the presidential debate

[SunWuKong]

i thought Kerry had a lot more solid points, and was i the only one that was getting tired of Bush saying for the millionth time how Kerry is inconsistent? we fucking got it, Dubya, move on.

[onnihs]

i thought Kerry had a lot more solid points, and was i the only one that was getting tired of Bush saying for the millionth time how Kerry is inconsistent? we fucking got it, Dubya, move on.

That's the thing, I don't see how Kerry is inconsistent as Bush claims he is, at all. I think he refuted that well tonight. It's important that leaders know how to adapt and change their plans of action once prompted with warranting information.

Overall, I'd say Kerry really shined tonight, and showed just how much he wants to fix things. It was refreshing to hear him speak.

[Faithless]

I think Bush was getting a little flustered, as well.

I like how Sudan is supposed stick it out with economic sanctions, but with Iraq it was a different story.

Talk about a mixed signal. Granted Kerry and Bush agreed about the use of the "African Union" as peacekeeper.

But for Bush, when you are confronted with this issue of genocide, wouldn't you want to be more supportive?

Humanitarian aid is one thing, but it sounds like some freedom wanting Sudanese could use a little American military might.

[Yeahman]

I don't think anyone hit a homerun.
I did have to reread the transcript to see what Kerry's position was on the war. At first it seemed as though he thought the war was a mistake. At first it seemed like he said that Bin Laden was the real threat and that Saddam was contained.
I can now see his real position though. Kerry believes that Saddam was a threat and that he must be disarmed by any means necessary. He would have prefered a diplomatic process. I guess I don't disagree with that position.
After watching the debate, I don't particularly dislike Kerry so much anymore.

[hooligan]

well, "do YOU really want an inconsistent president" got really old, really fast. that's all i remember about the debate.

[Yeahman]

that's all i remember about the debate.
Then it worked.

[truMp]

Kerry was much more articulate than Bush throughout most of the thing; you could even sense that Bush was nervous through his stutters and pauses, not really an appeasing image of a president who leads a global superpower. Though my impression of Kerry stayed relatively the same: dislike; he still wasn't solid on many of his points in my perspective, but he did win the debate against Bush who didn't know wtf he was talking about. Bush did have one good stance when he was referring to the "unjustified war message" and how it would be received by the troops over seas, the american populus, and the Iraquis.

Next Debate: Vice Presidential debate on Tuesday 10/5 -im expecting Cheney to lose.

[onnihs]

http://tinypic.com/atbg9

Credits: http://www.cnn.com/POLLSERVER/results/13581.exclude.html

:biggrin:

[Yeahman]

^ I tried to find a Fox News poll but couldn't. I would imagine their poll would show the exact opposite.

[tommyhtown]

What thing that stood out for me is Bush hammering Kerry on his statement, "the wrong war, in the wrong place at the wrong time." I think Kerry never responsed directly to that, which is some what of a good way to handle it.

well, "do YOU really want an inconsistent president" got really old, really fast. that's all i remember about the debate.

That theme seemed to continue after the debate whenever any Republican got any airtime on TV. They said that Kerry was flip-floping during the debate. I just went thru the transcript and I didn't see any evidence of that.

[onnihs]

^ I tried to find a Fox News poll but couldn't. I would imagine their poll would show the exact opposite.

hehe, word is, Fox hasn't said much of anything about the debates, especially the outcome.

[Faithless]

Bush did have one good stance when he was referring to the "unjustified war message" and how it would be received by the troops over seas, the american populus, and the Iraquis.
Well, I'm thinkin', how else would you put it, if you're opposed to it?

Does all the talk about too much focus on Iraq, causing slip-ups elsewhere hold water?

North Korea. Now it has more nuclear weapons.
Sudan. Described as genocide.
Homeland security. Cutting back on police and fire, here.

And should our tax cut have gone back into Fed budget to pay for Homeland security issues, rather than line our pockets?

[mrazntre]

Genocide in Africa is not a new thing.

I'm sure everyone remembers the painful undertaking of Somalia. Now that was a complete disaster and I'm positive it is the reason why Bush is avoiding it like the plague. Kofi Annan... where are you?

Bush is and always will be a terrible speaker. I don't think he flustered any more than he usually does. Kerry seems stoic as always and the debate looked to be *so so* more of a feeling out than anything. I'm waiting for the mud to start slinging because that's when oratory and debate skills really shine.

This debate felt like a two step since every question seemed to have both sides making the same arguments over and over again. I didn't watch all of the debate because the Dodgers were playing (Dodgers won btw), but I did catch portions of it.

I'm unimpressed by both candidates.

well, "do YOU really want an inconsistent president" got really old, really fast. that's all i remember about the debate.

you got HAD... HAHAH!

[applehead]

that debate sucked ass.
i've heard enough about the war
from both sides.

i never noticed how bush's eyes
were set so close together until tonight.

[Mr.Lum]

Bush kept rolling his eyes and making faces. He has no posture. HE is not a good debater or speaker. He's a medicore person. His dad could have done better. Kerry kicked his ass. Bush was like "..." half the time and when he had something to say it was "hes inconsistant" and then he repeated that over and over again. What a loser. LOL. Cause he did lose.

[artsfartsyjanet]

i have to watch the taping of the debate tomorrow since my 14 y.o. brother has some class project to do on it.... so no opinions yet.

[deez nuts]

I'm unimpressed by both candidates.


same here. it was like watching two slow kids in a special ed class.

[ellsworth81]

same here. it was like watching two slow kids in a special ed class.

hmmm, so you would say your opinion of kerry hasn't changed. unfortunately, he seems like a better president than Bush for the time being. We can make Bush our goodwill representative where he will snort lines with diplomats around the world. That's where Bush is a viking!

[deez nuts]

hmmm, so you would say your opinion of kerry hasn't changed. unfortunately, he seems like a better president than Bush for the time being. We can make Bush our goodwill representative where he will snort lines with diplomats around the world. That's where Bush is a viking!


hmmmm that's a tough one. i'm more clear on what kerry stands for when it comes to national security and he did justify his alleged flip-floppings. i don't know how else he would've justified it other than adapting to changing conditions. it's good to hear it though. i also liked his awareness on the threat nuclear proliferation.

neither candidate really set off a lightbulb in my head that he's the clear cut candidate i will vote for. i will wait and see on the other debates.


if neither makes it clear by the time i go to the booths, i'm voting pro-paycheck aka project dolla dolla billz yo.

[FrankieY18]

i watched the first half and missed the second half..but my friend was telling me that there were 15 seconds that Bush opened his mouth and didn't say anything...it was hilarious....jay leno, david letterman and conan are going to attack that, probably....will see tonight..hehe

one quote i like from bush was: "The most consistent thing about Kerry is his inconsistent"...(don't remember the exact wording he used..but that was what i received)

[achtungbaby]

I've seen quite a few presidential debates before and last night was possibly one of the worst pillagings of our era. It reminded me of a few times when my boss at work as had public speaking engagements, and because of our day-to-day dealings on a given issue, will sometimes assume that thorough rehearsal and preparation won't be imperative -- that's exactly what the President sounded like last night: like someone who'd glanced over the talking points in the car on the way to the event, but because he hadn't gone over it again and again and again, stumbled, muttered and even said shit that was just plain wrong (Kerry *did* mention Poland you moron).

Now, that's just sort of the "presentation" side of a debate that I'm talking about, and perhaps if that was the only thing lacking in the President, I wouldn't have felt like it was some ridiculous college football game rout, but the substance of his message might have been even worse: yes, Mr. President, we know you think Kerry is a flip-floppah...would you care to articulate or support that argument? No? You only wish to keep reiterating the same thing?

What was even more stunning was that this debate was supposed to bring home even more about how the President was tough on terror and would keep the country safe...but when push came to shove, had apparently no idea how to go about doing that. It seems that our President's foreign policy for the next four years would seem to be centered on discussing how John Kerry voted to authorize action in the Senate (based on the faulty evidence from the Administration) and then later criticized it.

Even if the George Bush of 2000 had showed up, it might have at least been a more decent fight. At least then he appeared more coherent and cognizant of what was being discussed presently than the guy from last night.

Kerry's best moment:

And for all the rest of the parents in America who are wondering about their kids going to a school or anywhere else in the world, what kind of world they're going to grow up in, let me look you in the eye and say to you: I defended this country as a young man in war, and I will defend it as president of the United States.

But I have a difference with this president. I believe we're strongest when we reach out and lead the world and build strong alliances. I have a plan for Iraq. I believe we can be successful. I'm not talking about leaving. I'm talking about winning. And we need a fresh start, a new credibility, a president who can bring allies to our side.

Just how good was Kerry? Even Republican Senator John McCain acknowledged that he handed Bush his ass:

Sen. John McCain (news, bio, voting record), the Arizona Republican who informally advised Bush on how to debate his friend and Senate colleague, told reporters in Miami on Friday that the debate was probably Kerry's "brightest moment" in the last six weeks. "He presented himself well, John did," McCain said. "Kerry came out slugging."

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=2&u=/ap/20041001/ap_on_el_pr/debate_rdp_29

[SunWuKong]

^ I tried to find a Fox News poll but couldn't. I would imagine their poll would show the exact opposite.

i couldn't find a Fox News poll on the debate either, but i did find an article on foxnews.com that says that polls show that Kerry came out ahead in the debate.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,134165,00.html

What was even more stunning was that this debate was supposed to bring home even more about how the President was tough on terror and would keep the country safe...but when push came to shove, had apparently no idea how to go about doing that. It seems that our President's foreign policy for the next four years would seem to be centered on discussing how John Kerry voted to authorize action in the Senate (based on the faulty evidence from the Administration) and then later criticized it.

yeah, from the debate last night, it seemed to me that Bush has about as coherent a plan as Kerry does, which is, not very coherent at all. seems he just wants to keep doing what he's been doing - which i think will definitely make this war more and more like the Vietnam War.

Just how good was Kerry? Even Republican Senator John McCain acknowledged that he handed Bush his ass:

speaking of McCain, he was quite the sly dog last night...

http://www.foxnews.com/photo_essay/photoessay_168_images/mccain_daughters_450.jpg
watch where that hand is going, Senator!

[Yeahman]

Just how good was Kerry? Even Republican Senator John McCain acknowledged that he handed Bush his ass:
No he didn't. Did you misread the quote or something?
"Both of them, I thought they did well," McCain told FOX News. "The reason this president is popular is not because he's a complex individual. He's popular because you see a man who is committed to leading this country in the War on Terror.

"This is what's making the American people — in a time of great insecurity that we're in — have great strength ... and this image, I think, was reaffirmed in the eyes of the American people tonight."

[kasia]

I don't think anyone hit a homerun.
I did have to reread the transcript to see what Kerry's position was on the war. At first it seemed as though he thought the war was a mistake. At first it seemed like he said that Bin Laden was the real threat and that Saddam was contained.
I can now see his real position though. Kerry believes that Saddam was a threat and that he must be disarmed by any means necessary. He would have prefered a diplomatic process. I guess I don't disagree with that position.
After watching the debate, I don't particularly dislike Kerry so much anymore.

i didn't really have a problem understanding his position. but then, i sat through the entire thing. he thought that Iraq was a threat but a war should only have been our last resort. he didn't say that saddam needed to be disarmed by any means necessary, though - that would be the position of bush. smoke 'em out. all of them. all them folks with evil hearts. anyhow, kerry also pointed out that there were a number of other countries that should be considered as real threats as well - take, north korea. however, he pointed out how bush never did anything about north korea. the implication...? north korea has no oil. and kim jung il never tried to kill his dad. this is a war we fought...so that he could get revenge for his dad.

No he didn't. Did you misread the quote or something?

wow. were those the only things he said about the debate?

[hooligan]

Then it worked.if you mean it worked as in making bush sound like a broken record then, hell yeah. don't forget the daily show is made up of pot smoking slackers.

No he didn't. Did you misread the quote or something?wasn't there some kind of report that says that 60% of fox news watchers are misinformed about the news?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A27061-2003Oct14&notFound=true

Fact-Free News


By Harold Meyerson
Wednesday, October 15, 2003; Page A23


Ever worry that millions of your fellow Americans are walking around knowing things that you don't? That your prospects for advancement may depend on your mastery of such arcana as who won the Iraqi war or where exactly Europe is?

