|
... Politex's |
|
for DEBATES 2000 |
|
|
|
... Politex's |
|
for DEBATES 2000 |
|
|
Texas Governor George W. Bush managed to take over the physical stage of the Los Angeles Times auditorium this evening, posturing, smirking, giving rival Alan Keyes the evil eye, making snide comments about his interrogators, and bending the rules of the debate to his benefit. John McCain, being televised from St. Louis, was unable to match the physical presence of Bush, being represented on the stage by a video box. However, as Mac Headroom he managed to answer more cogently more often, defeating the GOP network's representative by a comfortable margin. Both Bush and McCain answered their China questions well, and while Bush did quite well on his education question, Mac was clear and responsive in the explanation of his "rogue nations" policy. CNN's Judy Woodruff nailed Bush on Bob Jones, the history of fundamentalism, and, like the Watergate hearings, when he knew what he knew about Bob Jones. Similarly, Jeff Greenfield had Dubya repeating irrelevant responses on justice in Texas, and the LAT's Doyle McManus took him to school on trigger locks for guns. McCain, on the other hand, did poorly on defending himself against Greenfield's questions about his anonymous Michigan "Catholic Voter Alert" phone calls and his congressional record with respect to domestic policy. There were seven questions asked of both candidates, worth 14.3 points each. Unfortunately, there weren't enough debate interchanges to produce scores, but if there were, Bush would have been penalized for barging in on the other candidates several times during the last half hour of the 60 minute debate. debate transcript BUSH ANSWERS Question #1 Jeff Greenfield asked Bush why he should be the candidate, since Republicans agree that they'll get behind their candidate and there's so little difference between himself and Mac. Mac, on the other hand, has proven that he can get more Dems and I's, so why shouldn't Mac be the better GOP candidate? Bush said he disagrees with the "presumption" that I's will not go for him, and did not mention "Reagan Democrats" at all. He then spent the rest of his answer in vague generalities about what the "American people" want, having little to do with I's or Dem's per se. Greenfield asked again in his follow-up, but this time Bush indicated why his Texas record would be attractive to Conservatives, with no mention of Independents at all. Score. 50% Question #2 McManus began to ask a question about guns, and Bush interrupted, wondering why he wasn't getting an education question. The LAT rep noted that Bush had always been against trigger locks on guns, and wondered if his thinking had changed in light of the recent killings. Bush, unexpectedly, said he "didn't mind" trigger locks on guns, but wondered if we were going to have "trigger lock police" to go from house to house to enforce the law. He went on to say that we should enforce the laws already on the books. In a follow-up, McManus reminded Bush that the proposed trigger lock bill had to do with gun manfactures, not gun owners, so Bush's reservations were misplaced. McManus went on to note that the trigger lock law holding manufactures responsible was a law Bush had opposed to date. The Texan pretty much repeated what he had previously said as though McManus had never corrected Bush about the specifics of the law. Score. 50% Question #3 Woodruff noted that Bush "apologized" to Cardinal O' Connor "for not taking on the anti-Catholicism at Bob Jones when you were there." She noted, however, that there is a "long standing anti-Catholic strain among southern fundamentalists and evangelists" and wondered if Bush were unaware of this fundamentalist history when he visited Bob Jones. Bush totally ignored the question and reviewed the specifics of the letter, concluding that he was unaware that "one of the Joneses referred to my dad in a very impolite way." Given the close-knit loyality within the Bush family, a loyality that Dubya often brags about, his ignorance is hard to believe. In the follow-up Woodruff asked Bush if he regretted going to Bob Jones. He didn't answer the question, choosing to attack Mac instead, and ending with generalizations about his record of inclusion in Texas. For the record, Fournier at the AP and Warren Tompkins, Bush's South Carolina strategist, both have claimed that the Bush campaign team had been given detailed information on Bob Jones racist and bigoted history, and the Bush team discussed the matter and were split about whether Bush should go to Bob Jones. Again, it's hard to believe that all of this went on without the candidate being given an opportunity to decide on a course of action. Also for the record, Mac asked for 30 seconds to respond but never got it. Later in the debate, Bush simply took 30 seconds to answer Mac on another topic without anyone's approval. Score. 00% Question #4 Woodruff asked Bush about his China policy with respect to the defense of Taiwan. While his answer didn't add anything that he hasn't said previously on the subject, he was articulate and forceful. Here, is typically vague response had a purpose. He said he didn't want to tip his hand to China. On the other hand, Bush indicated that if Taiwan were to declare their independence, this would be unacceptable to the one-China policy being followed by the U.S. Bush's idea is to keep both China and Taiwan in perpetual check through a free-market economy. Score. 