Buftex Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 Bush was an was awful tonight! He was incoherent at times, looked like a petulant bratty spoiled child (which he may be), and on numerous occaisions showed his characteristic tendency to not see the big picture, even in the confines of the debate itself. I admitt, I will vote Kerry, but tonight was the first time I really saw what I had wanted to see from him all along. It seems like Bushs' new mantra will be "its' really, really hard work, it is...", and "we have really good people working out there". He said each of these things numerous times, even when it didn't fit the topic. Frankly, having suffered Bush as governor here in Texas before is current term in the big house, he honestly seems like a man who is unraveling. I expect he will be heavily coached for the next debate, and will likely do much better. Tonight though, Kerry had a definite edge. I am not saying he will now win the election, but tonight was a good night for Kerry. By the way, for all those who say that Bush is the "regular guy" who you would like to sit down and have a beer with, I ask, huh? He is the kind of guy, personally, who would make me want to bust a chair over his head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 To me it looked like Bush WAS the one that "saw the big picture" Kerry presented himself a lot better......but Bush's subtance wins over Kerrys style in my opinion It is easy to sit there and criticize the man actually doing the job.....doing the job is another matter altogether..... Kerry was making promises he cant keep......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 Once again proof that the average voter who has made up their mind sees things exactly the way they want to. A real debate over issues didn't happen, regardless of what is said by both sides and the media was on the "post" shows. That idea has disappeared, and in its place we are now analyzing inconsequential intangibles like confidence, likeability, quick wit, and then spinning and more analysis of that for days following. From what I saw, no one won the "debate" and America lost a little more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark VI Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 By the way, for all those who say that Bush is the "regular guy" who you would like to sit down and have a beer with, I ask, huh? He is the kind of guy, personally, who would make me want to bust a chair over his head. 51811[/snapback] Outstanding, D ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunTheBall Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 I have to agree with AD on this one. 99% of people had already made up their minds about who won the debate before it even took place. There are so many people who will see only what they want to see, on either side, without being objective. This wasn't a debate of issues, this was two guys giving prepared statements in a disjointed manner. All the "spin" which means "stevestojan" that comes from either camp just seems like that teacher in the Peanuts "Waa waa, waa waa". I don't even hear it anymore. RunTheBall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 At the very least one has to admit that Bush looked unhinged and unprepared, which is tough to excuse for a sitting president. And he was very much on the defensive. Kerry made some strong points that were unanswered (ie regarding the long-term status of bases in Iraq) and that may or may not be noticed by the viewing public. I am voting Kerry and there never has been a question. But I am interested to see what swing-state and undecided voters think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockpile Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 I think if they were competing for a role in a movie, Kerry is the better actor. That is about as far as I will discuss my political opinions here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 There are two clear reasons for me why it was obviously that Kerry won the debate handily. 1. I watched every network I could for hours after and some this morning, seeing an equal number of Bush supporters and Kerry supporters. There were some if not several Bush supporters who admitted that Kerry won the debate. Some of them said he won it decisively. None of the other side said anything close to Bush won. That is a very good indication, and if the dynamics were reversed, I would have said the same thing about Bush. 2. Howard Fineman made a pretty good observation about the spin room.He said when they opened the doors the entire Bush team looked glum before they met with reporters, and the entire Kerry team was practically dancing and fired up. That showed him this was a clear victory in their own camps eyes. Scarborough the staunch conservative said even Richard Reed the choirboy who is ALWAYS up and positive looked like he was beaten, and had never seen him like that. The body language of the two camps is what shows the tale of thr tape not what they blather as spin meisters. I agree, no knockout punch. I doubt Bush lost many votes. I think Kerry did well for himself, and looked like he could be President standing ext to the President. The cutaway shots will hurt Bush like they hurt Gore in 2000. Finally, the good news if you're a Kerry supporter, is that this entire debate was on Iraq and foreign policy. By far Bush's strength. This is the one that Bush SHOULD win handily, and he flat didn't. The next two are more to Kerry's advantage, at least the major topics. If he continues to do well, he could win the election in the debates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich in Ohio Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 I would say that kerry did a good job presenting himself, and that is what he was tying to do. The content did not seem to be important to kerry, just the