Then don't watch Fox News. The more you watch, the more you'll get things wrong.


Researchers from the Program on International Policy Attitudes (a joint project of several academic centers, some of them based at the University of Maryland) and Knowledge Networks, a California-based polling firm, have spent the better part of the year tracking the public's misperceptions of major news events and polling people to find out just where they go to get things so balled up. This month they released their findings, which go a long way toward explaining why there's so little common ground in American politics today: People are proceeding from radically different sets of facts, some so different that they're altogether fiction.
In a series of polls from May through September, the researchers discovered that large minorities of Americans entertained some highly fanciful beliefs about the facts of the Iraqi war. Fully 48 percent of Americans believed that the United States had uncovered evidence demonstrating a close working relationship between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda. Another 22 percent thought that we had found the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. And 25 percent said that most people in other countries had backed the U.S. war against Saddam Hussein. Sixty percent of all respondents entertained at least one of these bits of dubious knowledge; 8 percent believed all three.

The researchers then asked where the respondents most commonly went to get their news. The fair and balanced folks at Fox, the survey concludes, were "the news source whose viewers had the most misperceptions." Eighty percent of Fox viewers believed at least one of these un-facts; 45 percent believed all three. Over at CBS, 71 percent of viewers fell for one of these mistakes, but just 15 percent bought into the full trifecta. And in the daintier precincts of PBS viewers and NPR listeners, just 23 percent adhered to one of these misperceptions, while a scant 4 percent entertained all three.

Now, this could just be pre-sorting by ideology: Conservatives watch O'Reilly, liberals look at Lehrer, and everyone finds his belief system confirmed. But the Knowledge Network nudniks took that into account, and found that even among people of like mind, where they got their news still shaped their sense of the real. Among respondents who said they would vote for George W. Bush in next year's presidential race, for instance, more than three-quarters of the Fox watchers thought we'd uncovered a working relationship between Hussein and al Qaeda, while just half of those who watch PBS believed this to be the case.

Misperceptions can also be the result of inattention, of course. If you nod off for just a nanosecond in the middle of Tom Brokaw intoning, "U.S. inspectors did not find weapons of mass destruction today," you could think we'd just uncovered Hussein's nuclear arsenal. So the wily researchers also controlled for intensity of viewership, and concluded that, "in the case of those who primarily watched Fox News, greater attention to news modestly increases the likelihood of misperceptions." Particularly when that news includes hyping every false lead in Iraq as the certain prelude to uncovering a massive WMD cache.

One question inevitably raised by these findings is whether Fox News is failing or succeeding. Over at CBS, the news that 71 percent of viewers hold one of these mistaken notions should be cause for concern, but whether such should be the case at Fox because 80 percent of their viewers are similarly mistaken is not at all clear. Rupert Murdoch, Roger Ailes and the other guys at Fox have long demonstrated a clearer commitment to changing public policy than to reporting it, and an even clearer commitment to reporting it in such a way as to change it.

Take a wild flight of fancy with me and assume for just a moment that one major goal over at Fox is to ensure Bush's reelection. Surely, anyone who believes that Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda were in cahoots, that we've found the WMD and that Bush is revered among the peoples of the world -- all of these known facts to nearly half the Fox viewers -- is a good bet to be a Bush voter in next year's contest. By this standard -- moving votes into Bush's column and keeping them there -- Fox has to be judged a stunning success. It's not so hot on conveying information as such, but mere empiricism must seem so terribly vulgar to such creatures of refinement as Murdoch and Ailes.

The writer will answer questions about this column during a Live Online discussion at 4 p.m. today at www.washingtonpost.com (http://www.washingtonpost.com/).

meyersonh@washpost.com lies and the liars who tell them.

[Faithless]

Bush scolded Kerry about Kerry's accusation that Prime Minister Allawi was a puppet.

Well ... Report on U.S. Role in Allawi Speech Stirs Complaint (http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20040930/pl_nm/iraq_allawi_bush_dc_1)
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush (news - web sites) came under fire from a senior Senate Democrat on Thursday after the Washington Post said the U.S. government and a representative of Bush's reelection campaign helped draft Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi's speech to Congress last week.

