Full Version: Bush & the townhall debate
According to a Washington Times article, the president stands a better chance of doing well in tonight's debate due to the "townhall" format. To me, he should do worse since such a format requires one to think off the top of your head and answer impromptu questions. The president's personality may be a strength, but the debate isn't a backyard Texas BBQ. 
What do you think?
1.)Why would Bush do better in a townhall format with a combative John Kerry?
2.)Why is the traditional podium format worse for Bush?
3.)Will John Kerry have to change his debate tactics with the townhall format?
What do you think?
1.)Why would Bush do better in a townhall format with a combative John Kerry?
2.)Why is the traditional podium format worse for Bush?
3.)Will John Kerry have to change his debate tactics with the townhall format?
I voted - neither.
My reasoning is that the American people are finally waking up to the fact that he and Cheney have mislead us from the start.
No format is going to help him when he has lost any credibility.
For instance Cheney was very sly and slick in his debate but the next day he was the laughing stock of most news programs because of his blatant lies which the American public saw with their own eyes.
Bush was good mixing it up in a crowd of people before all this negative news about Iraq and the economy. Now more people have seen the lies and I don't care how good you are with people, they don't forget a lie.
No, I don't believe any kind of a format is going to help Bush now.
My reasoning is that the American people are finally waking up to the fact that he and Cheney have mislead us from the start.
No format is going to help him when he has lost any credibility.
For instance Cheney was very sly and slick in his debate but the next day he was the laughing stock of most news programs because of his blatant lies which the American public saw with their own eyes.
Bush was good mixing it up in a crowd of people before all this negative news about Iraq and the economy. Now more people have seen the lies and I don't care how good you are with people, they don't forget a lie.
No, I don't believe any kind of a format is going to help Bush now.
1.)Why would Bush do better in a townhall format with a combative John Kerry?
Bush connects with people well. He does not necessarily communicate well, in the sense of presenting a convincing message on the fly.
His connection with the audience will give him energy, something that was noticeably lacking at the "podium" debate.
2.)Why is the traditional podium format worse for Bush?
There is no connection to the audience. There is only the Moderator and the opponent. Recall that Bush "won" the debates with Gore mostly because Gore lost them. Bush was by no means spectacular in those debates.
3.)Will John Kerry have to change his debate tactics with the townhall format?
Kerry will need to show that he can connect with real people. I certainly think he is capable of doing this, but I don't think it will come as naturally as it does for Bush.
Bush connects with people well. He does not necessarily communicate well, in the sense of presenting a convincing message on the fly.
His connection with the audience will give him energy, something that was noticeably lacking at the "podium" debate.
2.)Why is the traditional podium format worse for Bush?
There is no connection to the audience. There is only the Moderator and the opponent. Recall that Bush "won" the debates with Gore mostly because Gore lost them. Bush was by no means spectacular in those debates.
3.)Will John Kerry have to change his debate tactics with the townhall format?
Kerry will need to show that he can connect with real people. I certainly think he is capable of doing this, but I don't think it will come as naturally as it does for Bush.
I agree with most of what Amlord said. Most, but not all. 
Bush will benefit from not being grounded to the podium. I'm not sure what the rules are (rules---sheesh.
), but I wouldn't be surprised if Bush tried to take off his jacket, pull off his tie, roll up his sleeves and start droppin' his "g's" as he tries to show he's jes plain folks.
The thing is that there are a lot more people who aren't drinking that Kool-Aid anymore and that Bush's "ordinary guy" image doesn't quite jibe with his blue-blood roots, millionaire status, and complete disengagement from most of the ordinary dramas of normal American life.
Bush will be folksy as hell, but the mannerisms won't replace whether or not he can handle being removed from the hothouse atmosphere of his carefully controlled campaign appearances before friendly audiences who have to sign loyalty agreements. I sincerely hope that both of these guys have to answer some really TOUGH questions instead of just falling back to their talking points.
But I doubt it. "Townhall debates" sounds very egalitarian, but there's probably going to be a few Democratic and Republican partisans planted in the group who will be there to make Candidate A look good or Candidate B look bad. The notion that "ordinary people" will ask better questions than trained journalists has merit, but any politician worthy of the title knows how to answer a question without really answering it at all.
As for Kerry, he's been doing these debates for the past 10 months as he had to fight for air with all the other Democratic candidates during the primaries. I think he'll be well-prepared to go toe-to-toe with Bush.
