The Presidential Debate

[Logan]

I just find it funny how people on this board can't drop their political affiliations (both Repubs and Dems) long enough to actually LISTEN to what these two men are saying.

More evidence as to what is wrong with this country.

[Chubby]

Originally Posted by GoldenEagle

Is anyone else surprised that North Korea has became such a focal point in this debate? I really do not think it is that big of an issue on voter's mind right now. Kerry is attacking it though.

In a foreign affairs/homeland security debate, I think it's a good tactic than talking Iraq all the time. Wish they'd spend more time on homeland defense tho.

[Young Drachma]

Yeah, Vlad-a-mer and him hung out in Crawford - at the Western White House.

[Peregrine]

I think the only thing that we may be able to agree upon is that after this debate people who went in liking Bush will think he won the debate and plan on voting for him and the same for Kerry. It's not like anyone will be swayed by anything in this debat

Yeah, pretty much. In fact replace "debate" with "election campaign" and you're still pretty right.

[Sharpieman]

Originally Posted by Chubby

Bush is only worried about nukes in the hands of terrorists??? Bad answer, very bad.

Yep, but it has limited impact on voters.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Chubby

Bush is only worried about nukes in the hands of terrorists??? Bad answer, very bad.

I'd have to agree with Dubya on that one. I'd say it is much more likely that a terrorist organization will explode a nuclear or biological weapon in this country than that any nation's government will be responsible for exploding WMD in this country. The question asked about the "greatest threat" facing this country.

[Chubby]

"I'm a pretty calm guy" gets a laugh, not in a good way

[Celeval]

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

You obviously didn't see all of the "pre-game" stuff on the news and cable. But stick around for the post-game show. Everyone wants to see who won and such. And then we get the day-after-game QBs which the newsies will be playing the one-liners and sound bites to their audience. Ratings will go up.

What, on every station? Personally, I think most of America was choosing between the 'Survivor: Vanatu' or 'Joey/Will and Grace' leadins, and will be heading bedwards after the debate. Assuming they're not watching Connecticut beat up on Pittsburgh.

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by Logan

I just find it funny how people on this board can't drop their political affiliations (both Repubs and Dems) long enough to actually LISTEN to what these two men are saying.

More evidence as to what is wrong with this country.

I'm not sure its so much political affiliation as much as its people having idealogical beliefs that they're not willing to waive on. I don't think that's how you can be in office, but I certainly don't think that people need to apologize for having convictions.

And that's what's great about this country. That we can have these sorts of discussions at all.

Just .02

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by Logan

I just find it funny how people on this board can't drop their political affiliations (both Repubs and Dems) long enough to actually LISTEN to what these two men are saying.

More evidence as to what is wrong with this country.

]

My political affiliation is neither, thank you, and what's wrong with this country is TV-inspired political doublespeak.

[Chubby]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

I'd have to agree with Dubya on that one. I'd say it is much more likely that a terrorist organization will explode a nuclear or biological weapon in this country than that any nation's government will be responsible for exploding WMD in this country. The question asked about the "greatest threat" facing this country.

But an ally today, could be a "terrorist" tomorrow. Look at Iraq as example A. Which is why I think "nuclear profileration" in general is a far better answer.

[sabotai]

Originally Posted by GoldenEagle

Is anyone else surprised that North Korea has became such a focal point in this debate? I really do not think it is that big of an issue on voter's mind right now. Kerry is attacking it though.

Maybe it should be. Osama and terrorism wasn't a big issue for voters in 2000.

[Sharpieman]

Sucks that Kerry has to go first

[Sharpieman]

If I were him I would want the chance to make a rebuttal

[Chubby]

Originally Posted by Sharpieman

Sucks that Kerry has to go first

Not if Bush fumbles.

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

I'd have to agree with Dubya on that one. I'd say it is much more likely that a terrorist organization will explode a nuclear or biological weapon in this country than that any nation's government will be responsible for exploding WMD in this country. The question asked about the "greatest threat" facing this country.

I wonder what would the greatest threat be instead??? If this is not it, people are deluding themselves.

[Sharpieman]

LOL

[Sharpieman]

What was that word Bush said?

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by Chubby

But an ally today, could be a "terrorist" tomorrow. Look at Iraq as example A. Which is why I think "nuclear profileration" in general is a far better answer.

