which can hurt him badly.
In fact, Bush really has very little to run on. The entire subtext of the Bush re-election effort is a negative message, that (as the team leader email said), John Kerry has a record of wavering in the face of real challenges. And we can't have that. No sir. I don't know what "record" that's based on, but Kerry took a lot of the wobble out of his image last night by clarifying his reasons for authorizing force and then calling Iraq the "wrong war at the wrong place at the wrong time," which essentially comes down to the fact that Bush promised one kind of action -- careful planning, international partnerships, war as a last resort -- and delivered almost the exact opposite.
People are interested in making a change. If Kerry's task, as the story goes, is somewhat akin to getting hired by the American public, he just gave a great first interview.
