Is it time for a debate between Bush and Kerry ?

Normally, the incumbent does not get too involved in campaigns this far from the election. However, Mr Bush has decided to go negative with his truckload of money. He's finally breaking down and spending a few of those millions he has been hoarding.

And, as Karl Rove said, their plan is to define John Kerry over the next 90 days, and they plan to do it in a very nagative manner. John Kerry deserves the right to defend himself. Since he does not have the money to compete with the Bush negative ads, his only option is to call for head-to-head debates. Let them answer to the American people. Mr Kerry should call for debates immediately.

Mr Kerry should call for debates every day until Mr Bush agrees or until he withdraws his negative ads. The people deserve to hear from Mr Bush in person - not in a lying television ad. The people deserve better...or perhaps not?

Everyone on the Bush team has to know that their guy can't win a debate with a stuffed animal, let alone someone with the ammuntion to destroy every point they are running on.

I expect Team Bush to play some sort of "We can't debate because we're fighting terror" card.

last time?

No way Bush will debate Gore -- he'll avoid it somehow.

How about when he was going against Governor Richards? Did you assume he'd avoid debating her too?

Since Bush had no reason to dodge debating in 2000. He didn't have 3 years of death and destruction to avoid discussing.

Also I don't live in Texas so I have no idea about their debates.

Thanks for playing, though.

and I just think it's weird that in every race Bush runs, people say he will hide from debating, and he's debated in every race he's ever run. I wonder if he didn't duck Anne Richards or Al Gore, why would people think he'll duck John Kerry?

All it does is drive down his expectations when people say he'll duck the debates. It just makes his job easier.

Gore lost the debates by coming off like a boring robot, I can't fathom Ann did the same thing.

How many debates has Bush been in as an incumbent? It's easy to debate when you have no record to defend.

Bush was dull and boring. Richards went after Bush for having no experience and for his business deals. Bush was basically saying the governor was lowering herself to attacking him. I thought Richards won, but the press said Bush did well since he didn't swallow his tongue.

Bush also debated Gary Mauro when he ran for reelection. This was interesting because Bush was ahead n the polls by 30 + percent throughout. There was no reason for Bush to debate him. Mauro was an old personal friend of the Clintons and the Bush people thought Mauro was just in the race to dirty Bush up for his coming presidential run. Again, Mauro was on the attack and Bush just shrugged and ignored him.

This is why I don't understand people saying Bush won't debate.

First his track record is he always debates.

Second, by saying he's scared, you just lower expectations for him, the same as every other race he's ever run. It just seems Dems would do better saying Bush is actually a pretty good debator, and try to raise his expectations a bit.

One thing Bush can do in a debate is follow an opponent's long answer with just a one sentence (fragment) summary of his opponent's position which is easily understandable to the average person. It's like he is able to translate an intelligent answer to the masses. He did this quite effectively against Gore twice, once on public financing of elections, and once on choosing judges to the Supreme Court.

But now that you mention it .....

Nah. It's too soon for debates.

has already scheduled the debates, the dates and the cities.

Sept 30, 2004 at the University of Miami in Coral Gables Florida.

Oct 5, 2004 (VP debate) at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland.

Oct 8, 2004 at Washngton University in St Louis.

Oct 13, 2004 at Arizona State University in Tempe.

This doesn't mean all these debates will be held, and I don't think either candidate has committed to be at all of them yet, but I'd assume at least three of the four will be held.

I can't imagine what the Rove team could do to make Bush look intelligent in that scenario!

Away from meet the press.

Hosted by PBS. Paid for by the Gov't.

Every political player should be required by public pressure to participate - including the 'behind the scenes players.'

Only then would true issues be put on display.

I think americans have an adversion to believing that any politician or wealthy person they like could be flawed or unhappy. Good, true Debates would be a shock.

a debate a month until election day. I am assuming pResident Moran won't be able to fit it into his busy raising-money-while-dodging-my-responsibilities-to-the-American-people schedule.

Eventually the press would pick up on it then it would look like Bush doesn't want to talk about the issues.

You know, I think we are going have to pull something like this in order not to get drowned in the attack ads.

It's not too early for Bush to make attacks on Kerry the theme of his speeches, so surely he can't say it's too early for debates...

Neither one is the official nominee of their party yet. There's a lot that can happen between now and August, when the GOP will hold its convention (ours in July).

Peace!

Attacking boosh* every day. Never REJECTING the idea of debates, but just giving the impression that they won't tell anyone anything they don't already know, since boosh* would lie anyway (however you'd phrase that in presidential-candidate-speak). Keep attacking boosh*. Hard. Every day. Get the steaming pile of maggot puke rattled. Until boosh* is BEGGING for a debate (remember the oversized ego we're dealing with here) -- then lower the boom on him and ACCEPT. (Or... maybe not accept.)

Granted, it's a high-risk strategy -- but I figure SOMEBODY has to posit the stupid questions, if only so they can be ripped apart and discarded as options. (And since I'm feeling generous tonight, it might as well be me...)

over the thought of not debating.

He will turn the negotiations over to a hard-bitten old veteran like Jim Baker and just tell him to let him know when the thing is decided. Otherwise, he just won't worry about it one way or the other.

But I'd just love to give his handlers fits. One of the standard techniques of any incumbent is to appear "above the fray" -- dismissing the opponent as beneath recognition. I'd like to see the tables turned, and in my dreams this might be the situation to do it in.

You're probably right, though. :shrug: Just a thought...

Can you imagine him going up against Sharpton, LOL! Anyone, from Gephardt to Kucinich to Dean to Kerry could easily take him down! I say, the sooner, the better!:grr:

harmed too much. Since the perception is out there that he is
a dimwit, no matter how he does no one is disappointed in his
performance. Rove knows this.