Democratic Sen. Diane Feinstein of California said in a Sept. 30 letter to Bush that the newspaper report raised doubts about Allawi's optimistic assertions on Iraqi reconstruction efforts and the prospect for elections.

"To learn that this was not an independent view, but one that was massaged by your campaign operatives, jaundices the speech and reduces the credibility of his remarks," Feinstein said. "I hope that you'll let me know whether these claims are accurate."
...

.
I'm just going to read this verbatim, so please forgive me. It came from a good man, Mr. Rove.
\\
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v245/chottomatte/allawi000.jpg

[Mr.Lum]

i couldn't find a Fox News poll on the debate either, but i did find an article on foxnews.com that says that polls show that Kerry came out ahead in the debate.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,134165,00.html



yeah, from the debate last night, it seemed to me that Bush has about as coherent a plan as Kerry does, which is, not very coherent at all. seems he just wants to keep doing what he's been doing - which i think will definitely make this war more and more like the Vietnam War.



speaking of McCain, he was quite the sly dog last night...

http://www.foxnews.com/photo_essay/photoessay_168_images/mccain_daughters_450.jpg
watch where that hand is going, Senator!

Bush has HOT daughters.

[achtungbaby]

i couldn't find a Fox News poll on the debate either, but i did find an article on foxnews.com that says that polls show that Kerry came out ahead in the debate.
Here's the Gallup/USA Today/CNN poll.

Gallup: Kerry 53% - Bush 37% (http://www.gallup.com/poll/content/?ci=13237)

yeah, from the debate last night, it seemed to me that Bush has about as coherent a plan as Kerry does, which is, not very coherent at all. seems he just wants to keep doing what he's been doing - which i think will definitely make this war more and more like the Vietnam War.
I tend to believe that the hawks in the our current Administration would love to have a decades long, global (cold) war. Lots of money spent on toys to blow stuff up, a constant, pervasive specter they can bring out from under the bed anytime they have to bring the country into line...



speaking of McCain, he was quite the sly dog last night...

Those are McCain's daughters aren't they... :eek:

No he didn't. Did you misread the quote or something?
Click on the link that I provided. Re-read the article. Stop watching so much FOX News and pro wrestling.

[Craig]

Those are McCain's daughters aren't they... :eek:Nope, those are the Bush girls.

[achtungbaby]

I did have to reread the transcript to see what Kerry's position was on the war.
I'd be happy to explain it to you or sum it up. It's quite simple and frankly, don't go along with the President's line of thinking (or lack thereof) that the world must be painted in black and white for life to go on; don't buy into that stop contradictory, hypocritical crap about "you're either for us or against us"...or more to the point, "Kerry has to be for or against the war for the sake of our troops."

Kerry's position on the war (based on the bits and pieces of the debate I saw):

1. The greatest threat to American security post 9/11 was not Sadaam Hussein but Osama bin Laden.

2. Based on the information that the Administration provided during the time leading up to the Iraq conflict, he supported having Hussein disarmed -- with the use of force, if necessary -- but only after every reasonable attempt towards a peaceful solution had been achieved. Bush failed to do that.

3. He believes, as does the President, that we must indeed "win" in Iraq, but that that win will only come through joint partnership/alliances with other nations. Such alliances will be impossible to forge under the current Adminstration, given the President sullied reputation.

Nope, those are the Bush girls.
Ahh, I was thrown off cuz they saved the pix with the filename "mccain_daughters_450.jpg"

Jesus...does it not look like she's pulling his hand in a certain direction, and he's trying to stave her off, nearly popping a blood vessel in the process?

[kimpossible]

I was wondering how long it would take you guys to get around to the Bush twins.

[VV o n g B a]

they aren't all that.

[Shuriken]

As a Kerry supporter, I am not optimistic about this debate process. As you might expect, I think that Kerry did very well last night and that Bush seemed as un-presidential as he's always seemed. (What do people see in him, anyway?) Of course, I'm pejudiced. But the bottom line is that these debates will be decided more on their atmospherics than on their substance — which plays to Bush's favor.

