Kerry-Bush II: A Viewer's Guide

By CBSNews.com's Chief Political Writer David Paul Kuhn.

With the baseball play-offs in full swing and the tendency of voters to gradually tune out after the first debate, significantly less Americans are expected to view Friday's debate. More than 60 million watched the first round, a big increase over 2000. Yet, with time running out and few opportunities left to reach large audiences, and with the reviews of the first debate in, the pressure is on the performers.

So Mr. Bush will try not to scowl or smirk (bad facial expressions are a new kind of political gaffe, apparently). Kerry will try not to drone-on. Mr. Bush can't look cross when challenged. Kerry can't look patrician as he traverses the stage to speak to voters.

Mr. Bush comes to St. Louis with some extra burdens. Having been viewed as the loser of the first debate on Sept. 30 at the University of Miami, the risks of dropping the ball again could be high.

But Sen. Kerry is still the underdog. Friday night is another opportunity to demonstrate his character and temperament in the mind of America. The momentum is on his side, but he may be competing with himself in ways. His pitfalls, at least stylistically, are his oft-noted tendencies to appear aloof, too obtuse, too removed from those regular folk that have bills and children in daycare.

The Gallup polling organization selected about 140 residents from the greater St. Louis area to make up the town meeting. They will be made undecided voters, or those that only slightly prefer a candidate — no partisans allowed.

Though the questions will be screened by the moderator, Charles Gibson of ABC's "Good Morning America," voters will directly question the candidates.

Mr. Bush is comfortable in town hall settings, carrying an uncanny ability to communicate with average Americans. He rolls up his sleeves. He's often self-deprecating. He uses first names.

In almost weekly question and answer sessions throughout his campaign, Mr. Bush has played the role of emcee as Republican voters lobbed softball questions his way.

But in the second presidential debate, Mr. Bush will not be preaching to the choir. He will be under the microscope of voters who were chosen for their indecision.

"Tonight is a different animal all together from (Mr. Bush's) town hall meetings; he's been delivering the same lines that get laughs on the stump in front of these 100 percent friendly audiences," said Northeastern University political scientist Alan Schroeder, author of "Presidential Debates." "The question is how well is (Mr. Bush) attuned to a general audience or these soft leaners.

"With Bush, what was being communicated last time was his unhappiness with being there and his being uncomfortable with being challenged," Schroeder continued. "His dad had the same problem, coming to these debates and looking angry for being there. Bush can't do that again."

New ammunition for contention came this past week when Mr. Bush's central argument for invading Iraq was undermined by a CIA report that concluded that prior to the invasion, Iraq had no stockpiles of chemical or biological weapons, no active nuclear program and lacked the technical capabilities to produce weapons of mass destruction.

Earlier, the president's direction of the war and occupation were challenged by former Iraq administrator Paul Bremer, a Bush appointee who headed the U.S.-led occupation.

Bremer said in two appearances that the United States didn't have enough troops in Iraq following the fall of Baghdad. Kerry and Edwards have used Bremer's comments to further substantiate the accusation that Mr. Bush mismanaged the war in Iraq.

Kerry said following the CIA report that "American people deserve more than spin about this war." Kerry then went further. He added that allegations about weapons of mass destruction were "purposefully used to shift the focus from al Qaeda, Osama bin Laden, to Iraq and Saddam Hussein."

Mr. Bush has also taken to the offensive this past week and unveiled a new, aggressive stump speech. Railing against Kerry in Pennsylvania, Mr. Bush said, "You can't win a war you don't believe in fighting," adding that "in Iraq, Sen. Kerry has a strategy of retreat."

"Bush has really gone on the attack against Kerry the last couple days," Schroeder said. "To carry that into a town hall is not a good idea because you can't get away with that with an audience that dislikes the negativity of the campaigns."

Another new development likely to feature in the argument is Friday's Labor Department report that said 96,000 jobs were added this month to employer's payrolls. Mr. Bush will likely use this number as proof that the U.S. economy is "turning the corner." Kerry will point out that the 96,000-job figure is less than the 138,000 new jobs that economists expected.

Kerry will argue that 800,000 jobs have lost in total since Mr. Bush took office in 2000. Expect Mr. Bush to reference the 1.8 million jobs that have been added to the payrolls since August 2003.

Just as there has been "new news" since the first debate, the landscape of public opinion is shifting too, albeit slightly.

The Annenberg Election survey found that Kerry comes into the second presidential debate showing strong gains among independents. In September, they preferred Mr. Bush 44 to 41 percent; in October, voters prefer Kerry 49 to 38 percent.

But Mr. Bush still resonates on a key character point: capacity to be commander-in chief. On that count, voters prefer Mr. Bush 50 to 41 percent.

With Mr. Bush enjoying a strong lead throughout September, a Reuters/Zogby tracking poll out Friday showed the candidates locked in a statistical dead heat, 46 to 45 percent. A recent /New York Times poll also placed the two men with 47 percent of the electorate behind each candidate.

"Kerry is on a roll and needs to stay on a roll," Schroeder said. "What you are looking for is someone up for the job — am I comfortable with this guy on the world stage? — and how are these guys doing under pressure."

The pressure will certainly be on Friday night.
By David Paul Kuhn