Skip to comments.
What Happened Mr. President?
Me
Posted on 10/02/2004 6:00:25 PM PDT by bjcoop
I have to say the President Bush had the chance to finish off Kerry once and for all and the opportunity passed him by. Dick Morris is right in saying that the next debate will be tougher because Kerry fares better on domestic issues. Hopefully Bush can pull off a Ronald Reagan from '84 and strike back in the next debate. But Mr. President, what happened? All his aides were saying that the President was ready and anxious to debate. I didn't see him anxious. I didn't see the Bush I saw in 2000 with Al Gore.
TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: firstdebate
1
posted on
10/02/2004 6:00:25 PM PDT
by
bjcoop
To: bjcoop
He'd been with Florida hurricane victims all day, and that can be draining, believe my, I know, I am a Florida Hurricane Victim, but yes, he definitley could have put the last nail in the coffin for FrankenKerry, but he just seemed tired on stage. I'm sure his aide's will make sure he rests before his next debate.
2
posted on
10/02/2004 6:04:06 PM PDT
by
danteinferno
(Global Test This!)
To: bjcoop
Bush won the debate. Kerry provided many great sound bites for the GOP.
Bush has increased in the polls. So what is hte problem?
Also from Gallup today:
But the worst news for team Kerry came when Gallup asked which candidate was tough enough to be president, a question that taps into concerns that Kerry may be weak on terror.
Gallup respondents gave the "tough enough" award to Bush - and by a landslide, 54 percent to 37 percent.
3
posted on
10/02/2004 6:04:10 PM PDT
by
stockpirate
(Kerry; supported by, financed by, trained by, guided by, revered by, in favor of, Communists.)
To: bjcoop
President Bush let Kerry have enough rope to hang himself.
It's a strategy.
4
posted on
10/02/2004 6:04:11 PM PDT
by
RandallFlagg
(<a href="http://www.michaelmoore.com" target="_blank">Hatriotism)
To: bjcoop
What happened, Mr. President?
Do you think he'll post a response?
5
posted on
10/02/2004 6:04:40 PM PDT
by
Clara Lou
(Hillary Clinton: "We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.")
To: bjcoop
And here is the complete article from Newsmax concerning the Gallup Poll.
Staffers at the Kerry campaign may want to put the cork back in their champagne bottles after they examine the internal numbers in the latest Gallup poll.
Sure, most felt that the Massachusetts Democrat was the better debater by a whopping margin of 53 to 37 percent.
Kerry did even better when Gallup asked which candidate expressed himself clearly, beating Bush 60 to 32 percent.
But when asked which of the two was more believable, it was Bush over Kerry - 50 to 45 percent.
On which candidate did better on the issues, again it was Bush over Kerry, 49 to 46 percent.
Those surveyed by Gallup also apparently didn't buy the media's line that the president came off as irritated and petulant. Asked who was more likable, it was Bush over Kerry again, 48 to 41 percent.
But the worst news for team Kerry came when Gallup asked which candidate was tough enough to be president, a question that taps into concerns that Kerry may be weak on terror.
Gallup respondents gave the "tough enough" award to Bush - and by a landslide, 54 to 37 percent.
6
posted on
10/02/2004 6:06:42 PM PDT
by
stockpirate
(Kerry; supported by, financed by, trained by, guided by, revered by, in favor of, Communists.)
To: bjcoop
Coop, this is probably the umpteenth similar post in the last two days. Keep yer chin up and don't go "wobbly" now.
This is the kick in the pants many Republicans have needed for getting too comfortable over the last three weeks.
7
posted on
10/02/2004 6:08:24 PM PDT
by
AngrySpud
(Behold, I am The Anti-Crust ... Anti-Hillary)
To: bjcoop
one-paragraph vanity undeserving of thread; expresses same opinion as on hundreds of other threads in the past 3 days.
8
posted on
10/02/2004 6:11:18 PM PDT
by
dufekin
(President Kerry would have our enemies partying like it's 1969, when Kerry first committed treason.)
To: bjcoop
9
posted on
10/02/2004 6:15:02 PM PDT
by
MEG33
(John Kerry has been AWOL on issues of national security for two decades)
To: bjcoop
That's because the Bush in 2000 hadn't been through four years of hell. Also, the Bush that debated in 2000 didn't spend the entire day of the debate rushing around the state sitting and crying with a bunch of families who lost possessions, loved ones, and normalcy in a series of several consecutive hurricanes. The fact is, Bush is not a quick thinker. This is extremely common, especially among those who are extremely intelligent. Take this with the fact that Bush's stress level for that day was probably extremely high. Add onto that the fact that Jim Lehrer acted like the complete liberal jackass that he is and presented Bush with loaded questions that attacked his character and administrative decisions (e.g., "Mr. President, has Iraq been worth the cost in American lives--10,052--I mean 1,052 up to today?"), while he actually gave Kerry questions that allowed him to present his case. So while Kerry is presenting his case, Bush is having to rebut the entire premise upon which Lehrer's questions are based upon, in addition to presenting his case, all in the same amount of time that Kerry had. Kerry most certainly had the upper hand in this debate, and yet he still didn't mop up. When you look at all that Bush had going against him, while looking at all Kerry had going for him, it actually just goes to show you how much of an excellent debater George W. Bush really is.
10
posted on
10/02/2004 6:17:45 PM PDT
by
JB_90
(Kerry-Edwards 2004: Because America needs a President who looks like a withered pumpkin.)
To: bjcoop
I am so sick of these what happened "whoa is me and the world" vanity's about the debate, we sound like a bunch of fricking whiney democrats.
11
posted on
10/02/2004 6:27:41 PM PDT
by
aft_lizard
(I actually voted for John Kerry before I voted against him)
To: bjcoop
I have to say Can we do our saying on existing threads without starting all these little vanity threads?
12
posted on
10/02/2004 6:30:45 PM PDT
by
RightWhale
(Withdraw from the 1967 UN Outer Space Treaty and establish property rights)
To: dufekin
To: bjcoop
You are correct! This is an incredibly serious election and the President should be armed to the teeth with John Kerry's joke of a Senate record!
To: JB_90
On top of the tiredness it did look a lot like President Bush was trying hard to follow the rules of the debate by holding his tongue.
To: bjcoop
Deabates are not for personal attacks, bjcoop.
The questions, moderator, time constraints were all set to favor Kerry before President Bush stepped into the auditorium.
If President Bush has gone after Kerry. No matter how right or wrong. The media would have massacred the President for 'viciously attacking'Kerry.
President Bush did just fine. Acquired a pocketful of very useful ammunition (Global Test, Going it alone in Korea, Waffling on Iraq, ect) that has been used to great effect on the stump.
Which is where you do your personal attacks.
Jack.
16
posted on
10/03/2004 9:22:15 AM PDT
by
Jack Deth
(Mostly Harmless)
To: bjcoop
You are totally wrong here. Even if Bush had won the debate by a huge margin, it would have still be completely premature to write Kerry off. The idea that Bush was going to put Kerry away is fantasy talk and that's what has gotten us into trouble here.
There are two more debates and 30 days left. Anything can and will happen. In the end I am confident the President will be re-elected, but I entertain no thoughts that it's going to be a smooth ride with no bumps along the way. Neither should you.
17
posted on
10/03/2004 9:26:11 AM PDT
by
ShandaLear
(Senator Kerry for President of the Debate Team.)
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson