Want to know how to craft a great zinger? Study the presidential debates.

　　想知道怎樣說話能切中要害，給對方一萬點暴擊?研究研究總統政要們的做法。

　　We've all had this experience: You're in a debate or a discussion. You're at a loss for words. And of course, after it's 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，突然腦抽無話可講，直到結束后，想想自己其實知道那時候該說什么合適。

　　I hate that feeling, but do you want to know who really hates it? Politicians.

　　你肯定懊惱壞了。沒關系，遇上這事兒最上火的是我們可愛的政要。

　　Rhetoric and words are almost all that they have. Now that we're in the 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的修辭和激動人心的話語。現在，又到一年競選時，機密會議、黨內初選、一個接一個的辯論......各派黨人摩拳擦掌，企圖大展拳腳。

　　Almost no political zinger is spontaneous. Consultants have spent millions trying to craft the right lines. And if you study the debates and the candidates' verbal tactics, you can find some great lessons--even blueprints--for using rhetoric to upend your adversary's position.

　　政治宣講都不會只是一次次個人的即興發揮。在這背后，有咨詢顧問投以巨資來組織恰當火候的語言組成文稿。如果你曾研究辯論語言和競選者們的言語攻勢，那么你將學到寶貴一課——即使是只研究藍圖——通過修辭來顛倒錯亂對手的處境。

　　Here are five examples--from both Democrats and Republicans.

　　下面是五個相關的例子，有出自民主黨的，也有來自共和黨的。

　　1.The dismissive counterpunch.

　　1.蔑視對手，報以迎擊。

　　Let's start with the kind of one-punch knockout that can really end an opponent's chances. The trick here to know the kind of opportunity you're looking for and be ready. Two great examples:

　　我們來看兩個不給對手留任何招架余地的一擊制敵的例子，教會我們要善于發現和運用時機：

　　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，是這個時代的例子——特朗普先生有效打擊了杰布·布什的勢頭，靠的是反復稱其“蔫頭耷腦”。當布什在一次辯論中大放異彩時，特朗普致以暴擊稱：“啊哈，終于活過來了，我喜歡!”

　　Second, a more classic example. In 1980, President Jimmy Carter was running against Ronald Reagan, and Carter had used the same effective line of attack against Reagan--perhaps one too many times.

　　第二個例子更加經典。在1980年的競選里，吉米·卡特總統對陣里根時，也用這樣的話打擊對手——十分有效，但是可能用的有點兒太多了。

　　Reagan was able to use a little verbal jiujitsu to turn the whole thing around on him in a debate. Instead of engaging, he simply dismissed Carter's line by chuckling: "Well, there you go again."

　　里根本可以使用適度的“言語柔道術”來扭轉乾坤。但是相比針尖兒對麥芒，里根選擇了簡單一句話來打趣卡特：“呦呦，繼續你的老生常談吧。”

　　2.The cool cultural reference.

　　2.借鑒文化背景。

　　This one is really hard to pull off. It's about working a cultural reference into your reply to an opponent's rhetorical dig. It can easily backfire--but if you do it effectively, you're in great shape.

　　這可不是容易事兒，需要從當時當代的文化背景中取材融入準備的宣講內容里。后果可能適得其反——但是如果能行之有效，出來的效果是很可觀的。

　　Cultural references evolve so quickly, it's 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，找到恰當的例子也是不易的。不過有兩個例子放在這兒說很棒。

　　The first comes from 2012, 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.

　　第一個例子發生在2012年的大選，時任總統的奧巴馬對陣羅姆尼。奧巴馬意圖通過指出美國當前的首要勁敵不是伊斯蘭國等中東分子，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 didn't get the cultural put-down exactly right (and maybe because by 2012, that was already kind of a cliché.)

　　原話怎么講?“像仍活在上世紀八十年代一樣，想用回20多年前的對外政策老套路。”這句話奏效了——但是說得并不完美——因為從某種程度上來說他的話曲解了羅姆尼的本意(也許是已經2012年了，這樣說真的是陳詞濫調)

　　A better example might come from 1984, in the Democratic primaries, when eventual nominee Walter Mondale suggested his rival Gary Hart didn't have any substance by quoting a Wendy's fast food commercial that was popular at the time: "Where's the beef?"

　　1984這一年民主黨核心會議中，有個更好的例子。最終人選沃爾特指責對手哈特沒有實力時，引用了一句美國快餐公司萬迪的著名廣告語：“那么牛肉在哪兒呢?”(指對手的真正實力根本不像看起來那么大)