fact that he looked good saying whatever it was he said. On a number of occasions, he downright lied, and he did a very good job of that. Case in point, whe he said that he "never said that GWB lied" this is 1--% wrong. He did it on at least two occasions. The problem is, that in a 90 second response it is tough to make the whole case. Because many if not all voters who have even 1/8th of a brain have already made up thier minds, the debates actually does little to effect them. They are basically watching to see their guy slap the other guys around a little. So in the end, the purpose of these debates is to win over the nitwits in the crowd who for some unknown reason have yet to make up thier minds. These people are the same type of people who are likely to screw up a simple punch ballot. So with that in mind, congradulations to kerry for winning the nitwit vote. He deserves it. Therefore, in this regard I think that kerry so called won the 1st debate, and to the vistor goes the nitwits. Good luck with this bunch, they are no doubt a high achieving bunch who may not even be able to find the voting booths on Nov 2nd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paco Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 Bush was an was awful tonight! He was incoherent at times, looked like a petulant bratty spoiled child (which he may be), and on numerous occaisions showed his characteristic tendency to not see the big picture, even in the confines of the debate itself. I admitt, I will vote Kerry, but tonight was the first time I really saw what I had wanted to see from him all along. It seems like Bushs' new mantra will be "its' really, really hard work, it is...", and "we have really good people working out there". He said each of these things numerous times, even when it didn't fit the topic. Frankly, having suffered Bush as governor here in Texas before is current term in the big house, he honestly seems like a man who is unraveling. I expect he will be heavily coached for the next debate, and will likely do much better. Tonight though, Kerry had a definite edge. I am not saying he will now win the election, but tonight was a good night for Kerry. By the way, for all those who say that Bush is the "regular guy" who you would like to sit down and have a beer with, I ask, huh? He is the kind of guy, personally, who would make me want to bust a chair over his head. 51811[/snapback] Man, oh, man you sound like a Patriots Troll. "Yes, my quarterback is a GENIUS and your quarterbackis nothing but a STATUE." You know what happened last night, Buf? Kerry got a stay of execution. It was so blatantly obvious he will take what is clearly progress in the middle east and screw it all up by doing exactly what the terrorists would like; leave a handful of people in Iraq to do a little bit of training and send everyone else home so he can start getting blowjobs from France and Germany. And North Korea? He wants to step in front of China and have unilateral discussions with Kim? Let me get this straight...he wants our allies to help us, but he thinks it's better if HE does the talking to NK? Well, I think at least we figured out who Kerry was talking about when he suggested certain international figures want him to be president. Kerry finally came across as a person with a message. It's only taken THIS long, buf. Just because your horse has started to run doesn't mean it's still not a hag. Let's see how long he stays on message. Did you even bother to LISTEN to what Kerry was suggesting last night or are you just glad he didn't finally end up in the election chair? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 Man, oh, man you sound like a Patriots Troll. "Yes, my quarterback is a GENIUS and your quarterbackis nothing but a STATUE." You know what happened last night, Buf? Kerry got a stay of execution. It was so blatantly obvious he will take what is clearly progress in the middle east and screw it all up by doing exactly what the terrorists would like; leave a handful of people in Iraq to do a little bit of training and send everyone else home so he can start getting blowjobs from France and Germany. And North Korea? He wants to step in front of China and have unilateral discussions with Kim? Let me get this straight...he wants our allies to help us, but he thinks it's better if HE does the talking to NK? Well, I think at least we figured out who Kerry was talking about when he suggested certain international figures want him to be president. Kerry finally came across as a person with a message. It's only taken THIS long, buf. Just because your horse has started to run doesn't mean it's still not a hag. Let's see how long he stays on message. Did you even bother to LISTEN to what Kerry was suggesting last night or are you just glad he didn't finally end up in the election chair? 51946[/snapback] From Biden, a member of the foreign intelligence committee, he said ALL of those countries in the multi-lateral talks with North Korea, including China, have stated clearly that they WANT the United States to ALSO have bilateral talks with North Korea, which is Kerry stance. It is not one or the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 Nice Kerry spin. LEHRER: We'll come back to Iraq in a moment. But I want to come back to where I began, on homeland security. This is a two-minute new question, Senator Kerry. As president, what would you do, specifically, in addition to or differently to increase the homeland security of the United States than what President Bush is doing? KERRY: Jim, let me tell you exactly what I'll do. And there are a long list of things. First of all, what kind of mixed message does it send when you have $500 million going over to Iraq to put police officers in the streets of Iraq, and the president is cutting the COPS program in America? What kind of message does it send to be