" The President had to spend the entire debate defending his policies and his actions over the last 4 years."
Which he did poorly and repeatedly with inane sound bites.
Look, I'm just discussing his performance in this debate, not his performance as a leader. I'm having trouble understanding why he was not more forceful defending his positions and decisions. He need not be that articulate, but tonal qualities and physical mannerisms have much impact on those millions who don't understand the nuances of the material. Again, style of communication can make or break a presentation. It happens every day in the business world...not that I want a big talker like clinton, with no substance.
Which he did poorly and repeatedly with inane sound bites.
which were EXACTLY what security obsessed americans WANTED to hear in his Texas grown manner. those repetitive sound bites,were exactly what soccer moms and dads and grandparents like zell miller WANTED to hear bush say... over and over and over again.
you feel assured by used car salespersons?
kerry wasn't even a good car sales person.
he was clearly on blurry terms with his positions, though very confident sounding... and he made lots of very serious and dangerous admissions about his submission of our sovereignty to foreigners, cancellation of our weapons programs, and his disdain for all of our allies. some of whom have died alongside us in the war for Iraqi freedom and the removal of the Middle East's most dangerous dictator...
I think YOU mistake slickness for genuine substance.
Bush actually did win, if you keep score on the points of substance. That is how debates are measured by the public in election years.