Want to know how to craft a great zinger? Study the presidential debates.想知道怎樣說(shuō)話能切中要害，給對(duì)方一萬(wàn)點(diǎn)暴擊？研究研究總統(tǒng)政要們的做法。

Weve all had thisexperience:Youre in a debate or a discussion. Youre at a loss for words. And of course, after its all over, you think of exactly the right thing to have said.我們都曾置身于討論或是辯論，突然腦抽無(wú)話可講，直到結(jié)束后，想想自己其實(shí)知道那時(shí)候該說(shuō)什么合適。

I hate that feeling, but do you want to know who really hates it? Politicians.你肯定懊惱壞了。沒(méi)關(guān)系，遇上這事兒最上火的是我們可愛(ài)的政要。

Rhetoric and words are almost all that they have. Now that were inthe middle of the presidential campaign season, with caucuses and primaries about to happen, and one debate after another after another, that gives them an opportunity.他們所能憑借的幾乎只有生動(dòng)的修辭和激動(dòng)人心的話語(yǔ)。現(xiàn)在，又到一年競(jìng)選時(shí)，機(jī)密會(huì)議、黨內(nèi)初選、一個(gè)接一個(gè)的辯論......各派黨人摩拳擦掌，企圖大展拳腳。

Almost no politicalzinger is spontaneous.Consultants have spent millions trying to craft the right lines. And if you study the debates and the candidates verbal tactics, you canfind some great lessons--even blueprints--for using rhetoric to upend your adversarys position.政治宣講都不會(huì)只是一次次個(gè)人的即興發(fā)揮。在這背后，有咨詢顧問(wèn)投以巨資來(lái)組織恰當(dāng)火候的語(yǔ)言組成文稿。如果你曾研究辯論語(yǔ)言和競(jìng)選者們的言語(yǔ)攻勢(shì)，那么你將學(xué)到寶貴一課即使是只研究藍(lán)圖通過(guò)修辭來(lái)顛倒錯(cuò)亂對(duì)手的處境。

Here are five examples--from both Democrats and Republicans.下面是五個(gè)相關(guān)的例子，有出自民主黨的，也有來(lái)自共和黨的。

1.The dismissive counterpunch.1.蔑視對(duì)手，報(bào)以迎擊。

Lets start with the kind of one-punch knockout that can really end an opponents chances.The trick here to know the kind of opportunity youre looking forand be ready. Two great examples:我們來(lái)看兩個(gè)不給對(duì)手留任何招架余地的一擊制敵的例子，教會(huì)我們要善于發(fā)現(xiàn)和運(yùn)用時(shí)機(jī)：

First,an example from this cycle--the way Donald Trump very effectively sidelined Jeb Bush by repeatedly describing him as low energy. When Bush came out with guns blazing in one debate, Trump was able to put him off effectively simply by saying,More energy tonight--I love that!第一個(gè)，是這個(gè)時(shí)代的例子特朗普先生有效打擊了杰布布什的勢(shì)頭，靠的是反復(fù)稱其蔫頭耷腦。當(dāng)布什在一次辯論中大放異彩時(shí)，特朗普致以暴擊稱：啊哈，終于活過(guò)來(lái)了，我喜歡！

Second, a more classic example. In 1980, President Jimmy Carter was running againstRonald Reagan, and Carter hadused the same effective line of attack against Reagan--perhaps one too many times.第二個(gè)例子更加經(jīng)典。在1980年的競(jìng)選里，吉米卡特總統(tǒng)對(duì)陣?yán)锔鶗r(shí)，也用這樣的話打擊對(duì)手十分有效，但是可能用的有點(diǎn)兒太多了。

Reagan wasable to use a little verbal jiujitsu to turn the whole thing around on him in a debate. Instead of engaging, he simplydismissed Carters line by chuckling: Well, there you go again.里根本可以使用適度的言語(yǔ)柔道術(shù)來(lái)扭轉(zhuǎn)乾坤。但是相比針尖兒對(duì)麥芒，里根選擇了簡(jiǎn)單一句話來(lái)打趣卡特：呦呦，繼續(xù)你的老生常談吧。