I lived through most of the Cold War and the great arms buildup in many countries. History may prove that the danger level then was minimal compared to a relative few nukes in the wrong hands.

[Chubby]

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

I lived through most of the Cold War and the great arms buildup in many countries. History may prove that the danger level then was minimal compared to a relative few nukes in the wrong hands.

Again, having them in the right hands today could be the wrong hands tomorrow.

[Buccaneer]

Addendum

I feel safer about the many nukes in China and Russia than I do in Pakistan.

[Chubby]

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

Addendum

I feel safer about the many nukes in China and Russia than I do in Pakistan.

Are those the nukes in Russia which are unaccounted for or accounted for?

[sabotai]

I pretty much agree with Joe Scarborough's (sp?) take on the debates.

[Warhammer]

I think those unaccounted Russian nukes would already have been used if they were in the wrong hands.

[sabotai]

Well, FWIW, the accessment from the people of MSNBC seems to be that Kerry won this, as Scarborough says, on points. But this could be pretty bad for Bush if he doesn't step it up in the next two considering terrorism and the war in Iraq are his strongest areas against Kerry, and he basically lost the debate on those issues. Kerry polls better for domestic issues than the war and Iraq. If we get two more debates of the same, it could be what Kerry needs to swing this election in his favor.

[Ben E Lou]

I'm listening to The Royal Treatment right now, and Marshall is saying that he thought it was very close. What are the various networks saying?

[Mac Howard]

I'm flipping through the channels now. Surprisingly Fox News are seeing Kerry as doing best. CNN saying that Kerry supporters are happy but Bush supporters not.

[Ben E Lou]

Back to the point on more money for the troops, I definitely think he was saying that we need more money and more troops:

Originally Posted by Debate Transcript

And he rushed the war in Iraq without a plan to win the peace. Now, that is not the judgment that a president of the United States ought to make. You don't take America to war unless have the plan to win the peace. You don't send troops to war without the body armor that they need.

I've met kids in Ohio, parents in Wisconsin places, Iowa, where they're going out on the Internet to get the state-of-the-art body gear to send to their kids. Some of them got them for a birthday present.

I think that's wrong. Humvees -- 10,000 out of 12,000 Humvees that are over there aren't armored. And you go visit some of those kids in the hospitals today who were maimed because they don't have the armament.

This president just -- I don't know if he sees what's really happened on there. But it's getting worse by the day. More soldiers killed in June than before. More in July than June. More in August than July. More in September than in August.

And now we see beheadings. And we got weapons of mass destruction crossing the border every single day, and they're blowing people up. And we don't have enough troops there.

Dubya really missed a golden opportunity in not jumping on this one.

[Senator]

I picked the wrong year not to run.

[Easy Mac]

I'd say Kerry 53 to 47, plus or minus 2 points. I think Bush just didn't play well the whole time, he just wasn't as cogent in his thoughts as Kerry. I think Bush seemed a little more jumpy tonight than normal, and he was too eager to rebuttal whenever he had a chance. He kept repeating a certain phrase (I forget the one he used), and it started to become like a "lockbox." Kerry made a very snide remark in the beginning that looked like it would hurt him, and it may. I think Bush started far better than Kerry, but Kerry played better in the middle, and I think they both finished about the same.

I also think the questions were a bit slanted against Bush. Perhaps that is the only way it could be done, seeing as how Bush is an incumbent, but it felt like Bush had to be on the defensive, and he seemed very frustated by this.

I think Kerry definitely helped himself here, but he needs to go on the offensive now before he wastes this chance. He seemed to actually have plans instead of not having Bush's.

And most of this was probably already mentioned, but I wasn't online.


But I'm biased

[Crapshoot]

NBC had it Kerry in a canter in thier small jury- including the army veteran. Interesting- but all said domestic issues matter more.

[Tigercat]

I think this debate, especially for clarity to win Independents, was a tie up untill the closing, perhaps maybe a slight advantage for Bush.

Think Kerry had a much better closing. Better composure, stronger talking parts. IMO, that closing made Kerry's night.

[Crapshoot]

Im curious- did anyone get the Fox take on it ?

