Posted on 09/30/2004 9:42:52 PM PDT by zencycler
Another vanity thread.
I wish people would put "vanity" in their titles.
Anyways, I will still vote for President Bush. I didn't need a debate to convince me otherwise.
What's with the rampant Tokyo Rose sewage flowing around the Freep tonight?
Kerry didn't win anything.
Sticking to a few points is good strategy. Too bad sKerry didn't have a strategy.
I think that Kerry scored a few points by looking presidential. But, his positions are all over the place and contradictory of each other and past positions. Bush is NOT slick and polished--but he is an honest man who sticks by his principles. People are not going to trade a good man in for a clunker.
In a few days, as people analyze Kerry's comments more and more people will believe that Bush won the debates. Remember in 2000, everyone thought that Gore had won right after?
Thanks for the QUICK reply, which shows you read the title only, then made a comment.
I agree. Here was my response to a Lib friend:
President Bush did a great job of making the case for strong, consistent leadership focused on the need to defeat terrorism. He was knowledgeable, clear and committed to the American people. John Kerry, on the other hand, failed in his mission to convince people he actually has any plan that is better or that he understands what it takes to fight global terrorism. He is committed to the "world" but not to America.
He wants to place his trust in the UN, France, Germany, Russia, and all the other countries who were on Sadam's payroll, and he denigrates England, Australia, Japan, Italy, Poland, and the other 30 countries who stepped up to the plate and understood the need to take the fight to the terrorists. He of course failed to mention that France and Germany have both reiterated that they will NOT send troops to Iraq whether Bush or Kerry is elected!
He says he is going to have to pass a "world test" before using preemptive measures. A test graded presumably by the same scumbags who were dealing with Sadam. We have no test to pass before defending America other than that of convincing the American people such action is needed. And President Bush did that on Iraq- and John Kerry voted in support of that action! Only now, out of political expedience, does he vacillate and try to weasel out of his vote.
He wants to give Iran nuclear fuel rods for "peaceful" purposes, just like Bill Clinton did for North Korea, and then trust them not to use the material for weapons. Well the North Koreans scammed the Clinton administration just like the Iranians will scam John Kerry.
John Kerry wants to destroy the diplomatic efforts to corral North Korea by going alone to the North koreans thus undermining the coalition we have built with the Chinese, the Russians, the Japanese, and the South Koreans. Unilateral talks with the Koreans under Clinton is what got us into this mess. Without China and Russia in the process, it will fail.
John Kerry spouted a lot of platitudes about what "he will do" to fix various problems, but gave us no confidence he can make any of them happen.
So yes, I do support a man with a clear vision, a consistent message, and a proven record of effective leadership.
So solly, but I read it all, and I stand by my statement.
Zencycler,
I'm a hard right conservative who wants badly for W to win, and I seem to have saw the same thing you did tonite. Maybe my expectations were too high. But W almost had the look that a close loved one just passed away, and he couldn't stay focused. His sputtering in speech, and I guess thought, throughout made me cringe several times.
At least he was able to continually nail Kerry for what Kerry is, full of it.
I sit tonite aghast at the thought that one of America's most rabid liberals could BS his way into the White House with just a few good 90-minute bursts of manuer.
kbeam
Bush looked like he just couldn't believe someone would stand before a national TV audience and lie like Kerry did. I thought I detected steam coming out of Bush's ears at one point.
He talked like a lying lawyer. Some people think that shows upbringing :-}
You are right, go read the stories on www.washingtonpost.com. Even the snarky Bush-hater Dana Milbank gives the President his due and says he put Kerry on the defensive for much of the evening. The AP story is slightly pro-Bush, which is a miracle for the AP. The soundbite they are all quoting is when President Bush hammered Kerry on the "wrong war, wrong time" stuff and said, "What is he going to say to the allies, 'come join us in this diversion?'" I didn't see that part of the debate but I was LMAO when I read it. That quote has the hand-your-ass-to-you quality that most people really want to see in a debate.
Welcome to FR, kbeam.
I didn't want to seem like a partisan for Bush. After all, if the media think you are just straight up schilling for one guy or the other they are not as impressed with your input.
I gave Kerry points for the several thousand dollar suit, the fresh manicure, the botox, tanning treatments, and extreme tooth whitening. He has had more done to him that the extreme makeover ladies. So yeah--I think he looked pretty good. I will give him a point or two for that.
Instead of getting a manicure, Bush was comforting hurricaine victims today. Who do you think is the REAL MAN?
I am a Bush supporter and a Bush/Republican voter.
Kerry did a much better job than Bush tonight.
Kerry was better prepared and more dynamic in his presentation. He stayed on the offensive and Bush missed several opportunites to respond and overall Bush just did not have his "game face" on.
His mumbling responses combined with non-verbal communications were very disappointing to me. Lack of preparation or too much self confidence???
I saw a picture of the two men - Kerry erect behind the podium, Bush slumped over the podium leaning on his elbows, head down.. Not the way to influence people and make a positive impression of dynamic leadership.
If the audience had been allowed to respond during the debate the Kerry people had a lot to respond to - at last their candidate was making a stand and GB simply was not with it. His fault or his advisors for not getting him ready for this initial debate.
Kerry will get several points of "bounce" from this first debate, but there are two more to go. If Bush does not do better in the next two, then it will be a very long election night come 2 Nov.
I could not help but wonder when it was announced that there would be three debates, why Bush had agreed to that. The advantage is to the chalanger.
My humble opinion - go flame mosquitos if you don't like it.
Lamudbug - a Goldwater Republican
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.