2.The cool cultural reference.2.借鑒文化背景。

This one is really hard to pull off. Its about working a cultural reference into your reply to an opponents rhetorical dig. It can easily backfire--but if you do it effectively, youre in great shape.這可不是容易事兒，需要從當(dāng)時(shí)當(dāng)代的文化背景中取材融入準(zhǔn)備的宣講內(nèi)容里。后果可能適得其反但是如果能行之有效，出來(lái)的效果是很可觀的。

Cultural references evolve so quickly, its hard to recall some of these accurately, but here are two good examples.鑒于文化背景演變速度之快，找到恰當(dāng)?shù)睦右彩遣灰椎摹２贿^(guò)有兩個(gè)例子放在這兒說(shuō)很棒。

The first comes from 2024, when President Obama and Mitt Romney were squaring off. Obama wanted to take Romney to task for having suggested that Russia was the biggest foreign challenge facing the United States--not ISIS or another Middle Eastern foe.第一個(gè)例子發(fā)生在2024年的大選，時(shí)任總統(tǒng)的奧巴馬對(duì)陣羅姆尼。奧巴馬意圖通過(guò)指出美國(guó)當(dāng)前的首要?jiǎng)艛巢皇且了固m國(guó)等中東分子，而是俄羅斯。

His line? The 1980s are calling to ask for their foreign policy back.It worked--but not perfectly--in part, perhaps, because Obama didnt get the cultural put-down exactly right (and maybe because by 2024, that was already kind of a clich.)原話怎么講？像仍活在上世紀(jì)八十年代一樣，想用回20多年前的對(duì)外政策老套路。這句話奏效了但是說(shuō)得并不完美因?yàn)閺哪撤N程度上來(lái)說(shuō)他的話曲解了羅姆尼的本意（也許是已經(jīng)2024年了，這樣說(shuō)真的是陳詞濫調(diào)）

A better example might come from 1984, in the Democratic primaries, when eventual nominee Walter Mondalesuggested his rival Gary Hart didnt have any substance by quoting a Wendys fast foodcommercial that was popular at the time: Wheres the beef?1984這一年民主黨核心會(huì)議中，有個(gè)更好的例子。最終人選沃爾特指責(zé)對(duì)手哈特沒(méi)有實(shí)力時(shí)，引用了一句美國(guó)快餐公司萬(wàn)迪的著名廣告語(yǔ)：那么牛肉在哪兒呢？（指對(duì)手的真正實(shí)力根本不像看起來(lái)那么大）

3.The nod to truth.3.站在真理一方。

Sometimes, the facts are on your side to the point that you can score simply by getting out of the way.有時(shí)很明顯你是占理的一方，那么稍微有所退讓也足以讓你得分。

A good example? Then-candidate Obama, in 2008, responding to a line of questioning about Hillary Clintons likability by telling her she was likable enough.舉個(gè)生動(dòng)的例子？08年總統(tǒng)大選時(shí)，作為競(jìng)選者的奧巴馬在回應(yīng)關(guān)于希拉里是否夠受大眾喜愛(ài)時(shí)簡(jiǎn)單回應(yīng)道：她超可愛(ài)的。

Perhaps the best came from the year 2000, when Vice-President Al Gore walked across the stage and sort of got into the space of Republican nominee George W. Bush.更好的例子發(fā)生在2000年，時(shí)任副主席的艾伯特戈?duì)栂襁~著太空步一樣穿過(guò)禮臺(tái)走向共和黨對(duì)手小布什。

Bush interrupted his remarks just for a brief second, to nod in Gores direction--as if to point out how weird it was that Gore had walked over. He didnt even have to say anything, but he made his point very clear.小布什用了一小招就打破了僵局沖戈?duì)栕邅?lái)的方向點(diǎn)了點(diǎn)頭不用一言一語(yǔ)，就足以表明自己覺(jué)得對(duì)方的行為有多滑稽。

4.The elephant in the room.4.明明很明顯，卻避之不談。

Sometimes theres another way to handle an obvious truth--and thats to say it in a manner that is so clear andobvious that there simply is no real response.有時(shí)面對(duì)顯而易見(jiàn)的事實(shí)，最好用的辦法其實(shí)是和稀泥。

Example: In 1988, Dan Quayle was running for vice-president, and in a debate with the Democratic nominee, SenatorLloyd Bentsen, Quaylemade the point that he had as much experience as John Kennedy had when hed run for president in 1960.例子：1988年的副主席競(jìng)選，丹奎爾與民主黨對(duì)手參議員本特森激烈辯論。奎爾聲稱自己的經(jīng)歷和肯尼迪一樣豐富，因?yàn)樗麖?960年就參與競(jìng)選總統(tǒng)了。

Maybe you werent even born in 1988, but you might know Bentsens response--which pretty much solidified the mainstream opinion of Quayle:可能1988年是時(shí)你還沒(méi)出生，不過(guò)你還是可以從本特森的回復(fù)中看出他和稀泥的功力看似是對(duì)對(duì)手觀點(diǎn)的強(qiáng)化，其實(shí)對(duì)自身有利。

Senator, I served with Jack Kennedy. I knew Jack Kennedy. Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine. Senator, youre no Jack Kennedy.我親愛(ài)的參議員，我曾效力于肯尼迪總統(tǒng)。我了解他。肯尼迪總統(tǒng)是我的朋友。不過(guò)，你永遠(yuǎn)不可能成為肯尼迪。

5.The table-turn.5.扭轉(zhuǎn)乾坤。

Similarly, sometimes you can take your opponents exact words and use them to turn everything against him or her.有時(shí)情況就是這么簡(jiǎn)單，你可以用對(duì)手的原話來(lái)置其于不利之境地。

As an example, in the Republican debates earlier this year, Jeb Bush started attacking Senator Marco Rubio for having missed votes in the senate while he was campaigning. Im not sure if this was ever going to be effective, but Rubio knocked him back and disarmed the attacksimply by observing, Someone convinced you attacking me is going to help you.一個(gè)例子是，今年度共和黨內(nèi)部辯論中，杰布布什攻擊對(duì)手馬克盧比奧稱其在競(jìng)選時(shí)錯(cuò)過(guò)參與議院內(nèi)投票。我不知道盧比奧的舉措是否奏效，不過(guò)他的反應(yīng)時(shí)是報(bào)以回?fù)舴Q你這樣做是因?yàn)樽哉J(rèn)為攻擊我對(duì)你的競(jìng)選有利。（我不會(huì)通過(guò)攻擊任何人來(lái)贏得競(jìng)選）

The most classic example is probably from 1984, when Reagan was running for reelection at age 73. When this was brought up in a debate, he almost seemed to have misunderstood the question in his remark--but it was a genius response:更經(jīng)典的案例出自1984年的總統(tǒng)改選，時(shí)年73歲。當(dāng)他的年齡被對(duì)手在辯論中提及時(shí)，里根幾乎誤解了自己當(dāng)時(shí)的處境但他的回復(fù)堪稱神來(lái)一筆：

I will not make age an issue of this campaign. I am not going to exploit, for political purposes, my opponents youth and inexperience, Reagan said.我覺(jué)得我在這個(gè)年齡競(jìng)選不成問(wèn)題。我更不會(huì)通過(guò)揭露我對(duì)手的年輕和沒(méi)有經(jīng)驗(yàn)來(lái)獲得什么政治上的勝利。

How effective was it?He even left his opponent, Walter Mondale, laughing--and beat him in a landslide.這話奏效了嗎？里根甚至讓他的對(duì)手捧腹大笑也使自己身處劣勢(shì)贏得競(jìng)選。

聲明：本雙語(yǔ)文章的中文翻譯系滬江英語(yǔ)原創(chuàng)內(nèi)容，轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處。中文翻譯僅代表譯者個(gè)人觀點(diǎn)，僅供參考。如有不妥之處，歡迎指正。

