Debate Prep 3

The third debate will be the last time that either candidate has a substantial audience of voters. The last three weeks of the campaign will be dominated by TV ads and on-the-ground campaigning in the battleground states, but nationally by news stories and images. It is a dangerous period for John Kerry because of the Bush campaign of shameless lies, which he will not have the opportunity to answer that the debates afford him.

Most polls now indicate that Kerry won the second debate as well as the first, but this is no time for complacency. Kerry has to make a final and lasting impression, powerful enough to overcome the relentless distortions of an incumbent president whose approval rating is so low that he can't talk about his accomplishments and must concentrate on bashing his opponent with tried and true tags of tax and spend liberal.

Kerry has to be crisp direct and powerful. Some of his answers in the second debate that talking heads have criticized, were good responses in the situation---he connected with the citizens asking the question. But in the same format as the first debate, Kerry has to be laser-sharp.

What Kerry can do in this debate is take his argument to the final step. He has established that Bush has made bad decisions leading to catastrophes abroad and at home, affecting voters and their families. Now he must hammer away with the idea that Bush will continue to make bad decisions in a second term, because he won't change. He won't admit mistakes, he defends all these wrong choices.

Not only does this close the basic argument-Bush is out of touch, makes wrong choices, is stubborn, is in denial, etc.---but it speaks directly to a major Bush vulnerability. Even his supporters are among the large majority who tell pollsters that Bush must make major changes in a second term. They're dreaming. Kerry should point to Bush and say, he's not going to change. It's going to be four more years of the same. He's telling you that himself.

He can list Bush's disasters and ask, do we really want four more years of this?

Kerry can also inoculate himself a bit against the last 3 weeks of attacks by "complimenting" the Bush campaign on its shameless use of distortion and hot-button issues, and saying: they are very good at public relations. They are very bad at telling the truth. They are very good at selling. They are very bad at delivering what they promise. They're good at making slick commercials, and very bad at making good decisions for America.

Kerry has to be prepared on taxes, health care plans and costs, and there's little doubt that he'll bring up stem cell research to honor his friend, Christopher Reeve. On economic issues, he's got a succinct briefing courtesy of Paul Krugman's new column.

The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Columnist: Checking the Facts, in Advance

The media storyline is to tantalize viewers with the prospect of "a knockout punch" in the third debate. The virtue of having given the "Bush comeback" storyline to the second debate is that it isn't available for the third. But expectations for Kerry in this debate will be very high, and so we can expect the predominately conservative pundits to say he didn't measure up to them. Our guess is that the media will say that the third debate was a draw, because that's the storyline that generates interest in following the rest of the campaign. In the conscious or unconscious struggle for audience, the media won't say the race is over. People might stop watching. They are more likely to suggest a momentum shift in Bush's direction because it's a better story than momentum continuing for Kerry.

The second debate was watched by some 47 million---not the more than 60 million that saw the first one, but a 25% larger audience than watched the second debate in 2000. The audience for the third debate may say a lot about how decided or undecided the electorate still is. Fewer viewers in a year of high interest would indicate more people have made up their minds. Friday's audience may have been suppressed by the fact that it was Friday. The audience for this debate should be higher, if interest remains strong.

This is not a time for Kerry complacency. He may have won the second debate, but it clearly energized Bush. He's much sharper and more engaged on the campaign trail. The national polls and the battleground state polls so far have not moved decisively against him. His job approval is 47%, and most re-elected incumbents had job approval of over 60%. So he's vulnerable, but he's definitely not toast yet. If Bush can control himself in the third debate and not let Kerry get to him, if he appears more presidential than he did in the first two debates (and he was better in the domestic issues second half of the second debate), he's going to come out of this with more confidence.

At the same time, Kerry is also getting better on the trail, with sharper lines in his speeches, and better delivery of them. Some of those injected into this debate can provide new soundbites that probably more people will see than will see the debate itself.

Finally, this debate is Kerry's opportunity to emphasize the "fresh start" theme that can reach voters who are troubled by Bush but not comfortable with "rejecting" the President in a time of war. A fresh start is a positive, a vote for something that still implies a change. It's a line that has begun to appear in Kerry and DNC ads as well as in Kerry and Edwards speeches. If it becomes a major theme in ads for the rest of the campaign, it should be a major part of Kerry's summation at the debate.