Post-debate: Advantage Blue

So the media stories are underway, led by the all-Republican-plus wayward son of a Republican President panel at MSNBC, and the headline is: Bush Comeback!

Surprise surprise!

It's amazing how the psychology of this works. Looking at Bush's performance you could reasonably describe it as forceful, aggressive, pertinent, or as loud, shrill and emptily repetitive. But because you did the negative story last week, well...

The talking heads pretty well agreed that the debate was a draw, as do some pro-Kerry bloggers. We disagree. In the coming days probably, but certainly by election day, it will become obvious how badly Bush lost this debate because he did not appear presidential, and Kerry did. Kerry was direct, empathetic, he didn't talk down to the audience, and though at times he was quite sharp and direct in his criticism, he ended up giving due deference to the president, yet making a case for why he would be a smart, confident and effective President.

Bush looked like a guy trying to save his job running a little Texas oil company that is going broke.

Bush was more coherent in his answers than last time, and it does seem true that the debate itself was remarkably substantive, owing chiefly to the intelligence and relevance of the questions by citizens in the audience. Bush probably heartened those supporting him who got wobbly because of his last debate performance, particularly with his 'doing things that are unpopular, because they are right,' which is an admirable sentiment, except he is so wrong about the right part.

At times he gave the illusion of being in command of facts, although the facts he listed were often bizarre, as his list of environmental accomplishments. He brought up the Dred Scott decision, pretty strange in itself, and spoke weirdly and inaccurately about it, which won't win him many black votes.

But his tone was aggressive to the point of being unhinged. Those neocon commentators loved his 'fight' when he ignored the moderator and spoke right through him, but swing voters are only going to be alarmed by such uncontrolled behavior.

Kerry made progress on explaining his analysis of the problems and the solutions he proposes. He made progress in refuting the flip-flop charge and in showing the confidence and strength to defend the country. He related more directly to the audience and the people asking questions. He remembered one questioner's name long after there had been several intervening questions, and referred back to her question. He gave his examples in terms of Missouri (where the debate was held) including the stunning observation that if Missouri were a separate country, the number of troops it is sending to Iraq would make it the third largest coalition partner.

Kerry won because the bad news this week---whether or not he dwelt on it---adds further doubt in the minds of voters that Bush is going to be a successful second term president, and Kerry continue to give voters reason to be comfortable with him as the alternative, as someone who will be a better President.

As for the media, we heard few insightful observations and turned it off. The Washington Week bunch---the PBS guardians of the CW---were just as bad as the rest. While they insulted the intelligence of voters by repeating that Kerry's answers were too nuanced, at least one of them proved he was too stupid to understand the answer by getting it wrong (and being indirectly corrected by a female fellow panelist.) It wasn't particularly difficult to understand: Kerry said he voted against the partial birth amendment because it had no provision for allowing these rare abortions to save the mother's life. Too nuanced? Get real.

The current drip drip of bad news may well be pushing the electorate in the direction of getting real. They may well be looking for someone with solutions, and someone who offers a fresh start.

Speaking of which we should announce our bias, since several of the tactics we suggested in this column and to the Kerry campaign via their website were specifically employed. But Kerry's success tonight was due to his successfully blunting the Bush attack, offering detail in his answers, relating to the voters in the hall and at home, and in continuing to appear presidential. Bush's one-note petulance continued to diminish him, despite the media relief at finding some justification for their pre-scripted headline.