Want to know how to craft a great zinger? Study the presidential debates.想知道怎樣說(shuō)話能切中要害，給對(duì)方一萬(wàn)點(diǎn)暴擊？研究研究總統(tǒng)政要們的做法。

Weve all had thisexperience:Youre in a debate or a discussion. Youre at a loss for words. And of course, after its all over, you think of exactly the right thing to have said.我們都曾置身于討論或是辯論，突然腦抽無(wú)話可講，直到結(jié)束后，想想自己其實(shí)知道那時(shí)候該說(shuō)什么合適。

I hate that feeling, but do you want to know who really hates it? Politicians.你肯定懊惱壞了。沒(méi)關(guān)系，遇上這事兒最上火的是我們可愛(ài)的政要。

Rhetoric and words are almost all that they have. Now that were inthe middle of the presidential campaign season, with caucuses and primaries about to happen, and one debate after another after another, that gives them an opportunity.他們所能憑借的幾乎只有生動(dòng)的修辭和激動(dòng)人心的話語(yǔ)。現(xiàn)在，又到一年競(jìng)選時(shí)，機(jī)密會(huì)議、黨內(nèi)初選、一個(gè)接一個(gè)的辯論......各派黨人摩拳擦掌，企圖大展拳腳。

Almost no politicalzinger is spontaneous.Consultants have spent millions trying to craft the right lines. And if you study the debates and the candidates verbal tactics, you canfind some great lessons--even blueprints--for using rhetoric to upend your adversarys position.政治宣講都不會(huì)只是一次次個(gè)人的即興發(fā)揮。在這背后，有咨詢顧問(wèn)投以巨資來(lái)組織恰當(dāng)火候的語(yǔ)言組成文稿。如果你曾研究辯論語(yǔ)言和競(jìng)選者們的言語(yǔ)攻勢(shì)，那么你將學(xué)到寶貴一課即使是只研究藍(lán)圖通過(guò)修辭來(lái)顛倒錯(cuò)亂對(duì)手的處境。

Here are five examples--from both Democrats and Republicans.下面是五個(gè)相關(guān)的例子，有出自民主黨的，也有來(lái)自共和黨的。

1.The dismissive counterpunch.1.蔑視對(duì)手，報(bào)以迎擊。

Lets start with the kind of one-punch knockout that can really end an opponents chances.The trick here to know the kind of opportunity youre looking forand be ready. Two great examples:我們來(lái)看兩個(gè)不給對(duì)手留任何招架余地的一擊制敵的例子，教會(huì)我們要善于發(fā)現(xiàn)和運(yùn)用時(shí)機(jī)：

First,an example from this cycle--the way Donald Trump very effectively sidelined Jeb Bush by repeatedly describing him as low energy. When Bush came out with guns blazing in one debate, Trump was able to put him off effectively simply by saying,More energy tonight--I love that!第一個(gè)，是這個(gè)時(shí)代的例子特朗普先生有效打擊了杰布布什的勢(shì)頭，靠的是反復(fù)稱其蔫頭耷腦。當(dāng)布什在一次辯論中大放異彩時(shí)，特朗普致以暴擊稱：啊哈，終于活過(guò)來(lái)了，我喜歡！

Second, a more classic example. In 1980, President Jimmy Carter was running againstRonald Reagan, and Carter hadused the same effective line of attack against Reagan--perhaps one too many times.第二個(gè)例子更加經(jīng)典。在1980年的競(jìng)選里，吉米卡特總統(tǒng)對(duì)陣?yán)锔鶗r(shí)，也用這樣的話打擊對(duì)手十分有效，但是可能用的有點(diǎn)兒太多了。

Reagan wasable to use a little verbal jiujitsu to turn the whole thing around on him in a debate. Instead of engaging, he simplydismissed Carters line by chuckling: Well, there you go again.里根本可以使用適度的言語(yǔ)柔道術(shù)來(lái)扭轉(zhuǎn)乾坤。但是相比針尖兒對(duì)麥芒，里根選擇了簡(jiǎn)單一句話來(lái)打趣卡特：呦呦，繼續(xù)你的老生常談吧。

