Where debates leave rest of race

Viewing the debates in their totality, Sen. John Kerry has to be exceedingly grateful that he was able to go toe to toe against the president of the United States for a total of 270 minutes, on a level playing field, on national television.

Absent those debates, President Bush may by now have been clearly on his way to reelection Nov. 2. Before the first matchup, he was consistently beating the Massachusetts Democrat in polls. Now the American public has had ample opportunity to view both men, unfiltered, addressing tough issues. The result is a race too close to call, both in nationwide opinion and in state-by-state Electoral College analyses, where no neutral polls show either man with a sure lock on the states required to gather the 270 votes needed.

Anything could happen. Bush could win the popular vote and lose in the Electoral College. So could Kerry. Or either man could win comfortably, in a collective shift of opinion among the "persuadable" voters not firmly wedded to a candidate.

What, ultimately, will decide this race? The Monitor interviewed a range of analysts, some partisan, some independent, for views on what the sprint to the finish line might look like.

"The only thing that will change momentum at this point would be an event, a continued rise in oil prices, the stock [market] falling under 10,000, something bad or good in Iraq, or ... a terrorist attack, which probably in the short run would work to the president's advantage," says Stephen Wayne, a political scientist at Georgetown University.

The public, particularly in battleground states, can expect to see ever more frequent ads between now and Election Day, and TV coverage of Bush and Kerry speaking at events (often never leaving the airport tarmac) in a rotating handful of key states. Expect also daily polling and focus-group results that purport to show momentum veering one way or the other. The goal is create a bandwagon effect.

Kerry should try to become more personable, says Professor Wayne, reflecting the widespread view that American voters' feelings about candidates - their likability and values - can be even more important than their stands on issues.

Bush should acknowledge that some things have not gone according to plan, but that over the long haul, he sees how things can work out, says Wayne.

"That was part of his father's problem; during the recession, he refused to use the 'r' word," he says, referring to the first President Bush, who failed in his reelection bid. "People want a president who recognizes the problems and [can] be more candid."

Republican pollster Whit Ayres, based in suburban Washington, says Kerry needs to "try yet one more time to come up with a coherent position on Iraq." Bush, he says, should continue to drive home his leadership advantage. "Fundamentally, that is what the election will boil down to," he says.

To Democratic activists, the risk for Bush in his "leadership advantage," as a sitting president, is that he comes across as stubborn and unable to adjust policies when they're not working.

Page: 1 | 2