sending money to open firehouses in Iraq, but we're shutting firehouses who are the first- responders here in America. The president hasn't put one nickel, not one nickel into the effort to fix some of our tunnels and bridges and most exposed subway systems. That's why they had to close down the subway in New York when the Republican Convention was there. We hadn't done the work that ought to be done.The president -- 95 percent of the containers that come into the ports, right here in Florida, are not inspected. Civilians get onto aircraft, and their luggage is X-rayed, but the cargo hold is not X- rayed. Does that make you feel safer in America? This president thought it was more important to give the wealthiest people in America a tax cut rather than invest in homeland security. Those aren't my values. I believe in protecting America first. And long before President Bush and I get a tax cut -- and that's who gets it -- long before we do, I'm going to invest in homeland security and I'm going to make sure we're not cutting COPS programs in America and we're fully staffed in our firehouses and that we protect the nuclear and chemical plants. The president also unfortunately gave in to the chemical industry, which didn't want to do some of the things necessary to strengthen our chemical plant exposure. And there's an enormous undone job to protect the loose nuclear materials in the world that are able to get to terrorists. That's a whole other subject, but I see we still have a little bit more time. Let me just quickly say, at the current pace, the president will not secure the loose material in the Soviet Union -- former Soviet Union for 13 years. I'm going to do it in four years. And we're going to keep it out of the hands of terrorists. I did'nt here one specific thing that he would do. Did anybody else see this??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 I'm going to do it in four years. And we're going to keep it out of the hands of terrorists.I did'nt here one specific thing that he would do. Did anybody else see this??? 51977[/snapback] That's one. The only one, in fact. Scariest thing about that is Kerry's complete inability to distinguish between police work and warfare... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RabidBillsFanVT Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 If the Bush voters on this board say that no one won the debate, then that means to me that Kerry won. Glad to see that someone FINALLY cracked that faux, folksy, keep it simple personality, and let the REAL Bush personality show through. Ahh, I can have a great weekend now Flame me all you want, Bushies. I am off to the beach for the weekend. CYA Keep the battle going... don't let the sheer numbers of Bushies on this board get you down, fellow Anti-GWBers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 That's one. The only one, in fact. Scariest thing about that is Kerry's complete inability to distinguish between police work and warfare... 51980[/snapback] I'm trying to find a remark Kerry made in the begining of the debate. Then toward the end he flip-flop's. And Bush caught him at it. In case you did'nt have it. Course, maybe you don't want it : ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MelissaInPhilly Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 I didn't watch the debates, but I do have a question: where was Nader? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadDad Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 That's one. The only one, in fact. Scariest thing about that is Kerry's complete inability to distinguish between police work and warfare... 51980[/snapback] He also said that he is going to fund police and firemen (the first responders), work on tightening security at our ports, nuclear and chemical plants, and air cargo. In my opinion Mr. Kerry did state at least some of the things he would do differently than what is presently being done. Then again, I'm just a lemming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 That's one. The only one, in fact. Scariest thing about that is Kerry's complete inability to distinguish between police work and warfare... 51980[/snapback] Really, I guess the point being, He had a chance to tell us what specifics he would apply. But proceded to say what Bush was't doing, When his rersponse was "Jim, let me tell you exactly what I'll do. And there are a long list of things". Well John, where's the beef? Typical political spin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 I didn't watch the debates, but I do have a question: where was Nader? 52048[/snapback] One of the agreements between the 2 camps to ensure these "debates" happened was a guarantee that neither would debate ANY other candidates in any forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paco Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 Really, I guess the point being, He had a chance to tell us what specifics he would apply. But proceded to say what Bush was't doing, When his rersponse was "Jim, let me tell you exactly what I'll do. And there are a long list of things". Well John, where's the beef? Typical political spin. 52070[/snapback] Much like his comment that the subways were shut down in NY during the convention. It is my understanding that only a few areas were shut down, but that the subway continued to run. Or much like his comment that Bush hasn't spend a single penny on cop and fire departments, which is completely innacurate as well. And when Bush would start countering that point, Kerry would just grin and shake his head as if "damn, I thought I could get that one past him." Kerry's blunders last night far outweighed the incumbents, and as the days pass, they will come out. The question becomes, will people turn off Survivor long enough to find out? Probably not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts