After months of taking shots at each other through campaign stops and advertisements, Senater John Kerry and Mr. George W. Bush will face each other for the first time this Thursday in Miami for the first of three presidential debates. The important swing state of Florida was chosen because right now there is nothing Floridians are concerned with more than politics. The two candidates both signed off on a 32 page agreement specifying every last detail of the debate.

So what did each candidate get out of the deal? For Kerry it was getting Bush to agree to a third debate, as he had been threatening to pull out of the October 8 debate in St. Louis. Now he will have one more shot at taking on Bush face to face. And what did Bush get? Pretty much everything else. For instance, there will be no opening statements by the candidates. Neither candidate may cite any person in the audience (a tactic that Gore used against Bush in the 2000 debates). Neither candidate may address the other directly. When a candidate is answering a question, TV coverage is only permitted to show the candidate who is speaking (presumably to avoid anything like his dad’s glancing-at-the-watch gaffe in his second debate against Clinton). The timing lights are to be placed such that they are visible to TV audiences (this so that Bush can show people how long-winded Kerry is). For the town-hall style debate (the one that Bush had been so afraid of), audience members must have their questions approved by the moderator beforehand. All of this favors Bush, as does changing the first and most watched of the debates to cover foreign policy, an issue that for some incomprehensible reason seems to be Bush’s strongest point despite the fact that he has made America less secure than it has ever been. Did the Kerry campaign give Bush whatever he wanted just to get that third debate? At this point one has to wonder if Bush was ever even serious about not agreeing to a third debate.

Or maybe the Bush campaign just pulled out the ol’ “you’re-breaking-my-balls” strategy.

That’s not even mentioning another battle that Kerry seems to have lost–the battle for top billing. Watching the coverage of the upcoming debate, I couldn’t help but wonder why so many kept referring to it as the “Bush-Kerry Debate.” At first I thought it might have to do with their position. After all, Bush is the president, and Kerry is only a senator. But then I remembered. In 2000 it was the “Bush-Gore Debate.” At the time Bush was a governor. Gore was vice president. If it went by rank, Gore should have been listed first. Perhaps it’s alphabetical? I suppose Bush sounds better in front than Kerry any way. “Bush-Kerry” rolls off the tongue better than “Kerry-Bush.” Of course, to be fair it should really be called “the first presidential debate.” But so as not to come across as either fair or balanced, it will henceforth be referred to here as the “Kerry-Bush Debate.”

Of course, a more serious advantage that Bush also has is a head start on getting his message to the American people by appearing on The O’Reilly Factor for three nights in a row leading up to the debate.

Still, Kerry may yet be able to overcome these obstacles. Bush may be seen as more charismatic, but Kerry has made his living off of his debate skills–first as a prosecutor, then as a senator. By all accounts, Kerry is an excellent debater. But they told me the same thing about Gore in 2000, and he turned out to be a terrible debater.

The bottom line, though, is that all Kerry has to do to win this is not screw up. Unfortunately, not screwing up has never been something the Democrats are very good at. Regardless, Thursday should be an interesting night.