100% Question #5 Greenfield asked Bush if he were still confident that the 458 prisoners on Texas' death row have had their legal rights protected in light of a man being released from Texas' death row because his lawyer slept through much of the trial. Bush responded that the system must be working or the man wouldn't have been freed, but did not talk to Greenfield's point that lawyers sleeping through death trial cases is so common in Texas that they're called "sleeping lawyer cases." Bush literally laughed out loud during this exchange but observers found it difficult to understand what, exactly, he was laughing at. Greenfield followed up by asking Bush if he's convinced that capital cases under his watch are protecting the rights of the accused, but Bush refused to answer the question, instead saying that his job as governor is to be sure that the prisoner has access to state and federal courts. The question of the level of justice provided in the state courts remained unanswered. Score. 30% Question #6 Woodruff asked Bush if he believed it proper to allow individuals to contribute as much as they want to to indivudual candidates. Bush responded that that's the way it is in Texas, so he's for it. Although the Supreme Court concluded that unlimited contributions leave, at the very least, a perception of impropriety, Bush called their finding a "liberal interpretation," even though Justice Souter wrote for the majority.In the follow-up Woodruff asked if Bush believed individuals expected nothing in return when they give millions in soft money. Bush didn't answer that. Instead, he said we need an Attorney General "that enforces the law" and an administration that's "honest." He called issue ads, such as, presumably, the distorted, pro-Bush environmental ad which one of his "pioneers" has spent $1.5 on to flood upstate New York, "freedom of speech." Score. 60% Quyestion #7 Greenfield asked Bush if he sees a conflict with his conservative backers about his plan to have federally mandated testing on the local level to be sure that federal money is being properly spent. Bush did not acknowledge that his plan does contradict those conservatives who find any federal limit unacceptable. However, he felt that federal control over the results of state testing is needed in order to provide vouchers for those local schools that are ineffective. This response was Bush's most informed, logical, and determined of the debate, and that's what viewers were left with. Score. 100 %
South Carolina Debate. Excerpts of 2/15/00 Bush Remarks, in exact order of occurrence. "Let me speak to that...Let me speak to that. Let me speak to that...Let me--let me answer that...Let me say something, John. Let me finish. Let me finish...Let me finish please, please...Let me finish. Let me finish...Let me say what I said...Let me just say one thing...Let me say one thing about this business, John...But let me say something...Let me finish...Let me say one thing about this...Let me finish...Please let me finish, John...John, let me finish, let me finish...May I finish, please?...May I finish, please?...Let me say one thing else...(off-mike) He had a long time...Let me stop...One thing and then he can speak...Let me finish...Let me finish...Let me finish. Let me finish...Let me say something about all this business...John, you're...John, if I, look...John, hey John, one thing is...Wait a minute..." --Politex, 2/26/00. full text
by Bill Brasin There were at least three things different from the first South Carolina debate last month. The audience was respectful and not part of the action, the presentation was thoroughly professional and well organized, and the candidates, mouthing lines they've been using for weeks, appeared to be as interested in how they looked and sounded than what they said. Using our usual point system, George W. Bush came out of the debate with his lowest score of the year, but we don't think any score reflects what was going on in the debate. Since Mac needs Independents to come out Saturday, Dubya's goal was to blur policy distinctions between the two to discourage a large turnout, thus winning with his GOP establishment votes. He did that to a certain extent, but paid a price, since he also admitted that Mac is a good conservative like himself, which undercuts this week's Mac attack portraying him as a moderate. Dubya's other goal was to be seen as an agressive fighter in control of the facts, if not the English language. At one point he said Clinton "has drug his feet" on a missle system. He later said he wanted taxpayers to get "a higher slice of the pie." As for the facts, he didn't allow them to get in the way of a point he wanted to make, such as his assertion that individual soft money contributions are presently limited to $1,000. While Bush sputtered and stomped throughout, turning up volume and passion with the sincerity of a video game, Mac's presentations generally were firm and friendly, but