No predictions here because I'll be at my son's high school homecoming football game tonight so I'll have to rely on the talking heads and the unbiased folks of America's Debate for the lowdown. Have fun!
Bush will benefit from not being grounded to the podium. I'm not sure what the rules are (rules---sheesh.
), but I wouldn't be surprised if Bush tried to take off his jacket, pull off his tie, roll up his sleeves and start droppin' his "g's" as he tries to show he's jes plain folks.The thing is that there are a lot more people who aren't drinking that Kool-Aid anymore and that Bush's "ordinary guy" image doesn't quite jibe with his blue-blood roots, millionaire status, and complete disengagement from most of the ordinary dramas of normal American life.
Bush will be folksy as hell, but the mannerisms won't replace whether or not he can handle being removed from the hothouse atmosphere of his carefully controlled campaign appearances before friendly audiences who have to sign loyalty agreements. I sincerely hope that both of these guys have to answer some really TOUGH questions instead of just falling back to their talking points.
But I doubt it. "Townhall debates" sounds very egalitarian, but there's probably going to be a few Democratic and Republican partisans planted in the group who will be there to make Candidate A look good or Candidate B look bad. The notion that "ordinary people" will ask better questions than trained journalists has merit, but any politician worthy of the title knows how to answer a question without really answering it at all.
As for Kerry, he's been doing these debates for the past 10 months as he had to fight for air with all the other Democratic candidates during the primaries. I think he'll be well-prepared to go toe-to-toe with Bush.
No predictions here because I'll be at my son's high school homecoming football game tonight so I'll have to rely on the talking heads and the unbiased folks of America's Debate for the lowdown. Have fun!
1.)Why would Bush do better in a townhall format with a combative John Kerry?
I don't think that he will do better with a townhall debate, so I voted neither in the poll.
Also from the Washington Post is another perspective on this:
The article makes a very good point, if you haven't practiced standing your ground with reporters during your administration, how can you possibly be expected to do well with impromptu questions from a town-hall audience. Even if there are plants, I think that enough of the questions are likely to be tough for both candidates that we'll see Kerry shine again here and see Bush suffer and fidget uncomfortably.
Furthermore, I think Bush knows his answers aren't going to satisfy people but he has to recite them anyway and toe the party line. Kerry on the other hand comes off as extremely confident, because he doesn't have the mental block of knowing he made huge mistakes over the last 4 years.
The point that Bush is better able to connect to a live audience is a valid one, but I think that any advantage he might have had here will be defeated by three things:
1) Anxiety over his past performance
2) The toughness of the questions, forcing him to search uncomfortably for answers.
3) Actually having to face people that disagree with him and debate them.
3.)Will John Kerry have to change his debate tactics with the townhall format?
I think he needs to keep up more of the same thing he has been doing, it has been working. As nighttimer said, Kerry is an expert with these town-hall type debates because he frequently participated in them during the primaries.
I don't think that he will do better with a townhall debate, so I voted neither in the poll.
Also from the Washington Post is another perspective on this:
QUOTE
Several Bush advisers said the president may well pay a price for his decision to remain isolated from tough or unexpected questions when he faces Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.), whose events are notably less scripted, in a town-hall-style debate tonight at Washington University in St. Louis. The questions are likely to be tougher than those he faced when he taped an interview about parenting for the "Dr. Phil" show this summer.
The debates, which will conclude Wednesday in Arizona, have brought new scrutiny to Bush by tens of millions of people who are accustomed to seeing him only in brief clips or formal settings. Bush received poor ratings in polls after television shots from the first debate showed him fidgeting and grimacing under challenges by Kerry, and his remarks became repetitious and at times peevish.
<snip>
The president has stopped taking questions from the small pool of reporters who cover his photo opportunities, and he has answered questions from the White House press corps twice since Aug. 23, both times with interim Iraqi Prime Minister Ayad Allawi at his side. His last prime-time news conference was April 13.
The tradition of the White House news corps shouting questions at the president has largely faded during this term because Bush reacts testily and does not answer, and his staff typically sets up events so he does not have to walk near reporters.
