Posted on 09/30/2004 5:57:19 PM PDT by Admin Moderator
Thread 1 - Pre-Debate discussion
Did anyone see that great commercial on H&C?
"These people kill children, they killed innocents in Spain and us on 911" Or something like that.
Wow it was great!!!
Local Wcco TV Group has no real change. MN. Undecided. This is a very liberal station. Lean somewhat Pres. Bush.
I don't think your daughter would want to be stuck with a guy like Kerry, either. And that is a point many seem to be missing here. The target audience isn't the wonks like us who know the facts and who we are voting for. It is the "Security Mom" woman vote, with whom Kerry is doing poorly and needs to reclaim.
Look, we all know Slick Willie, and let me tell you, Senator Kerry, you are no Slick Willie. I recall during the Republican Convention, all the "pundits" slammed Laura Bush' speech. And yet polls the next day showed it did greatly assist the President with the female vote. Kerry's pomposity won't go over well with them.
Dick Morris said the other night on Fox that Kerry must have a plan for Iraq and not just come out and bash Bush all night. I think that is why Kerry flopped tonight.
It's too hysterical here tonight.
The people that have no firm opinion about the candidates, are not emotionally attached.
They aren't in despair over which candidate won on style. IMO, neither did.
They are not jumping up and down saying "Ah-hah! That man stumbled! I'm voting for the other guy!" Only the partisans in each camp are looking for a moment to hammer the other guy with. The undecideds are not hypersensitive to the mannerisms of each.
They are listening to the substance of the debates because they don't particularly care about which candidate scores a point in the image category.
Do not "misunderestimate" the American people. They are not "sheeple" as often labeled. Instead of concentrating of which person perspired more, they were focusing on the candidates words. It's amazing that more people here seem to be focused on image over substance, when conservatism is proudly defined as a realist ideology.
Bush had the edge in substance and Kerry had some disturbing remarks in this debate.
IMO, we arrive at a draw. Kerry's remarks were a turnoff, Bush held positions they were more in agreement with, but he didn't put it away because at moments he was too defensive. However, any observer not emotionally attached caught the constant negativity and attacks on the President of the United states.
Predictions on Undecideds:
They noted Kerry was negative. They noted his constant attacks on the President. They noted his positions on the WOT are not in line with their own. Nothing he did tonight came across as sincere or believable.
They noted the President did not stray from his convictions. They noted moments when he came across defensive. They noted he wasn't at his most articulate.
The next few days they'll have competing forces for their attention. Substance over style.
The memory of the words will outlast the image. The image can only hold until next each is seen. Words are not so easily erased.
Undecideds will still lean toward Bush.
Thanks. I'll give a listen -- hopefully lighten things up.
So it's President Bush's fault that Kerry lied thru his teeth the entire night. Except of course, when he wanted us to stop building bunker busters, and he wanted the global community to determine our safety.
Bush was the same leader we have seen for nearly four years.
He does not EVER step into a debate like some macho man entering the boxing ring to beat up his opponent. He gives rational and quiet assurance that, though the battle is tough, the war will be won.
I just tried to freep the nbc25 poll and it said my ip addy had already been recorded......I have never been there before how can that happen? Unless they are mad that W is winning the poll and wont let freepers vote.
Thank you! I just saw Karen Hughes and she did a great job on FOX News in her recap of the debate.Go Team Bush !!!!
Dang. If this posts TWICE, my apologies. Errors, errors .....
I guess I'm just too much of a conservative to look at this clearly. I feel like I'm the only one that thinks Bush won this debate. It's mostly because of his plain speaking. My favorite part was when Lehrer told him he had 30 seconds to respond and he said something to the effect of: "Well, I've stated my position several times, I can't be any plainer." They say Kerry had a lot more detail...well, of course. Muddled positions are muddled because of so much detail. Bush is of the Reagan school: "We win, they lose." Nuff said.
"I CAN'T BELEIVE NO ONE IS TALKING ABOUT KERRY GIVING IRAN NUCLEAR FUEL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I'M I DRUNK OR DID HE SAY THAT!!!!!!!!!!!!"
i can't believe bush left it slip.
oh well, we'll see a tv commercil featuring it.
Okay, I'm starting to see something here that I missed at first. When you watch the clips that the various spin shows are replaying ad-nauseum, the president looks and sounds great, much better than he did during the actual debate?
I am beginning to see the brilliance of the simple repetitive strategy. It plays very well in sound-bites. President Bush looks firm and in control, Kerry looks like an angry wonkish gnome.
The questions sucked. Bush missed a couple of opportunities and allowed Kerry to leave some impressions that are just flat wrong. Personally, I don't think Bush was as effective as he normally is but he seemed tired.
Objectively, I don't see a real winner here - not in terms of just this debate. Bush got in some weak licks and Kerry was allowed to get by with saying a couple of things that went unanswered. Two glaring issues are that - 1. We haven't left Afghanistan - we're still there. 2. We didn't get France and Germany's assistance and weren't going to get it because they were trying to hide what they'd been doing in Iraq. The president also gave Kerry room to wiggle off the hook on the matter of 'I voted for it before I voted against it'. Leaving that unanswered when Kerry weasled out was akin to saying - okay that was just a debate tactic, I surrender the point...
Kerry was effective in presenting his message; but, dishonest in his presentation. How that is recieved will depend on how much the public really knows and how much they trust Kerry. And I'm not talking about the Koolaid drinkers.
Overall, Nothing to write home about. Kerry, regardless of the fact that he's a liar, is a strong debator. That he managed to come out of this debate with what is essentially a draw, speaks bad for both of these two.
I will say this, the president seemed tired and still did reasonably well so I don't see this hurting him on it's own. The next one will leave a mark if he let's things slide like he did on this one. And it's probably best that this is done now. In three weeks, it's doubtful it will be remembered. The debate on the economy will be closer to election time and that stands a real chance of hurting. If this plays the way I expect it to. Bush will be on the defensive. He should be on the offensive.
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.