2.The cool cultural reference.2.借鑒文化背景。

This one is really hard to pull off. Its about working a cultural reference into your reply to an opponents rhetorical dig. It can easily backfire--but if you do it effectively, youre in great shape.這可不是容易事兒，需要從當(dāng)時(shí)當(dāng)代的文化背景中取材融入準(zhǔn)備的宣講內(nèi)容里。后果可能適得其反但是如果能行之有效，出來(lái)的效果是很可觀的。

Cultural references evolve so quickly, its hard to recall some of these accurately, but here are two good examples.鑒于文化背景演變速度之快，找到恰當(dāng)?shù)睦右彩遣灰椎摹２贿^(guò)有兩個(gè)例子放在這兒說(shuō)很棒。

The first comes from 2024, when President Obama and Mitt Romney were squaring off. Obama wanted to take Romney to task for having suggested that Russia was the biggest foreign challenge facing the United States--not ISIS or another Middle Eastern foe.第一個(gè)例子發(fā)生在2024年的大選，時(shí)任總統(tǒng)的奧巴馬對(duì)陣羅姆尼。奧巴馬意圖通過(guò)指出美國(guó)當(dāng)前的首要?jiǎng)艛巢皇且了固m國(guó)等中東分子，而是俄羅斯。

His line? The 1980s are calling to ask for their foreign policy back.It worked--but not perfectly--in part, perhaps, because Obama didnt get the cultural put-down exactly right (and maybe because by 2024, that was already kind of a clich.)原話怎么講？像仍活在上世紀(jì)八十年代一樣，想用回20多年前的對(duì)外政策老套路。這句話奏效了但是說(shuō)得并不完美因?yàn)閺哪撤N程度上來(lái)說(shuō)他的話曲解了羅姆尼的本意（也許是已經(jīng)2024年了，這樣說(shuō)真的是陳詞濫調(diào)）

A better example might come from 1984, in the Democratic primaries, when eventual nominee Walter Mondalesuggested his rival Gary Hart didnt have any substance by quoting a Wendys fast foodcommercial that was popular at the time: Wheres the beef?1984這一年民主黨核心會(huì)議中，有個(gè)更好的例子。最終人選沃爾特指責(zé)對(duì)手哈特沒(méi)有實(shí)力時(shí)，引用了一句美國(guó)快餐公司萬(wàn)迪的著名廣告語(yǔ)：那么牛肉在哪兒呢？（指對(duì)手的真正實(shí)力根本不像看起來(lái)那么大）

3.The nod to truth.3.站在真理一方。

Sometimes, the facts are on your side to the point that you can score simply by getting out of the way.有時(shí)很明顯你是占理的一方，那么稍微有所退讓也足以讓你得分。

A good example? Then-candidate Obama, in 2008, responding to a line of questioning about Hillary Clintons likability by telling her she was likable enough.舉個(gè)生動(dòng)的例子？08年總統(tǒng)大選時(shí)，作為競(jìng)選者的奧巴馬在回應(yīng)關(guān)于希拉里是否夠受大眾喜愛(ài)時(shí)簡(jiǎn)單回應(yīng)道：她超可愛(ài)的。

Perhaps the best came from the year 2000, when Vice-President Al Gore walked across the stage and sort of got into the space of Republican nominee George W. Bush.更好的例子發(fā)生在2000年，時(shí)任副主席的艾伯特戈?duì)栂襁~著太空步一樣穿過(guò)禮臺(tái)走向共和黨對(duì)手小布什。

Bush interrupted his remarks just for a brief second, to nod in Gores direction--as if to point out how weird it was that Gore had walked over. He didnt even have to say anything, but he made his point very clear.小布什用了一小招就打破了僵局沖戈?duì)栕邅?lái)的方向點(diǎn)了點(diǎn)頭不用一言一語(yǔ)，就足以表明自己覺(jué)得對(duì)方的行為有多滑稽。