The debates, which will conclude Wednesday in Arizona, have brought new scrutiny to Bush by tens of millions of people who are accustomed to seeing him only in brief clips or formal settings. Bush received poor ratings in polls after television shots from the first debate showed him fidgeting and grimacing under challenges by Kerry, and his remarks became repetitious and at times peevish.
<snip>
The president has stopped taking questions from the small pool of reporters who cover his photo opportunities, and he has answered questions from the White House press corps twice since Aug. 23, both times with interim Iraqi Prime Minister Ayad Allawi at his side. His last prime-time news conference was April 13.
The tradition of the White House news corps shouting questions at the president has largely faded during this term because Bush reacts testily and does not answer, and his staff typically sets up events so he does not have to walk near reporters.
The article makes a very good point, if you haven't practiced standing your ground with reporters during your administration, how can you possibly be expected to do well with impromptu questions from a town-hall audience. Even if there are plants, I think that enough of the questions are likely to be tough for both candidates that we'll see Kerry shine again here and see Bush suffer and fidget uncomfortably.
Furthermore, I think Bush knows his answers aren't going to satisfy people but he has to recite them anyway and toe the party line. Kerry on the other hand comes off as extremely confident, because he doesn't have the mental block of knowing he made huge mistakes over the last 4 years.
The point that Bush is better able to connect to a live audience is a valid one, but I think that any advantage he might have had here will be defeated by three things:
1) Anxiety over his past performance
2) The toughness of the questions, forcing him to search uncomfortably for answers.
3) Actually having to face people that disagree with him and debate them.
3.)Will John Kerry have to change his debate tactics with the townhall format?
I think he needs to keep up more of the same thing he has been doing, it has been working. As nighttimer said, Kerry is an expert with these town-hall type debates because he frequently participated in them during the primaries.
1.)Why would Bush do better in a townhall format with a combative John Kerry?
I have no idea. Bush cannot debate. I don't need proof, the proof is in the pudding. Or, I guess the argumentation. Bush has none. His only arguments are memorized rhetorical statements that rarely pertain to the actual questions: I. E.: "President Bush, what are you going to do to improve the situation in Iraq" A: " Well our troops are doing a good job, a tough job at that. My opponent is not able to send a consistent message..." etc... Not that Kerry is a lot better, but he is better.
2.)Why is the traditional podium format worse for Bush?
I think all debate formats are bad for Bush. The town hall style debate will require him to respond like a human being and not a recording and so he is in grave danger of looking like... well an idiot. The traditinal podium approach is more stump-speech friendly, and thus I don't believe that that format is worse for Bush.
3.)Will John Kerry have to change his debate tactics with the townhall format?
I don't see why he would. Kerry only real tactic is to be vague, somewhat rhetorical and attack Bush at every opportunity except the best ones. Kerry's 'tactics' then will work just as well in a townhall format. Atleast Kerry is able to answer questions without always using the Red Herring.
I have no idea. Bush cannot debate. I don't need proof, the proof is in the pudding. Or, I guess the argumentation. Bush has none. His only arguments are memorized rhetorical statements that rarely pertain to the actual questions: I. E.: "President Bush, what are you going to do to improve the situation in Iraq" A: " Well our troops are doing a good job, a tough job at that. My opponent is not able to send a consistent message..." etc... Not that Kerry is a lot better, but he is better.
2.)Why is the traditional podium format worse for Bush?
I think all debate formats are bad for Bush. The town hall style debate will require him to respond like a human being and not a recording and so he is in grave danger of looking like... well an idiot. The traditinal podium approach is more stump-speech friendly, and thus I don't believe that that format is worse for Bush.
3.)Will John Kerry have to change his debate tactics with the townhall format?
I don't see why he would. Kerry only real tactic is to be vague, somewhat rhetorical and attack Bush at every opportunity except the best ones. Kerry's 'tactics' then will work just as well in a townhall format. Atleast Kerry is able to answer questions without always using the Red Herring.
Bush should do better with this format, it's more casual and more to his style.
The American voter will see a stark difference tonight, and it will help them make up their minds.
On one side, they'll see a basic individual, and on the other side a classic politician.
Now, all that everyone has to do is figure out where Kerry actually stands on any issue and we're off to the races.
The American voter will see a stark difference tonight, and it will help them make up their minds.
On one side, they'll see a basic individual, and on the other side a classic politician.
Now, all that everyone has to do is figure out where Kerry actually stands on any issue and we're off to the races.
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.