sometimes vague and a little too low-keyed. Perhaps he was even a little wistful, realizing that his retooled positive campaign will never match the barrage of negative advertising that the Bush camp and its pro-tobacco and anti-abortion surrogates will continue to throw at the South Carolina voters 24 hours a day until the Saturday vote. Ironically, the one new policy area introduced by Bush this week in a further attempt to muddy the distinction between himself and Mac, his campaign reform plan, was filled with a glaring loophole as well as the factual error, so let's start our analysis with that Larry King question. Question #3 The question King never quite asked because Bush kept interrupting was why he waited until now to propose a campaign reform plan. Bush claimed he had been talking about it since last summer, but the fact is it has never been presented as a total plan, such as his education plan. Mac's problem with the plan is that while it prevents corporations and unions from providing "soft money," it does not prohibit individuals from doing so, and 30% of all soft money is contributed by individuals. Bush responded that individuals should have the right to give soft money as a free speech protection. However, others have used the same argument for corporations and unions. Mac said Bush is providing a $1 billion soft money loophole, but Bush later shot back that individuals have the right to free speech contributions, mentioning that his campaign's average contribution is $350. Is he that seriously confused? Campaign contributions to candidates are "hard money." This part of his plan has to do with "soft money." Doesn't he understand the implications of his own plan? When Mac pointed out that under the Bush plan there's nothing to prevent an individual from giving a $1 million check to the RNC or the DNC tomorrow, Bush responded, "John, there's a $1,000 limit." Duh, George. No there's not, you're very confused. Question #1Bush responded first to the initial Larry King question, "What area in foreign policy would you first change as president?" Bush said changing our relationship with China from partnership to competitor, Mac said establishing a more proactive policy with respect to "rogue states" such as Iraq. The major difference between the two was that Bush believed our foreign policy should reflect national interest, period. Mac suggested that such a view is too simplistic and refered to himself as "Wilsonian" in that intervention is necessary in instances such as genocide, when our basic national values as well as pragmatic interest come into play. Bush called that being the world's peacekeepers, Mac thought of it as being proactive, alluding to Nazi Germany. In all, Mac showed a firmer, less simplistic grasp of foreign policy and history. Question #2 The most heated interchanges came during the discussion of this topic, dirty campaigning. Mac said using a vet to attack him was a low blow, Bush responded that - comparing him with Clinton was an equal low blow. Mac said he's taken that ad down and asked for an apology from Bush about the vet. Bush would not offer an apology nor would he say his negative ads would stop, claiming none of his ads are negative. Mac said there presently were ads calling him "Clinton-lite," Bush said negative flyers paid for by the Mac committee were being placed on windshields. And so on. Question #4 This was one of the weaker moments for Bush because his response was so illogical. King asked him how he could claim he was an outsider when the GOP establishement supports him--38 senators, 175 congressmen, and 26 governors. In effect, Bush said he was an outsider because the 213 politicians who live in Washington are actually from other states. For example, Strom Thurmond is from South Carolina. Given that argument, the real Washington insider is an impoverished black in a D.C. ghetto. Mac's response got to the heart of it--although he's been part of Washington politics for going on 20 years, he's not well-liked because he's been a thorn in the side of the Washington GOP establishment, "special interests, money, and legislation." It's no secret that much of Bush's campaign contributions and the reason for his Washington establishment support is that he's the GOP candidate of what Mac calls the "iron triangle." Question #5 Towards the end of the previous interchange, Bush had a mind-melt and fixated on the idea of Washington insiders, claiming that he would go to Washington from Texas and show them how a true leader would be able to change things. Then he fixated on the idea of leadership and began to talk about his leadership in education, although Keyes had shifted the discussion to questions of morality. King: "Are you saying...education is a moral issue?" Bush's response was a reach: "If we don't educate our children we'll have moral problems." This moved into Keys castigating Bush for going to Bob Jones and not denouncing its racist policies. This allowed Bush to go ballastic and tell Keyes, "Please don't insinuate, in any shape--way, shape or form, that I support..." Bush said he doesn't agree with Bob Jones' racist rules and he didn't call them on it during his speech, but he went there to deliver a message of compassionate conservatism, implying that such a message was a corrective in and of itself. Why then, King asked, didn't he go and give the same message to the GOP gays, the Log Cabin Republicans, when invited. Bush said he didn't because they previously made a commitment to Mac. Mac said that statement was untrue. The discussion moved into "don't ask, don't tell" in the military and no new ground was broken, except Mac made it clear that Colin Powell could have nearly any position in his government that he wanted. Bush, on the other hand, said such "talking about philosoply...cheapens the process. What we need to do is get elected on principles and issues." Oh, ok. Question #6 Bush went on stump speech auto-pilot for the obligatory abortion question. After appearing pumped-up while saying, keep my daughter out of it, his recitation was robotic. King had no greater success than others at implying to Bush that his responses are contradictory. On the one hand, Bush claims to support abortion for rape, incest, or the health of the mother. On the other, Bush supports the old GOP platform plank that does not contain that provision and when asked he refuses to say that he would change the plank to reflect his claimed position. We're left with the conclusion that Dubya's talking out of both sides of his mouth. Question #7 Consider the logic in this. The GOP majority controls both the House and the Senate. Most GOP Senators and Representatives are backing Bush and he uses them to hold his establishment bid together. Yet, he says he doesn't trust them, and that's why his first priority is to given the projected surplus back to the taxpayers in the form of tax cuts. While Bush says he doesn't think he can discipline Congress to keep to a budget, Mac asks why then did Dubya back the recent pork barrel spending bill, which is an example of the work of an undisciplined Congress. Further, Mac said, paying the nation's debt first is the "grown-up" thing to do and George's inability to attempt to even think about disciplining Congress is a mark of his true lack of leadership. Recall that in Question #5 Dubya was generalizing on his ability to lead Washington "insiders." Now, on another topic, he says he can't. Again, we're left with the conclusion that Dubya's talking out of both sides of his mouth. Question #8 King noted that DNA technology has released prisoners from death row in Illinois to the extent that future executions have been halted. Based on the assumption that DNA technology could have proven innocence in some Texas executions, shouldn't Bush halt executions and double-check? Bush said,"no," because he was "actually convinced" that all 100+ prisoners executed under his watch were guilty. King asks, "Are you convinced that everybody on death row now is guilty?" Bush: "We'll adjudicate these cases when they come up..." King: "But what if someone isn't?" Bush: "If someone isn't, they should be put to death." He couldn't have meant that. Bush did go on to agree with King that if DNA evidence got anyone in Texas off of death row, then "we would examine every case on death row." Again, the Bush position is not very logical, but he's taken such a firm pro-execution position that he can't back out of it at this point. Question #9 The last full discussion led to some amusing results for George. King asked him if Mac was a conservative in spite of a Bush ad that implied otherwise. Bush said he was, which allowed Mac to talk about all of the names he'd been called in the last ten days. Mac went on the talk about being a "proud conservative" and joke about the campaign, leading Bush to wedge his way into the dialogue: "John you're...John it...Hey John...Listen, you're playing the victim here. Wait a minute. Remember who called who trustworthy." George came off looking pretty silly as he began to huff and puff and attempted to get himself worked up into a faked snit with increased volume, rapid talk, and a jerking pointed finger. Mac just smiled and said, "You remember who made the first ad that said I was going to raise taxes by $40 billion, George." Question #10 A series of short responses told us MacBush was against racial profiling, the capital of Israel should be Jerusalem, polls shouldn't matter in foreign affairs, and we should not reduce our nuclear arms. Bush refused to take a position on internet sales taxes, but Mac said we shouldn't have one. While both agreed that there should be government programs to make prescription drugs available to the elderly, neither believed that such a program should be given to all Americans. Finally, Bush believed he was "going to win" on Saturday, Mac thought he was "probably going to win," and Alan Keyes, who won the debate hands down because he could say what he wanted to and was the most articulate of the three, said it was in "God's hands."
Analysis of key states by AP Delegate Count Bush 27 Mac 11
Jan. 24 Iowa caucuses (Bush 42%, Forbes 30%)
Editorial Policy: All entries are dated and documented as needed. Text (c) Politex. Permission of author required for reprinting. Duration of working link not under our control. Updated daily at various times. Send all e-mail to Politex.  links
|
by Bill Brasin