Conventional wisdom says that Al Gore won the 2000 presidential debates, but Bush's team did a better job of spinning the aftermath. Among those who didn't watch the Bush-Gore debates (which probably includes a majority of voters), it was driven home that Gore sighed the wrong way and seemed contemptuous. So, people remember Bush as having won the debates, enabling Bush to win enough votes to prevail in the 2000 election, if not in the popular vote. Substance be damned! I'm sure the same thing will happen this time around.

In the days to come, expect Tucker Carlson to greet TV audiences with: "Well, John Kerry is still comatose from the knockout punch that George Bush delivered Thursday night..." Or words to that effect. And expect Republicans to dismiss Democrats' opinions to the contrary. On the NewsHour last night, conservative commentator David Brooks said that Kerry came off as the smartest student in the class, while Bush seemed like the world-weary teacher. Take that!

I'm not saying that Bush fell on his face last night — he often came across as tongue-tied and testy, but not helpless. However, if Bush had fallen on his face, it probably only would have endeared him to his supporters and others. He would have appeared like one of the folks, a regular guy. By contrast, if Kerry fell on his face, it would have been curtains for his campaign. There's no way Kerry could have won outright last night. With the deck stacked against him, the best that he could have done was to play Bush to a draw.

[VV o n g B a]

i think its gonna be difficult for bush to spin this one. it's bush's grimaces that everyone is talking about today. and even conservatives generally agree that kerry did a better job. the only positives i hear are from karen hughes and sean hannity.

[Deadpool]

I didn't like the debate at all. THe whole thing was about iraq.
Bush kept saying "It's hard work."

[mrazntre]

I was wondering how long it would take you guys to get around to the Bush twins.


well....

1 is easy to get around, but the other might take some time cuz she's kinna fat.

[Mr.Lum]

I heard from some people that go to Yale (folks that had class w/ her) that the Yali one is dumb as bricks. Like her pops.

[tommyhtown]

they aren't all that.

Yeah, but hooking up with the daughters of the most powerful man in the world is something else. Imagine the possibilities -- doing 'it' in the Lincoln bedroom, joining part of the mile-high club ON the Airforce-one, etc.

I never thought of Chelsea that way but the Gore daughters ...

[Yeahman]

Hey guys, who am I?
"I understand that it's hard work... I understand what it means... It's hard work..."

Makes it sound like he didn't work a day in his life and was just thrown into the oval office unprepared. Oh wait. That's exactly what happened.

if you mean it worked as in making bush sound like a broken record then, hell yeah. don't forget the daily show is made up of pot smoking slackers.
I am a slacker but I don't smoke pot.

wasn't there some kind of report that says that 60% of fox news watchers are misinformed about the news?
Only 60%?
But all I was saying was that McCain never said that Kerry won the debate. That's called liberal spin. Even the Daily Show didn't go that far. Didn't Wesley Clark say that Bush bounced back after struggling early on the debate?

I'd be happy to explain it to you or sum it up. It's quite simple and frankly, don't go along with the President's line of thinking (or lack thereof) that the world must be painted in black and white for life to go on; don't buy into that stop contradictory, hypocritical crap about "you're either for us or against us"...or more to the point, "Kerry has to be for or against the war for the sake of our troops."

Kerry's position on the war (based on the bits and pieces of the debate I saw):

1. The greatest threat to American security post 9/11 was not Sadaam Hussein but Osama bin Laden.

2. Based on the information that the Administration provided during the time leading up to the Iraq conflict, he supported having Hussein disarmed -- with the use of force, if necessary -- but only after every reasonable attempt towards a peaceful solution had been achieved. Bush failed to do that.

3. He believes, as does the President, that we must indeed "win" in Iraq, but that that win will only come through joint partnership/alliances with other nations. Such alliances will be impossible to forge under the current Adminstration, given the President sullied reputation.
You forgot to add that Kerry still believes that Saddam was a threat.
"I've had one position, one consistent position, that Saddam Hussein was a threat."

[mndeg]

hes like "No, I can't do that."

[SunWuKong]

Jesus...does it not look like she's pulling his hand in a certain direction, and he's trying to stave her off, nearly popping a blood vessel in the process?

http://www.foxnews.com/photo_essay/photoessay_168_images/mccain_daughters_450.jpg

Jenna: Please, Senator, just a little...
McCain: No no, we're in public! People will see us!

