One of the things about these joint public appearances is that there’s a fellow who keeps asking questions. Sometimes, the candidates answer the questions, or at least respond to them. I’ve pasted below just the questions asked by Jim Lehrer in the first debate. I’ve heard a bunch of criticism of these, and thought this might be a good way to examine what he did. By the way, I’ve marked the questions for Senator Kerry with a K and those directed to Our Only President with a B in case y’all are having a rough morning.
- K: Do you believe you could do a better job than President Bush in preventing another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States?
- B: Do you believe the election of Senator Kerry on November the 2nd would increase the chances of the U.S. being hit by another 9/11-type terrorist attack?
- K: "Colossal misjudgments." What colossal misjudgments, in your opinion, has President Bush made in these areas?
- B: What about Senator Kerry's point, the comparison he drew between the priorities of going after Osama bin Laden and going after Saddam Hussein?
- K: As president, what would you do, specifically, in addition to or differently to increase the homeland security of the United States than what President Bush is doing?
- B: What criteria would you use to determine when to start bringing U.S. troops home from Iraq?
- K: Speaking of Vietnam, you spoke to Congress in 1971, after you came back from Vietnam, and you said, quote, "How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?" Are Americans now dying in Iraq for a mistake?
- B: You have said there was a, quote, "miscalculation," of what the conditions would be in post-war Iraq. What was the miscalculation, and how did it happen?
- K: You just—you've repeatedly accused President Bush—not here tonight, but elsewhere before—of not telling the truth about Iraq, essentially of lying to the American people about Iraq. Give us some examples of what you consider to be his not telling the truth.
- B: Has the war in Iraq been worth the cost of American lives, 1,052 as of today?
- K: Can you give us specifics, in terms of a scenario, time lines, et cetera, for ending major U.S. military involvement in Iraq?
- B: Two minutes. Does the Iraq experience make it more likely or less likely that you would take the United States into another preemptive military action?
- K: What is your position on the whole concept of preemptive war?
- B: Do you believe that diplomacy and sanctions can resolve the nuclear problems with North Korea and Iran? Take them in any order you would like.
- K: Senator Kerry, you mentioned Darfur, the Darfur region of Sudan. Fifty thousand people have already died in that area. More than a million are homeless. And it's been labeled an act of ongoing genocide. Yet neither one of you or anyone else connected with your campaigns or your administration that I can find has discussed the possibility of sending in troops. Why not?
- B: Clearly, as we have heard, major policy differences between the two of you. Are there also underlying character issues that you believe, that you believe are serious enough to deny Senator Kerry the job as commander in chief of the United States?
- K: If you are elected president, what will you take to that office thinking is the single most serious threat to the national security to the United States?
- B: ... President Putin and Russia. Did you misjudge him or are you -- do you feel that what he is doing in the name of antiterrorism by changing some democratic processes is OK?
OK, I count six or seven out of eighteen that are simply dopey. That’s pretty high. To answer generally, though, whether the questions were good or not, I suppose we have to look at what his goals ought to have been. I think they should have been to try to get the viewers to understand (a) where the candidates’ policies differ and how, as well as where they do not differ, and (2) what past patterns of behavior and judgment would lead us to anticipate. I don’t think it’s important for the moderator to provide occasion for the candidates to persuade us that their policies are the right policies; it’s not a debate, after all. I also don’t think it’s important for the moderator to get the candidates off-script, as if they are more genuine when they haven’t thought about what they are saying.
So, how did he do? Well, it seems clear to me that on policy, he failed entirely. Perhaps he disagrees with me on his goals, but there is little here that isn’t a cue to the candidate to go all vague. Oh, and Jim? Asking a general question with the word ‘specifically’ in it isn’t the same as asking a specific question. As for the patterns, well, that’s the most interesting thing here. Taking the answers out, and looking just at the questions, it’s clear that Jim Lehrer views the election as a referendum on the incumbent. That’s a reasonable stance to take; in fact, mostly if an incumbent is up for re-election, it’s a referendum on his (or more rarely her) performance. The administration, though, would like to make Senator Kerry an issue in himself, and that too is reasonable. We aren’t judging Our Only President against a Replacement-Level President (Ford?) but against an actual candidate. That said, any discussion of John Kerry has to be in comparison to Our Only President; that’s simply how incumbency works. If the incumbent has done a good job, it’s an advantage.
Anyway, those are my thoughts. Does the list of questions provoke anything for you, Gentle Reader?
,
-Vardibidian.