4.The elephant in the room.4.明明很明顯，卻避之不談。

Sometimes theres another way to handle an obvious truth--and thats to say it in a manner that is so clear andobvious that there simply is no real response.有時(shí)面對(duì)顯而易見(jiàn)的事實(shí)，最好用的辦法其實(shí)是和稀泥。

Example: In 1988, Dan Quayle was running for vice-president, and in a debate with the Democratic nominee, SenatorLloyd Bentsen, Quaylemade the point that he had as much experience as John Kennedy had when hed run for president in 1960.例子：1988年的副主席競(jìng)選，丹奎爾與民主黨對(duì)手參議員本特森激烈辯論。奎爾聲稱自己的經(jīng)歷和肯尼迪一樣豐富，因?yàn)樗麖?960年就參與競(jìng)選總統(tǒng)了。

Maybe you werent even born in 1988, but you might know Bentsens response--which pretty much solidified the mainstream opinion of Quayle:可能1988年是時(shí)你還沒(méi)出生，不過(guò)你還是可以從本特森的回復(fù)中看出他和稀泥的功力看似是對(duì)對(duì)手觀點(diǎn)的強(qiáng)化，其實(shí)對(duì)自身有利。

Senator, I served with Jack Kennedy. I knew Jack Kennedy. Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine. Senator, youre no Jack Kennedy.我親愛(ài)的參議員，我曾效力于肯尼迪總統(tǒng)。我了解他。肯尼迪總統(tǒng)是我的朋友。不過(guò)，你永遠(yuǎn)不可能成為肯尼迪。

5.The table-turn.5.扭轉(zhuǎn)乾坤。

Similarly, sometimes you can take your opponents exact words and use them to turn everything against him or her.有時(shí)情況就是這么簡(jiǎn)單，你可以用對(duì)手的原話來(lái)置其于不利之境地。

As an example, in the Republican debates earlier this year, Jeb Bush started attacking Senator Marco Rubio for having missed votes in the senate while he was campaigning. Im not sure if this was ever going to be effective, but Rubio knocked him back and disarmed the attacksimply by observing, Someone convinced you attacking me is going to help you.一個(gè)例子是，今年度共和黨內(nèi)部辯論中，杰布布什攻擊對(duì)手馬克盧比奧稱其在競(jìng)選時(shí)錯(cuò)過(guò)參與議院內(nèi)投票。我不知道盧比奧的舉措是否奏效，不過(guò)他的反應(yīng)時(shí)是報(bào)以回?fù)舴Q你這樣做是因?yàn)樽哉J(rèn)為攻擊我對(duì)你的競(jìng)選有利。（我不會(huì)通過(guò)攻擊任何人來(lái)贏得競(jìng)選）

The most classic example is probably from 1984, when Reagan was running for reelection at age 73. When this was brought up in a debate, he almost seemed to have misunderstood the question in his remark--but it was a genius response:更經(jīng)典的案例出自1984年的總統(tǒng)改選，時(shí)年73歲。當(dāng)他的年齡被對(duì)手在辯論中提及時(shí)，里根幾乎誤解了自己當(dāng)時(shí)的處境但他的回復(fù)堪稱神來(lái)一筆：

I will not make age an issue of this campaign. I am not going to exploit, for political purposes, my opponents youth and inexperience, Reagan said.我覺(jué)得我在這個(gè)年齡競(jìng)選不成問(wèn)題。我更不會(huì)通過(guò)揭露我對(duì)手的年輕和沒(méi)有經(jīng)驗(yàn)來(lái)獲得什么政治上的勝利。

How effective was it?He even left his opponent, Walter Mondale, laughing--and beat him in a landslide.這話奏效了嗎？里根甚至讓他的對(duì)手捧腹大笑也使自己身處劣勢(shì)贏得競(jìng)選。

聲明：本雙語(yǔ)文章的中文翻譯系滬江英語(yǔ)原創(chuàng)內(nèi)容，轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處。中文翻譯僅代表譯者個(gè)人觀點(diǎn)，僅供參考。如有不妥之處，歡迎指正。