I'm sure many others have already commented and diaried about the transition from the wonderful first debate to the upcoming second. Clearly, there is lots of work left to do. We should all do what we can, however little that may be, because it all adds up - and the stakes are incredibly high.
Kerry has his work cut out for him, too. Bush may have messed up in many ways Thursday night, but he accomplished one major feat: he has set the bar as low as it could be for a sitting president! But this has been done before, some of us may recall.
The year was 1984, and Ronald Reagan had performed rather poorly in debate # 1, against Walter Mondale. Reagan's closing statement was a rambling embarrassment (if I recall, it involved driving down highway 101 on the Pacific coast, and the statement was almost as winding as the road itself). In fact, Reagan's performance was so bad that some in the press, let alone the public, thought that, age 73, he may be getting senile (imagine!).
So how did Reagan overcome this to win by a landslide? A one-liner (he was the master). Early in the 2nd debate, he said "I want you to know that also I will not make age an issue in this campaign. I am not going to exploit for political purposes my opponents youth and inexperience."
So what's Bush going to say? I don't think he'll say "I'm not going to use my opponent's intelligence and sobriety against him." But he will try to neutralize the effect of the first debate, one way or the other. Probably something like "my opponent may be a smooth talker, but this country needs a straight shooter."
Kerry could counter with "Me, a smooth talker? President Bush a straight shooter? Folks, he's like a used car salesman. He's trying to sell you a used-up, seriously damaged 4 year old administration. He's telling you it's running smoothly, but you only have to look around to see it's not."
Bush will try something like this. Don't be fooled when some GOP-friendly pundit says Kerry did well. Listen to what they say: "That was the best I've ever seen John Kerry. Bush was off his game." Now, between and afte rthe debates they'll try to tell people that what they saw that day doesn't reflect the candidates. Bush is really better than that, Kerrry is really worse than that. We should all be saying "No, Kerry is always that good, if you listen to him instead of listening to the GOP spin in the media."
What else will Bush try to pull? He'll say "My opponent said that tax cuts are only for the rich. But everyone got a tax cut - and everyone knows it." This would be a fastball straight down the middle for Kerry, an easy home run. He can just cite the latest Congressional Budget Office figures. "Well, the top 1% of wage earners averaged a tax cut of $78,460. Those in the middle 20% averaged $1,090. In fact, the middle class is paying a bigger share of taxes collected, while the highest earners are paying a smaller share. Plus, state and local taxes are going up to pay for services that the federal government cut. Finally, we're going into huge debt, that will disproportionately hit the lower middle class. Is this really fair? Is this what people want?"
What else will Bush try? How will Kerry respond?