LOL
What a substandard debate, looked like 2 high schoolers going at it.
If there is anyone on this planet unable to exploit Kerry's wishy washiness, it's Bush.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Faisal: *
I have DVR'd it. Will watch it tonite. BAsed on what you guys are saying, I am now most interested in myvoice's comments on the debate. ;-P
[/QUOTE]
myvoice has already started searching right wing blogs to come up with republican talking points and you will see how pathetically he will try to convince us that Bush won the debate.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Agent Smith: *
myvoice has already started searching right wing blogs to come up with republican talking points and you will see how pathetically he will try to convince us that Bush won the debate.
[/QUOTE]
haha.. freerepublic is posturing that even though bush didnt 'blow kerry out' he spoke from his heart unlike kerry who spoke like a senator..
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ravage: *
haha.. freerepublic is posturing that even though bush didnt 'blow kerry out' he spoke from his heart unlike kerry who spoke like a senator..
[/QUOTE]
and Kerry used his brain. We want a President who uses his brain not heart.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by skhan: *
LOL
What a substandard debate, looked like 2 high schoolers going at it.
If there is anyone on this planet unable to exploit Kerry's wishy washiness, it's Bush.
[/QUOTE]
i dont think that the debate was below standards......questions were tough and covered a broad spectrum and i think kerry and bush did a pretty decent job. They were well prepared to answer some tough questions. However i personally think kerry did a better job. He was more composed and to the point. He was quick in picking Bush's mistakes during the debate and he acted really presidential throughout. But dont underestimate Bush. we should realize that bush's " down to earth" debate style connects really well with millions of average and below average americans. whereas as kerry's intellectual approach to solve different problems could be too hard for an average american to grasp. But in essence, Kerry did a better job.
This dumb debate was like a boring Reader's Digest version of this dumb repetitive and highly uninformative campaign.
Is it really a great win for Kerry? Maybe just to be declared "winner" is all one gets out of this and the new momentum that is created.
No real exchange of new or enlightening information about these two sadly uninspiring fellows.
Bush:
In the aftermath of 9.11 bring the actual perps to justice:
OBL, al quaeda, Talibs.
In addition a long-term strategy to effect drastic political and social change in the region most responsible for enabling and empowering current and future terrorists. (read "Operation Iraqi Freedom").
Ultimately sending in the most severe terms possible this message: Enabling, aiding and encouraging terrorist activity against the U.S. will have "serious consequences".
Frankly, these are still very defensible positions in the aftermath of the worst and most horrific attack on innocent U.S. citizens in our history.
Strong message with a crappy messenger and a highly motivated opposition-so it doesn't resonate well in this debate.
Kerry:
A telling moment: Comparing Bush's Iraq decision with the quip, " like attacking Mexico after Pearl Harbor". Here's what I just don't like about Kerry. Throughout the campaign and in quips like this, he is pandering to the anti-war crowd. "Wrong war, wrong time" bit. If the war is as preposterous as wrong-thinking as the "Mexico" quip suggests. If it was based solely on GWBs belief or intentional ruse of WMD, John Kerry should long ago have had the balls to do what Dean and Kucinich did and be outright against the war on principle alone. But he voted for the War resolution, which he's explained away as "simply giving the president the authority" to wage war. And I just think the authority to go to war means quite a lot if you are a U.S. senator voting for it and you would not even dream of doing so unless you-John Kerry-had very serious and compelling reasons to do so. I think the entire U.S. congress overwhlemingly gave GWB the green light to kick Sadaam around when the U.N. showed that it was not serious about "serious consequences".
So it's the mischaracterization that Iraq was GWBs unilateral war that in my view is a serious cop out for those democrats who want to be "tough on terror" and in theory support all of the three basic tenets of the longterm strategy of the WOT, while still appearing to be "anti-war candidates" for their very pliable constituency.
So, to conclude the left is staying true to the main thrust of their main campaign focus-"Anyone but Bush".
That apparently is the only qualification, because while Kerry spoke more cleary, he really didn't say anything at all.
Oh and also, I don't like the way Kerry skis. I saw some video of him skiing in Sun Valley, Idaho. He skis like such an aristocratic pussy. Yech!
Kerry definately did a better job that bush . However he could have been more "strong" on certain things. When bush spoke of the possibilty of billateral talks with KIM of North Korea he used the "China" card, Kerry should have used his argument to draw analogy with iraq. But nonetheless he did present some sound facts . All in all it was a good debate which swung in favour of Kerry.
-
The presstitutes were trying as hard as they could to create the impression that the two candidates were radically different and were two ‘choices’ for the people.
-
Bush wouldn’t touch ‘nuculur’ with a ten foot pole..whatever the hell is WMD non-proliferation
A big win for Kerry no matter how the Repub's try and spin it, looking forward to the next one!
John Kerry won this debate in the first ten minutes. He came out poised, electrified and on message. He looked Presidential and in this country this means a lot. I felt Bush had every opportunity to go after Kerry but he did not. Why? I think Bush did not want to be the first to start personal attacks and Kerry never did take the "flip-flop" bait. Bush looked like he ran out of material about 30 minutes from the end while Kerry looked like he could go on for another hour. Bush often sighed and took long pauses after asking for 30 seconds to rebut. He appeared ill at ease. Kerry was of larger stature than him. It was the cowboy versus the professor last night and the professor schooled him.
I also think Kerry struck just the right cord by respecting the President but clearly marking the differences. Kerry said tremendous things about the First Lady which were classy. He stated that we must "reach out to the Muslim world," which was brilliant. He brought up how Bush's Secretary of State had to apologize to the world for misinformation.
As a Pakistani-American, I know Bush would be better for us; however I just cannot, as a person of conscience, vote again for Bush, given the destruction and unnecessary death he has caused all over the globe. I do think Iraqis better without Saddam but a civil war in its place is not better. I do think Bush bundled the post-war planning in Iraq and has all but forgotten about OBL.
The most telling lines from the debate:
Kerry: "What is worse, making a mistake in how you talk about the war or making a mistake in how you conduct the war?" One got the feeling that if there were any Kerry supporters in the room, they would have jumped out of their chair and given a five minute applause.
Kerry: "Saddam Hussein didn't attack us, Osama Bin Laden attacked us."
Bush: "I KNOW Osama Bin Laden attacked us!"
Bush came across as angry and looked very sour. Score one for the Democrats last night -- and humanity.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ravage: *
haha.. freerepublic is posturing that even though bush didnt 'blow kerry out' he spoke from his heart unlike kerry who spoke like a senator..
[/QUOTE]
What heart?
Kerry did better than expected, and Bush did worse. The problem is that this does not necessarily translate into votes. Bush was widely expected to do poorly in the debate, and he survived without major gaffes.
At this point the “odds” are 65% that Bush will win. the next time this is measured Kerry will close the gap, but he is certainly not in the position to overtake Bush. The post debate “spin” is probably more important than the debate itself.
Getting more interesting, but certainly no reason for celebration on either side.
For an interesting perpsective, here is a financial web site where contracts are traded based on the election results. (look at the bottom right) Beyond just words, here people are putting their money where their mouth is. The results can be updated and tracked any time!
As of today the “odds” that GWB will win are actually better by one percent than yesterday! Apparently expectations for his performance were quite low.
Good analysis TUMS. Bush mentioned a few times how his administration has a multi-prong approach in fighting the war on terror, unfortunately those prongs consiste of guns, missiles, and bombs while Kerry’s multi-prong approach is military force, global cooperation, and dialog with Muslims, who’s religion is falsely being used as a front to recruit would be terrorists.
The core difference between the two parties as presented in the debate last night is that Bush’s policy is "Our way or the highway" while Kerry believes that Global cooperation is the way to go, which doesn't mean turning away from the fight or submitting to the terrorists, or asking the world for permission to act, but garnering support for the military and other actions you do take. Bush just doesn't get that, but cowboys aren't know for their brains and this isn’t the wild west.
:k:
What a pity that Bush will win anyway.
Kerry looked Presidential. The fact that he is posing such a huge challenge to an incumbant this late in the game is a good indication he might emerge as a winner. Repbulicans were hoping to knock him out last night. They lost.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by funguy: *
Kerry looked Presidential. The fact that he is posing such a huge challenge to an incumbant this late in the game is a good indication he might emerge as a winner. Repbulicans were hoping to knock him out last night. They lost.
[/QUOTE]
FG, what huge challenge?, man you are living in a fantasy world. There is no chance Kerry is going to win. He can win all the debates, but he is not going to win. There is a clear difference, people do not believe that Kerry can do an effective job on the issues that face US today, War in Iraq...Is he for it before he was against it? that has to be the line of the century. We should increase troops in Iraq, we should bring them back and so on. What you need is consistency, that I am afraid Kerry cannot provide.
^ Kaleem, from my understanding he was for giving the President power to go to war. However, he feels that the president went in too fast (many people do). I think he's been consistent. But people blabber so much and twist words, that no one actually hears what he's trying to say.
The other problem is Bush's crap about being "resolved" and not following "the politics." Well, our presidents are elected officials that are supposed to represent the people of the country. If the American people learn from their mistakes, and realize that a situation should have been handled differently, shouldn't a president be capable of understanding that and actually reflecting it in his policies?
To me Bush comes across as, " I know everything, you are all stupid to comprehend what I am doing. I am good. The rest of the world is evil." It is this self-righteous attitude that will bring his demise next month.
It was obvious once again last night, that he is NOTHING without his chamchaaz Chenney and Rumsfeld.
Look, I will not argue with you that Bush is not the sharpest knife in the drawer, however, a sign of an intelligent person is that he surrounds himself with people who are. That is exactly what he did. I am afraid of the people Kerry will associate himself with. To me he is just not the right candidate. I do not agree with a lot of Bush administration policies, but, I cannot bring myself to vote for Kerry.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Kaleem: *
I am afraid of the people Kerry will associate himself with. To me he is just not the right candidate.
[/QUOTE]
Such as?