Posted on 10/01/2004 3:46:07 AM PDT by LS
Ever watch one of those boxing movies where the hero belts the loud-mouthed opponent right in the kisser, but to no apparent effect? Then, the villain wobbles a little, develops that funny look in his eyes, then tumbles like an rotten oak?
Last night in Miami, the President delivered one of these delayed-reaction shots to John Kerry.
Reading the posts of Freepers was both funny and horrifying. "We lost the election tonight," moaned one. "It's over," said another.
That's probably what "Rocky's" trainer was thinking right before Clubber Lang hit the mat.
The fact is, Kerry is finished.
The post-moretms today---from Seattle to Albuquerque, from the Fox All Stars to the human catfish, Susan Estrich---all agree that while Kerry scored minor points early, no opinions changed.
That, my friends, is the knockout blow for Bush. It's now October 1, meaning that foreign policy will not come up in the subsequent debates. Put another way, had Kerry delivered a right uppercut, Bush would still have had a 30-day-standing count to recover. But Kerry did no such thing, His minor style-sheet debate point "wins" will fade by early next week, while Bush's seriousness---yes, at times, anger at having to even deal with such nonsense---will continue to shape public opinion.
Leave the boxing metaphor for a moment and use that of a roller-coaster: Kerry pegged everything on Iraq---his "high point," if you will. Now, that "momentum" (or lack thereof) has to sustain him for 30 days. It ain't gonna happen.
While Terry McAuliffe smirks and thinks he can run videos of Bush "being angry and perturbed," he's missing the fact that his coaster is already losing momentum, and his boxer is already out on his feet.
I not only look for polls not to change, but for Bush to continue to gain in Maryland, New Jersey, New Hampshire, Maine, Pennsylvania, and Michigan. Two lines in particular will reverberate after the Kerry condescension evaporates: the one about asking allies to fight for a "diversion," and the one about leaders needing to be steady and consistent.
It was a huge mistake for Kerry to allow the foreign policy debate first. Even if he had won decisively, it allowed Bush more than a month to regain his footing. But as matters stand, the coaster is already pulling into the station, and there won't be any more runs this year.
Absolutely true!!
Our honorable President Bush, was clearly perturbed by having to stand on the stage with a POSER, a liberal mental case, a lying gigolo.
W is the personification of our Country, we are ACTION ORIENTED and the President wanted nothing to do with counteraction v. KerryPoople's lies.
I tend to agree with you here, provided Bush can hold his own in the next two debates though. I'd like to see him score a knockout in at least one of them, but if this was the best Kerry can do, I'm not too worried.
However, I will say that Kerry was not knocked out of the race, as could have happened. He lived to fight another day, although he's nonetheless eating Dubya's dust.
:-) But the Swifties are still lurking out there...
I would not say that Bush administered a knockout blow, but Kerry's problem is that he needed a knockout blow in this debate in order to get back in the race. He did not get it.
He's still standing, but that's about all you can say for him.
Kerry's biggest opponent right now is Kerry.
We laughed out loud at some of his statements last night because he has no core beliefs. He's been all over the map in regards to Iraq, so anything he would have said had no credibility.
Treblinka Square?!?!?
In answer to a question from Lehrer (in tonight's debate) Kerry - as if to PROVE his LONGTIME foreign policy experience, and his superior foreign policy knowledge - recounted how he had (with former Senator Smith (R-NH)) gone down into the bowels of the former KGB under TREBLINKA SQUARE.
ONE PROBLEM: Treblinka was the name of a NAZI EXTERMINATION CAMP.
The KGB was on Lubyankaya Square.
How could a presidential candidate - with Jewish heritage - confuse the name of a DEATH CAMP WITH ANYTHING ELSE!?!?!?!?!?
Instead of showing off his experience and knowledge, this exposes Kerry as a shameless ignorant fraud.
posted by reliapundit @ 11:31 PM
HI ! Yes Bush won that debate and anyone would be perturbed when a liar continues to lie! I despise liars and the President did not like the liar John Kerry either!
BTW, People need to get over to AOL main page and vote! The Democrats paid for a page on AOL and ABC ran a poll on who won. It is showing Kerry 54% to Bush 46% we need votes!! Thanks
We are a society driven by looks and feelings. Kerry looked the best he ever has in front of a national audience. For the non informed people out there, which there are loads of them, looks can determine who they pull the switch for.
1) Admitted he is in favor of unilaterally disarmaming by vowing to scrap the bunker busting nuclear program.
2) Admitted he believed that the US should submit to a global test to justify our use of military force.
These gems could seal Senator's fate.
It was a ninth inning win for W in a best of 7 series. W got hit once by the ball, but walked to first base and later scored after he took a base. It was not an extra inning game. It was not a "no hitter" nor anything special.
It was NY against Boston. Boston lost this game. The series will be decided during the final game on November 2nd. There are still 2 games to go.
1 game for W. Maybe the next game will be better.
("passion" is the MSM word of the day)
I guess this trip is also "seared, seared" into his memory.
I cannot begin to express the loathing I feel for this creature.
I may be a rabid partisan, but it sure sounded like Ketchup Boy offered an outright surrender.
I forced myself to watch the debate last night – until about 9:40 Eastern.
That is when Hanoi John said he would never confuse the war with the warrior, and he has always supported the troops – even after he returned from fighting in Viet Nam.
All I could think of was his testimony before the Senate, his meeting with the North Vietnamese delegation and his anti-military activity with the VVAW. I couldn’t even listen long enough to hear President Bush’s reply.
I'm sure we will all peruse various analyses about last night's presidential debate to get a sense of how the two candidates were received, but I thought that both of them did well enough for partisans to claim victory, maybe giving Kerry an edge on debate style and Bush at least an edge on substance. In particular, I expected the European media to promote Kerry's performance, in part because (like their American counterparts) they prefer Kerry to Bush and in part because they prefer his debating style. Imagine my surprise when CQ reader KPowell referred me to the center-left magazine Der Spiegel, which claims that Bush won on points:
Die teils scharfen Angriffe von Kerry ließen den amtierenden Präsidenten Bush weitgehend unbeeindruckt: Mit der Darstellung seiner Außenpolitik und des Irak-Konflikts konterte Bush die Attacken seines Herausforderers. Für SPIEGEL ONLINE analysiert das Forschungsinstitut Medien Tenor die erste von drei TV-Debatten im US-Wahlkampf...Did you get all that? Well, the Babelfish translation isn't much more clear than that, but if you can pick your way through the linguistic horrors it inflicts, you'll find that Der Spiegel's 15 analysts determined that Bush remained presidential in the face of constant attack by Kerry. Bush also showed more warmth, empathy, and humor than Kerry did.
Even more interesting and more objective, in tallying up the various questions and statements, the analysts determined that Bush's statements and presentations on foreign policy were 21% more positive than Kerry's, and that substatantively, Bush scored higher as well. Bush also promoted his own policies far more than attacking Kerry's by a 3-1 margin, while Kerry spent 72% of his time attacking Bush rather than promoting his own. Der Spiegel also compares this with the Gore-Bush debates, where both men used the time to promote themselves, 69% and 88% respectively.
In other words, Kerry left the impression with these analysts that, as has been the case throughout the campaign, he debated as the Not-Bush rather than as a candidate standing on his own. If he continues to campaign that way, I don't see how he can get the needle to move much further above the 42-44% range.
Very unexpected that the Europeans thought Bush, whom they detest, beat their boy Kerry.
Bush won last night on a couple of other points I thought.
When Kerry complained only the British, Australians,and Italians did any of the hard work, Bush pointed out he had forgotten Poland. I thought this backed up Bush's point of Kerry insulting our alies while saying he will get more of them.
I thought Kerry relied on name dropping way to much and thats the sign of a weak man.
I thought the "global test" remark was bad for Kerry and his infering he was against bunker busting nukes gave us shades of who he really is.
I thought Bush could have hammered him harder but this is Bush's style, he's won with it before and he is obviously smarter and has a cooler head than me.
I thought Bush landed way more heavy shots, Kerry had flurries that made one think he was really connecting, when you watch the replay, you see they were glancing blows.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.