[Dutch]

I'd say Bush 53 to 47, plus or minus 2 points. I think Kerry just didn't play well the whole time, he just wasn't as cogent in his thoughts as Kerry. I think Kerry seemed a little more jumpy tonight than normal, and he was too eager to rebuttal whenever he had a chance. He kept repeating a certain phrase (I forget the one he used), and it started to become like a "lockbox." Bush made a very snide remark in the beginning that looked like it would hurt him, and it may. I think Kerry started far better than Bush, but Bush played better in the middle, and I think they both finished about the same.

I also think the questions were a bit slanted against Kerry. Perhaps that is the only way it could be done, seeing as how Kerry is the challenger, but it felt like Kerry had to be on the offensive, and he seemed very frustated by this.

I think Bush definitely helped himself here, but he needs to go on the defensive now before he wastes this chance. He seemed to actually have plans instead of not having Kerry's.

And most of this was probably already mentioned, but I wasn't online.


But I'm biased

(We almost agree, Easy. )

[Mac Howard]

Originally Posted by Aadik

Im curious- did anyone get the Fox take on it ?

They expressed disappointment that Bush missed several opportunities to make points against Kerry. SkyDog has made one such point above. Another was Kerry admitting an error over his vote on the $87 billion support ("I made a mistake in what I said, Bush made a mistake on what he did"). Bush let that go and it was never again mentioned. They also felt that Bush looked shaken, tired and annoyed at times.

[Ben E Lou]

As far as "how they did", I'm thinking that Kerry did slightly better than Bush. However, I think that what got hammered home tonight was not such-and-such candidate is "better" than the other candidate, but that they have clear ideological differences on the issues in question. In some ways, I'm grateful for this. Maybe I'm too optimistic, but I'm hoping that this will cause people to actually think about how they feel about the issues, rather than who "performed" better.

[Ben E Lou]

Heh. CNN.com's headine right now is "HIGHLIGHTING THE DIFFERENCES"

[GrantDawg]

I think Kerry helped clear up his views on the war, and Bush talked in sound-bites that didn't work very well. There were no major mistakes or homeruns, so I'd call it a slight Kerry win. Will it be a major bump? Probably not. He is really going to need a strong showing in the next two debates if he hopes to eek out a win.

[Vegas Vic]

My take:

I thought Kerry looked nervous at the start of the debate, but he got stronger and more in command as it progressed.

I thought that Bush got off to a good start, but it almost looked like he ran out of material in the latter stages of the debate. He was stammering more and repeating himself, almost as if he was just trying to fill in the allocated time.

Overall, both candidates did what they needed to do. There were no obvious gaffes. I think that Kerry probably came out slightly better, because this was Bush's home turf (terrorism and Iraq), and he really didn't deliver a knockout blow that would have in effect locked up the race.

[Swaggs]

The big winner tonight is.... FOFC. Way to stay civil towards one another.

I did not think either particularly stood out. Bush came off as blank a few times, but stuck on message very well, and I think the things he said will probably stick in voters' minds because he kept hammering them.

I think this is really the first time a lot of people may have seen Kerry, as opposed to seeing Bush regularly for the past 3.5 years. I think Kerry may have dispelled some of the negative opinion of him by acting human while people were watching.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

The big winner tonight is.... FOFC. Way to stay civil towards one another.

You're a stupid, poopy-head.

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

You're a stupid, poopy-head.

your mama puts out for sailors !

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Aadik

your mama puts out for sailors !

How did you know that?!?

[Julio Riddols]

I'm feeling more and more like I'd rather shoot myself than register and vote for either of these two candidates. It would be a waste of my time if I were to go through all that for what I perceive to be two people who care less about the issues at hand and more about winning an election. I don't want a president who is just trying to be the most popular or say the right things.. At the same time, I don't want a president who can't get past his opponents perceived weakness and simply provide us with facts and truth and a specific real plan that we agree with, and that he will stick with. I feel like neither of these guys is worth a shit or will be worth a shit as the leader of the "free" world. Americans don't even have a voice in this really. We're basically forced to choose the lesser of two evils for the second time in 4 years.

Barring a revolution, I think America is headed for a steep decline in the next four years that will leave the rest of the world laughing at our situation and ignoring us rather than trying to come to a resolution that we propose. I don't feel any safer today than I felt on 9/11.

