Bush, Gore Must Learn From Round 1

Amid the overstatements, misstatements and repeated sighs of last week's presidential debate, candidates Al Gore and George W. Bush showed they have their work cut out for them tonight at Wake Forest University.

Both candidates' supporters considered the first debate a success - though not a victory - in this race, in which only a few percentage points separate Gore and Bush. As of Monday, Bush pulled ahead in the polls to lead Gore 47 percent to 44 percent, according to a Gallup poll.

Although he stumbled over his words a bit in the Oct. 3 debate, Bush proved that he could appear well-prepared and informed and that he could hold his own at the podium against Gore, an experienced debater.

Gore was knowledgeable and confident in his positions. His debating strength often lies in taking the offensive, which can make him seem brutal. He managed to restrain himself in the first debate, though his audible and frequent sighs punctuated Bush's speaking.

These sighs showed viewers that Gore has a personality, but they also indicated that it might not necessarily be likable. He should clean up his behavior before today's more intimate debate places the candidates together at a table, where he could be perceived as childish and rude.

Most of what we can expect in the debate tonight will be stylistic. The candidates should use fewer but more meaningful statistics and figures. However compelling the candidates and their staff might find these details, the numbers are too complex for the public and leave voters confused.

What's more, there's a perception that numbers can be easily manipulated, so viewers often mistrust the sources. Look for Ross Perot-esque charts and pointers if the candidates decide they must use statistics to prove their points.

Also look for them to get the facts right. At the first debate, Bush incorrectly claimed Gore had overspent him while campaigning, while Gore exaggerated about overcrowded classrooms and said he had never questioned Bush's experience.

Gore should also stop overstating his involvement with various issues. His latest claim is that he evaluated Texas floods and fires with James Lee Witt, director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Gore did go to Texas, but not as a part of Witt's group.

And Bush needs to think before he speaks. His comment that "at-risk children are unfortunately labeled as such, and it means basically . they can't learn" was poorly conceived and callous. But neither can he resort only to rehearsed comments; his little jabs about "Medi-scare" and Gore "inventing the calculator" didn't fly, either.

Substantively, the candidates will likely be asked to elaborate on their foreign policy goals, an area they have mostly ignored in this domestically focused campaign.

Gore and Bush looked outside the U.S. borders in the first debate as they discussed bringing democratic leadership to Yugoslavia and building a national defense. But tonight's debate should dig deeper; on the table are issues such as missile defense, nuclear arms, immigration and foreign trade.

We can expect Gore's repetitive refrain that the wealthy would receive the most benefit from tax cuts under Bush's plan and Bush's response of "Washington fuzzy math." But tonight, Bush should respond with simple logic: the wealthy pay the most taxes to begin with, and therefore they should receive the greatest absolute cut.

They will also likely revisit abortion, Medicare and social security.

Last week's debate ultimately failed to captivate viewers. Some critics even doubt that the candidates will make an impression on undecided voters until the final debate.

Therefore, the candidates must work tonight to be honest, genuine and compelling salesmen for their policies and themselves. They had last week to work out the kinks and nervousness. Now, it's time for them to make an impact in this neck-and-neck race.

Columnist Anne Fawcett can be reached at fawcetta@hotmail.com.