XPost: seattle.politics, or.politics, ca.politics
XPost: soc.history.war.misc, soc.support.depression.family

from https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/11/opinions/debate-coach-grades-desantis-haley-graham/index.html

Debate coach: One candidate got a B. The other flunked
Opinion by Todd Graham
6 minute read
Updated 9:26 AM EST, Thu January 11, 2024


'I think I hit a nerve': See Haley spar with DeSantis
01:31 - Source: CNN
Editor’s Note: Todd Graham is a professor of debate at Southern Illinois University. His teams have won five national championships; he’s been
named the national debate coach of the year three times and been
presented with the lifetime achievement award in academia and debate.
You can find him at his website, on Facebook and on X. The views
expressed in this commentary are his own. View more opinion at CNN.

CNN
—
It’s not often that a presidential candidate opens a debate by calling
an opponent names like “mealy mouthed” or talking about how much their opponent lies.

I am, of course, joking.

Rudeness, it seems, is the norm for Republican presidential debates.

This time, there were only two candidates in CNN’s Wednesday night
debate in Iowa. Nikki Haley (aka: “mealy mouth”), the former Ambassador
to the United Nations and former governor of South Carolina met Ron
DeSantis (aka: “DeSantisLies”), the governor of Florida in the final
debate before the Iowa caucus.

Here’s how each of them fared:

Nikki Haley: B
Former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis participate in a CNN Republican Presidential Debate at Drake University
in Des Moines, Iowa, on January 10, 2024. (Will Lanzoni/CNN)
Will Lanzoni/CNN
Haley still needs to fix a couple of debating techniques. The opening
tone matters and Haley went right to calling DeSantis a liar. Whether or
not Haley is correct, the word “liar” is frowned on in debate, as it’s only meant for the grossest of infractions. There are better terms, such
as “disingenuous,” that ease the tone of any debate. And Haley’s best strategy is to be the likeable one on stage, so this was a major error.

At the very least, Haley needed to move her disclaimer from near the end
of the debate to the beginning. She said it was a “shame” she had to put
up the website, DeSantisLies.com, in an effort to document his
mistruths. Haley should have led with that.

The other hiccup for Haley is that she debates as if she can win the
whole debate, nay, the entire presidency, in this very instant right now
if she jams as many topics as possible into each of her answers. Debt
limit, supporting Ukraine, Iowa campaigning, renewable fuel standards
and social security are all deep topics. Yet Haley mentioned all those
and more in just one of her crowded answers.

When Haley found her momentum, it was partially because she stopped
focusing on the DeSantisLies website. Haley’s finest moments in these
debates were when she talked about leaders bringing out the best in
people. That’s a much better fit for Haley’s persona and is starkly different from the other candidates.

screengrab haley desantis iowa hit a nerve
Opinion: Who won the Republican presidential debate?
Haley’s answers on Ukraine were on-point, and cleverly sandwiched in
there was a line about “dictators always do what they say they’re going
to do” so we should take their threats seriously.

Haley smoked DeSantis on the Disney debate, arguing that government
shouldn’t be vindictive. Haley pointed out that Disney has always been considered “woke” and yet it wasn’t until they criticized DeSantis that he began his mouse fight.

But Haley’s best move was borrowing and improving a Trump tactic. She
taunted DeSantis with his low poll numbers and his squandered war chest
of $150 million dollars spent for private planes, etc.

Trump’s effective 2016 debating tactic was calling out opponent’s low
poll numbers during the debates. Bandwagoning and ad populum attacks are effective persuasion tools because people prefer to support what or who everyone else is.

Haley’s new application is to say DeSantis has low polling numbers
because he’s so bad at campaigning, so why should we trust his decisions
on any topic. It’s clever and can be utilized at any time in the debate.

Finally, Haley deftly pivoted away from Trump. She was more forceful in
her criticisms of the former president than she’d been in previous
debates. Haley knows it’s now or never to highlight their contrasting
styles and policies. This could be something to build on for future debates.

Ron DeSantis: D+
Former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis participate in a CNN Republican Presidential Debate at Drake University
in Des Moines, Iowa, on January 10, 2024. (Will Lanzoni/CNN)
Will Lanzoni/CNN
DeSantis had two areas I’d like to see him expand on and highlight. His strengths in these debates have been his brags. Apparently, Florida is
actually doing pretty darn well, according to this Florida man. He lists
a bunch of accomplishments where Florida ranks very highly, and they
sound impressive. But DeSantis doesn’t give his arguments enough air to breathe before he’s off talkin’ ‘bout bathrooms or something.

When listing accomplishments, debaters need to “sit” on each topic for a while. Otherwise, believability slips. DeSantis listed so many things
that Florida was the best at that I began to remember the name of that
website that kept coming up in the debate. And that’s what happens when laundry-listing accomplishments. Without proper backing, people doubt
things that seem too good to be true. DeSantis should make his
achievements his main offense in future debates.

The other area where I liked DeSantis’ performance was when he called
out the mayors of “sanctuary cities” as hypocrites. Absent his Martha’s Vineyard humans-as-props stunt (Florida is not a Mexico border state),
DeSantis has an excellent point. Why again do we place such a high
burden on border states like Texas when immigration is a national issue?
Why aren’t other states taking in more people seeking a better life in
the US? And DeSantis pointed out how difficult it was for these cities
to handle only a fraction of what’s happing at our borders.

His answers became alarmingly policy-free and could easily fit on bumper stickers. That’s what doomed DeSantis.

Todd Graham

Unfortunately, the overall quality of his answers declined rapidly
throughout the debate. His answers became alarmingly policy-free and
could easily fit on bumper stickers. That’s what doomed DeSantis. And he telegraphed why he refused to leave the shallow end of the debating
pool. After Haley made a pretty good point, DeSantis retorted, “She’s focused on a lot of political stuff – things that no voter cares
about….” Wrong timing. Haley was making perfect sense, as she was every other time he accused Haley of a “word salad.” It’s as if DeSantis just learned that phrase, word salad, which I honestly don’t think he
understands.

His answers on important subjects were often vapid. Haley couldn’t have
been much better at presenting reasons why we must support Ukraine and
help it beat back Russia’s invasion. DeSantis’s answer? “I think a lot
of people have died. We need to find a way to end this.” Okay… Haley
just told us how.

When asked if he would actually implement a flat tax that he’s
mentioned, DeSantis replied that he would only adopt the flat tax if
people are “better off” than they are now. That was his debate answer. I wish my teams got away with that!

Just imagine:

Random opponent: “Hey, SIU: What’s your plan?”

Southern Illinois University: “Flat tax. But only if we win the solvency debate that a flat tax is better than the status quo. Otherwise, we
won’t do the flat tax.”

Random opponent: “Sounds perfectly reasonable and normal for debate and policymaking.”

Then there was his double-turn on abortion. I previously complimented
how Haley approached the abortion debate. DeSantis was divided. Should
he criticize Haley’s previous answer OR should he steal it because
people liked it? DeSantis’s decision? Do both.

He said that while you’ve got to have “compassion” for what’s going on in the country, he also argued that Haley has been “using the language
of the left” to attack anti-abortion activists.

GET OUR FREE WEEKLY NEWSLETTER
Sign up for CNN Opinion’s newsletter
Join us on Twitter and Facebook
Somehow DeSantis managed to say we need compassion, but compassion is
the language of the left, which the left uses to attack anti-abortion activists. It’s tragic to think anyone on earth believes compassion to
be a word or concept worthy of contempt, but it’s true and it’s happened before in another Republican presidential debate. Remember when the
Republican audience booed the golden rule – do unto others as you would
have them do unto you?

It was hard to get upset with DeSantis’s troubling statement because I
was chuckling at him not realizing he also asked for compassion. I think
he should have said “Ta-Da!” when he finished that whirlwind of an
answer while giving everyone the famous DeSantis “fake” smile.

The spit-out-my-tea moment was when DeSantis was asked if the government
should go after businesses that don’t agree with you, and it was
specifically about Disney after they criticized DeSantis. His answer? He
did it to protect the kids.

Disingenuous.

RELATED
Opinion: Who won the Republican presidential debate?

MORE FROM CNN

Opinion: Who won the Republican presidential debate?

DeSantis and Haley battled for the spotlight in the ...

Everything is on the line for Haley and DeSantis at ...
Search CNN...

Search
US
Crime + Justice

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)