Unless youre rich, theres just no real future here anymore.

Just my opinion.. I don't claim to be educated, but I just dont think that the war is why we are in trouble.

[Dutch]

I think Bush hammered home the point that we can win the peace in Iraq if we stick to it and don't give up on all the hard work we have done. I don't think Kerry could counter that. Bush won big marks with asking how Kerry planned to do the same but more with the philosophy of "The Big Diversion" and "Wrong War, Wrong Time, Wrong Place". I think that was a huge point for Bush.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by Julio Riddols

Unless youre rich, theres just no real future here anymore.

Taking away the rich people won't solve that, that's for sure. If being rich is what makes you happy, you have the best chance on earth to do that right here in the USA than anywhere else in the world, that's a fact. Maybe there's more to your future than just money? I hope so.

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

How did you know that?!?

she steals all my clients..

[SFL Cat]

I think it was a wash. Questions were definitely slanted to favor Kerry and Bush did seem to be on the defensive most of the time. But I don't think anyone really won tonight. I think things might tighten a little but no major movements in the polls.

Kerry contradicted himself and actually flip-flopped on Iraq during the debate. Although he said he felt Saddam was a threat and should have been removed, he later said we should have isolated Saddam...so I guess he said he thought Saddam should be removed, but he would have left him in power if he had been running things?!! Some of his info was also dead wrong. Most of the sources I've read, indicate Bin Ladin is now hiding somewhere in Pakistan, not Afghanistan...so if Kerry was serious, he'd have a lot of troops conducting a snipe hunt. Also I found it interesting when Kerry said something about WMD's crossing the border daily...WTF was he talking about?

Bush did alright. But he could have done a lot better. I certainly think he should have done a better job explaining how Iraq is a key part in the overall war on terror. Bush certainly got the point across about Kerry changing his positions with the political winds...but could have offered more examples. Also, he should have gone after Kerry's Senate record on defense.

That said...I don't think either delivered anything close to a knockout punch to the other.

[Arles]

I think Kerry certainly looked better in the debate - he was calm, cool and appeared very knowledgeable on the issues. Bush, on the other hand, did look a little annoyed and even bewildered at times by what Kerry was saying. So, I would expect Kerry to get a slight bump from this tonight just based on the overall appearance of both men. However, I think that most people have an idea of Bush's character and dimeanor (good or bad) and I doubt the fact that he stumbled at times while speaking will change anyone's opinion of him. We've seen this from time to time for four years now.

Yet, on the substance and the soundbites, I think Bush played it much safer and avoided the big quoteable gaff. Kerry, on the other hand, walked into two situations that may haunt him down the road. The biggest was this sillyness about a "global test" for using preemption. That was a big no-no in my opinion and the republicans will play that up bigtime. Bush nailed him on it and it plays to the stereotype that Kerry will outsource our security to France and Germany.

The other thing that may hurt Kerry is something Bush said. How can you tell troops to go into war when you view the war as a mistake and done at the wrong place at the wrong time. If you feel the war is a legit mistake and we shouldn't be there, I don't think many people want a president running a war because "well, we're there now so I guess we should probably finish it".

So, the gist is Kerry wins in polls over the weekend and the race tightens up a bit, but the republicans got yet another couple of questionable soundbites to add into the kitty for their onslaught of upcoming ads. If Bush can simply tread water in the next two debates, I think he will be in great shape to win and that each night Kerry will get a little too verbose and say something he will regret later like the "global test" thing.

[Pumpy Tudors]

I've made it no secret that I dislike politics in general (althuogh I doubt many of you really noticed or cared), but I actually watched the debate for half an hour tonight, and I don't really see the point of the whole thing. It was two guys doing a scripted disagreement with each other. Sure, I understand that these guys want to be the "leader of the free world" and all that, but everything seemed so artificial. I've tried to get into politics, and I've listened to politicians on the national and local levels from time to time, and I haven't ever gotten the sense that any of them have any legitimate passion for what they're saying. It's just a competition to see who can make the most voters do a "".

Seriously, why the hell should I actually WANT any of these people leading me? The 30 minutes of debate I watched tonight failed to give me an answer to that question.

Edit: When I say that I've tried to "get into politics," I mean that I've tried to become interested. I didn't mean that I've tried to become a politician.