As a Kerry supporter, I am not optimistic about this debate process. As you might expect, I think that Kerry did very well last night and that Bush seemed as un-presidential as he's always seemed. (What do people see in him, anyway?) Of course, I'm pejudiced. But the bottom line is that these debates will be decided more on their atmospherics than on their substance — which plays to Bush's favor.

Conventional wisdom says that Al Gore won the 2000 presidential debates, but Bush's team did a better job of spinning the aftermath. Among those who didn't watch the Bush-Gore debates (which probably includes a majority of voters), it was driven home that Gore sighed the wrong way and seemed contemptuous. So, people remember Bush as having won the debates, enabling Bush to win enough votes to prevail in the 2000 election, if not in the popular vote. Substance be damned! I'm sure the same thing will happen this time around.

In the days to come, expect Tucker Carlson to greet TV audiences with: "Well, John Kerry is still comatose from the knockout punch that George Bush delivered Thursday night..." Or words to that effect. And expect Republicans to dismiss Democrats' opinions to the contrary. On the NewsHour last night, conservative commentator David Brooks said that Kerry came off as the smartest student in the class, while Bush seemed like the world-weary teacher. Take that!

I'm not saying that Bush fell on his face last night — he often came across as tongue-tied and testy, but not helpless. However, if Bush had fallen on his face, it probably only would have endeared him to his supporters and others. He would have appeared like one of the folks, a regular guy. By contrast, if Kerry fell on his face, it would have been curtains for his campaign. There's no way Kerry could have won outright last night. With the deck stacked against him, the best that he could have done was to play Bush to a draw.


actually Bush looked very frustrated whenever Kerry was speaking, and some of his responses showed that, too. but i thought Bush was a much better actor and played to his audience's emotions, a lot more so than Kerry did.

[Kuchana]

Next Debate: Vice Presidential debate on Tuesday 10/5 -im expecting Cheney to lose.

On the contrary, I've read that Cheney is an excellent debator as well as Edwards. Now that will be a good debate to watch instead of Bush and Kerry.

As for the Bush and Kerry debate, I gotta admit I was disappointed by Bush's response for the most part. From what I read about his record in debating, I expected more from him. Kerry on the other hand was quite articulate. But that doesn't mean I agree with what he said. Just because you can state your words in an articulate manner doesn't get my vote. So he can talk the talk but can he walk the walk? I hardly think so. I have to agree with Bush's statement about the only consistent thing about Kerry was his inconsistency and I believe that is a point that needs to be made, repeatedly. But I also liked how Kerry owned up to his inconsistency yet I still don't believe his sincerity. I disagree with his idea on N.Korea and his belief that he can get France and Germany to send troops to Iraq (fat chance that will ever happen since both countries repeatedly stated they will not send any!) In the end, I was unimpressed with both candidates but as far as whose points I agree with the most, even before the debate, I'd have to go with Bush. It's interesting that none of them brought up the Israel-Palestine issue. Hah! Well only as a passing reference to succeeding in terrorism but not actually acknowledging the problem of the conflict in the first place.

It ended up being I only watched the debate for about 10 minutes and then turned it off because I was completely disgusted by the constant sparring between the two and besides I've already made up my mind for the most part.

[Mr.Lum]

It's interesting that none of them brought up the Israel-Palestine issue. Hah!

Because neither of them have the ability to solve it.

[Chu Chi]

I didn't like the debate at all. THe whole thing was about iraq.
Bush kept saying "It's hard work."


It is hard work if you're a "C" student.

CC

[Mr.Lum]

It would have been funny if somebody farted really loud. LOL. I love that kind of shit.

[Shuriken]

"I have learned that success is to be measured not so much by the position that one has reached in life as by the obstacles which he has had to overcome while trying to succeed."

-Booker T. Washington


I wonder how this saying would apply to George W. Bush.

[Mr.Lum]

He's a miserable failure.

[hooligan]

He's a miserable failure.
let's change this regime, baby.

internets.

[nola]

Are the polls supporting Kerry or Bush after the second presidential debate?

[Faithless]

I PDF'd the transcript for debate 1.

I think the debates are worth saving for a bit -- especially when these darn news web sites seem to like to archive their stuff so fast. :rolleyes: