I thought Kerry came off a lot more poised and prepared and is simply a better speaker, but I think he concentrates way too much on saying "he'll do things different" without really articulating what that is. He wants us out of Iraq as soon as possible yet he wants to send more troops in and train them better. He criticizes spending so much money on the war yet clearly he'd have to spend a lot more to accomplish his strategy PLUS set up another military section for the Sudan and other military obligations outside of Iraq. Either way, he won by default because Bush didn't know what the fuck he or Kerry was talking about and constantly went back to vague flip flopping remarks rather than clearly articualting why Kerry's ideas may be unrealistic. In conclusion, I'm still voting for Nader.
There was a some show on PBS last night which follows all of the third party candidates to their national conventions. Interesting stuff. Michael Badnarik will be the one third party candidate on the most state ballots.
fuck I would have loved to have caught that
They show most of the canidates campaigning and stuff, except for Nader. Whenever they show him, he's just always coming out of an office or meeting room, to talk to the press.
Kerry basically came off like I said he would, he'd be bush but with more feelings and emotions.
So instead of acting like a mongol, he'd be a mongol with table manners.
I wish Jim Leher would have asked the two candidates to take a sheet of paper and make a paper airplane and sail it across the room, and see who could fly their plane farther.
If Bush saw kerry running around with a paper airplane he'd have to take a seat and sit motionless for seven minutes.
If Jim asked Bush to make a paper plane, he'd asked for a leave of absence.
this is painful to watch, i still think bush is gonna win, but christ now i am starting to doubt my decision on who to vote for. mark one up for kerry
granted debates don't really mean shit, and i still have no clue what kerry's position is on things yet, other than the fact that, its a better position than the presidents.
i was hearing all week how smooth bush becomes during a debate, and how he crushed gore 4 years ago, i don't see it
Edited By crack hitler on 1096608184
Makes you miss Howard Dean and his banshee yells.
Quote:He criticizes spending so much money on the war yet clearly he'd have to spend a lot more to accomplish his strategy PLUS set up another military section for the Sudan and other military obligations outside of Iraq.
he made it very clear that he would repeal the tax cut for the top 2% that bush created to pay for his plans.
did you people really pay attention or did you apply your normal short attention span idiocy to the debate?
while i was a bush hater but still unsure as to whether i would give my vote to kerry i am stunned at the superficial nature at which you all have seemed to watch this debate.
as to gonzo's comments as to kerry coming across as bush wit "feelings", i couldnt be more disappointed at your lack of observation.
kerry obviously dominated this debate. bush was on the defensive all night. bush said nothing of substance, and kerry came across as infinetely more on top of the issues.
unless kerry does something reprehensible, he has my vote.
sleeper, you keep on voting for a man you know nothing about. your obstinance in the face of ignorance is cute.
When in doubt, go for cuteness
I agree with Arpi but I will not endorse negative remarks in Gonzo's direction.
i missed most of the debate, i did catch the last 20-30 minutes and kerry seemed to have a strong grasp on every question that was posed to him, and a direct and concrete answer. bush spoke in platitudes and generalized how he "knows how the world works" and "stay the course" and about his "conviction". he sounded like a politician while kerry stood up there and gave real answers and how he planned to do things differently than bush had in the past 4 years, and change the mistakes that bush was too stubborn to realize he had made under the guise of "being resolute" and "strong in the face of terror"
Dude he basically says that he would do the exact same things Bush has done but he'd have done it in a more polite way as far as iraq goes. His whole stance on most issues were that Bush has no tact when dealing with other countries, Kerry would basically throw in an excuse me and a please before he would have invaded iraq.
In the end it's easy to monday morning quarterback, no one can trully know what kerry would have done in the same situation. Just as no one can trully know if Kerry will bring a true alliance like he says he can, basically because he says the other countries will like him more than Bush but thats an "if".
Yes Kerry whipped Dubya if for nothing more than just coming off more calm, prepared, and intelligent. My opinion still stands though that I want neither man in office but unfortunatly this is what we're stuck with so i'll just stay at work on election day.
Sorry if I dissapoint you but i'd have to give a fuck about your pompus and arrogant opinons in the first place.
Observations on the debate:
Bush:
well, he was very repetitive, sputtering or rambling...constantly overused his time and then asked for 30sec responses, and then didn't have anything to say. He basically looked lost at times, very uncomfortable, and those faces were made when Kerry was hammering him or made points, made look Bush look bad. First 30min, Bush looked fine, but once Kerry started hammering and really making points, Bush seemed to lose it. Some might not totally agree with Kerry's content, but he was in command, owned Bush on this debate, and took him very to task over Iraq. MSNBC did a great job covering. CNN too.
VIEW FROM THE RIGHT:
Some felt (Dick Morris of the Post) that this was the debate on Kerry's weakest point (foreign policy), and Bush had an opportunity to "put him away" but failed miserably. Soon we have a debate on Bush's weakest point, economy and domestic issues.
my father and my roommate Tom, both republicans, thought Bush looked awful. Tom thinks it's over.
OVERALL:
i just thought kerry gave an A+ presentation and overall debate based on questions asked and making points. did his content equal A+? No. things still remained unanswered in some areas. I'd give him a B there. As for swing voters...I will refer to NBC, who had an interview with a room of swing voters...every one of them gave the debate to Kerry. Several had their vote swayed, the rest would wait till the next debates. Thats a big win. And thats why Tom fears it's over...that the staunch left and right's decisions are aleady set...but its the swing voters that will make this election...and last night was a big influential test, and Kerry shone.
SUMMATION:
Will that remain, will things change...who is to say? But for now, Kerry, in mind, will get a bump and cements a possible push to grab swing voters in this. I still view the election as a tossup. Who grabs the swing voters wins this election. In my mind, Kerry won the first skirmish.
Brian "GIP" Cosell with the blow by blow.
i got the jew, but not the jew nose.
Quote:Sorry if I dissapoint you but i'd have to give a fuck about your pompus and arrogant opinons in the first place.
thank you sir!
Quote:Sorry if I dissapoint you but i'd have to give a fuck about your pompus and arrogant opinons in the first place
based upon your superficial and childlike understanding of candidates positions , i can't really say that this bothers me.