Keeping Score: A round-by-round look at how Bush and Kerry did during the debate.

HOW DID Bush and Kerry do tonight? A mixed bag for both. Let's look at the scorecard.

Round 1: How will Kerry make America safer? Kerry says he'll use alliances and won't upset Muslims around the world. Bush stumbles before giving the numbers of al Qaeda killed and captured. Round to Kerry

Round 2: Will Kerry's election increase the chances of a terror attack? Showing the certitude that makes thinking people cringe, Bush replies, "That's not going to happen" because he's going to win. "In Iraq, no doubt about it, it's tough. It's hard work," he says. Kerry calls Iraq a "colossal error in judgment." Round to Bush

Round 3: What misjudgments has Bush made? "Where do we start?" Kerry asks. Let the record note that he mentions Vietnam ("as someone who's been in combat") at 9:12 p.m. Unfortunately, he then spins off into talk about multiples of ten. It probably isn't numerology, but who can tell. Bush quotes Kerry's old stance on Saddam. Looking peevish, Bush says "That's part of a pre-September 10th mentality" and gestures to Kerry. A good line of attack he should have pressed more. I mean, wasn't that the theme of the Republican convention? Round to Bush

Round 4: What about going after Saddam and not bin Laden? Bush says, sensibly, "We have to be able to do both." Kerry flops around about the "rush to war" and how Bush didn't fund body armor. Round to Bush

Round 5: What would Kerry do differently on Homeland Security? Kerry attacks Bush's funding of firehouses and the tax cuts, which is weak.

But Bush flounders, muttering something like, "Pssshhht" and shrugging his shoulders. In his rebuttal, he nearly shouts that you better have a president who understands that you have to protect America. Round to Kerry

Round 6: What criteria will you use for knowing when to bring troops home from Iraq? Bush says, "When our generals on the ground" tell us that Iraqis are ready to protect themselves "from these terrorists." Kerry says, "Help is on the way." ("I know what it's like to go out on" missions where you don't know what's around the corner--second Vietnam reference.) During rebuttal, Bush hits Kerry's $87 billion vote for the first, and inexplicably the only, time. Round to Kerry

Round 7: Are Americans now dying for a mistake? After saying he agrees with Bush, Kerry says Iraq is like FDR invading Mexico after Pearl Harbor. Then again with the summits. And then Halliburton. Welcome to the MoveOn.org portion of the program. An increasingly surly Bush responds, "That's just absurd. . . . What does he say to Tony Blair. . . . You can't expect to build alliances when you denigrate the contributions of those who are serving side-by-side with Americans in Iraq." Ouch. Round to Bush

Round 8: What was Bush's miscalculation on post-war conditions in Iraq? Bush says, basically, that the Baathists were cowards and didn't fight and, also, Tommy Franks won too fast. Also: "I know we won't [win in Iraq] if we send mixed signals." Kerry makes news by saying that now he would not have gone into Iraq knowing what he knows now. Or maybe this isn't news. To be honest, I've lost track. Anyway. Round to Kerry

Round 9: How has Bush lied on Iraq? Kerry says that he's "never used the harshest word which you just have." Hmmm . . . can that be true? Someone should look into it, since this isn't the type of thing the RNC would send out a press release about. Bush's rebuttal is a non sequitur: Osama bin Laden doesn't get to decide how America defends itself. Huh? Bush seems personally offended at the suggestion that anyone else might get to do his job. And for the fourth time or so, says, "That's not how a commander in chief acts." Kerry is going to win this round, but he makes one gigantic mistake: "I've had one position, one consistent position," on Iraq, he says. Oops, that should go in an ad. Round to Kerry

Round 10: Has the war in Iraq been worth the cost in lives? Bush's finest moment so far. He names a woman he met whose husband died in Iraq and talks about how they prayed together. "I thought her husband's sacrifice was noble and worthy. Because I understand the stakes of this war on terror," he says. "Every life is precious, that's what distinguishes us from the enemy," he says. If only he could have brought himself to name "the enemy" he keeps referencing.

Kerry's rebuttal is, "I understand what the president is talking about because I know what it means to lose people in combat," and, that "reminds me of my own thinking when I came back from fighting in that war." If you're keeping score at home, this is the fourth time he's brought up Vietnam.

Bush starts his rebuttal by laughing out loud and then coming to tonight's lodestar: "You cannot lead the war on terror if you keep changing positions" again. Kerry's rebuttal uses Colin Powell as a club on Bush and then starts talking about the Pottery Barn Rule. They teach it at SAIS, you know. That and the little known Crate and Barrel Corollary. Round to Bush

Round 11: Give us specifics for how you would end U.S. involvement in Iraq. Kerry talks about 14 military bases in Iraq and guarding the Oil Ministry and we're off to MoveOn land again. we're building 14 bases and guarding the oil ministry only, a sop to the MoveOn types. Says you have to close the borders and bring in allies. Round to Bush

Round 12: Is it now more or less likely that you'll go into a preemptive war again? Bush says, "by speaking clearly and doing what we say and not sending mixed messages" it is less likely we'll have to use troops again. Kerry rebuts that "the enemy" was Osama, not Saddam, and that Bush should have used U.S. troops, not Afghan troops, at Tora Bora. See? Bush should be using multinational troops where he's using American troops and American troops where he was using foreign allies. That makes sense. Round to Bush

Round 13: What is your view on preemptive war? Kerry says the POTUS always has that option and then, amazingly brings up JFK's consultation with the French during the Cuban missile crisis. That is, as the saying goes, a big matzah ball hanging out there.

Shockingly, Bush passes up the opportunity. His rebuttal is, however, devastating. He says he doesn't know what it means to "pass a global test. . . . My attitude is you take preemptive action in order to protect the American people." That's a standing 8-count. Round to Bush

Round 14: Can diplomacy solve the problems in Iran and North Korea? President Bush wants to work with the Moo-lahs to convince Iran to abandon their nuclear ambitions. Kerry beats Bush over the head with Powell again. This is Kerry's best moment, until Jim Lehrer steps in. Lehrer wants to clarify what type of negotiations the two candidates favor. Bush wants bilateral. Kerry says, naturally, "I want both!" Round to Kerry

Round 15: Darfur--why won't you send in troops? Kerry mentions the "back-door draft" and says we're too overextended in Iraq to do Darfur. Bush, interestingly enough, knows about the timing of the African rainy seasons. Round to Kerry

Round 16: Are there underlying character issues serious enough to deny Kerry the job? For looking like such a sourpuss all night, Bush is limber and charming here: "Whew, that's a loaded question," he smiles. He admires Kerry's service and appreciates that he's a great dad and that his daughters have been so kind to the Bush girls. He admires Kerry's service in the Senate, but not his record. "He changes positions on the war in Iraq" and on things "in his core" "in his heart of hearts" and, even worse, sends "mixed messages." Kerry makes the fair point that "It's one thing to be certain, but you can be certain and wrong." Round to Bush

Round 17: What do you think is the single biggest threat facing America? Kerry doesn't hesitate: "Nuclear proliferation." Round to Kerry

Round 18: Did Bush misjudge Vladimir Putin? President Bush thinks that it's important to have good personal relationships with former KGB agents as they try to roll back important civil freedoms. This way you can disagree constructively. Kerry doesn't have a better answer, but did get a neat-o tour of KGB headquarters right after the fall of the Soviet Union. Round to Kerry

I've got this fight scored dead-even: 9 to 9. Of course there are intangibles to consider. On the whole, Kerry was more relaxed and polished and certainly calmer. He also managed to sneak in a fifth Vietnam reference during his closing remarks ("I defended this country as a young man in war.") Kerry was a grounded presence and his performance should give Democrats hope.

Bush was, as someone once put it, surprisingly more tart than sweet. At times the president faltered and you could see the wheels spinning as he flipped through his mental Rolodex, looking for the right card. Peevish is the word which kept coming to mind. He was, however, ruthlessly on-message. If Kerry really is being damaged by the sense that he's a flip-flopper who doesn't know his own mind--and the higher-ups on Team Bush insist that this is the key to beating him--then the president did exactly what he wanted to do. But if the central issue of this election is the September 10 versus the September 12 party, then Bush may have let slip a fair opportunity.

I like the part where Kerry says (almost a quote) "I have a plan and IF IT WORKS we can start decreasing the troop commitment in Iraq in 6 months..." What the hell is this? I have a plan too and if it works I can become the richest man in the world and cure cancer and end world hunger...if it works. I couldn't believe he said this. Even he doesn't really believe in his own plan.

What an slick talking jerk.

Bush doesn't have the brainpower to think and speak persuasively on his feet unscripted. He will never
"win" a debate unless his opponent loses it.

As I've said all along this year, WE are the campaign.
Bush cannot win it for himself. We will need to speak
for him, and get everyone we meet to do the same.

It is unfortunate when people confuse relentlessly negative critical comments as intellectual sophistication. There is this strange fascination with a certain segment of Freepers. They seem to think if they are playing devils advocate ALL the time and making constantly critical comments about their own side, it makes them seem thoughtful and intelligent. Maybe we should have a term for this? Call it "McCainism" A metal defect that requires the victim to constantly critize their own side while NEVER pointing out where the other side blew it. McCainism does not make you look smart. See REAL intelligence would be to provide some serious BALANCED review not this hysterical "OH WE LOST! IT IS ALL OVER" chicken little screech time after time, post after post.

Mark my words Boy's and Girls, John Kerry just lost the election tonight. Since most who suffer from McCainism seem to be lawyers, I will put it to you in terms you might understand. John Kerry may, or may not, have won the formal debate but he didn't win the Jury. And you people always forget this one fact. The JURY (i.e. The American people), not the Debate coaches decides the election.

John Kerry lost the election tonight people. You heard it here first.

"He could have SLAMMED HIM. Is he trying to be a NICE guy here ?"

I think perhaps he was. Let Kerry say all of the attack stuff in the debates. Have Bush come off as being "on track on the fight against terrorism". Responding to all of the minor facts of Kerry's attacks, lies and mistakes can look as being on the defensive as well. Just stay on message.

Also - some of the things Bush feels may not go over well in a debate setting (like telling the U.N. to shove it). Especially when Bush is showing how Kerry is pissing off our allies, and not the type of person who will inspire confidence with other nations.

Dittos shouted from the rooftop! I think it is some fear of winning. Kerry did not win this debate and he was a complainer and had no hopeful vision for the country. It's Jimmy Carter and Reagan all over again

My point is not "Chicken Little-ism" at all. Bush should've been able to kick his sorry butt out of the ball park no problem. I've seen some who've said that Bush doesn't have the intellectual wattage and we are the wattage. Sorry, but anyone who has an MBA from an Ivy League school has all the wattage necessary to stomp Kerry's grapes into the ground. You may be right, the nuances of "Global Test" may work against Kerry, but honestly, didn't Kerry have enough baggage that a gaff on his part should have been background noise to the debate?

You are not capable of rational thinking if you say a man who has accomplished what President Bush has in his lifetime hasn't the brain power to win a debate. I think he does and did. He spoke straight and confidently and Kerry flubbed and made up statistics.

Please do not tell me you are a Bush/Cheney '04 campaign worker that is charged with stirring up excitement within the base. That would be terrifying.

I disagree. I think he won. He answered plainly. "You're an idiot, John" is not how I want my president to handle issues. It is not really focusing on what is important. I did not take notes of the debate, but did come away with Kerry wanting bilateral talks and Bush wanting multilateral talks focusing on China. That is how the undecideds will see it.

"Bush should've been able to kick his sorry butt out of the ball park no problem"

That's not Bush's style. He stays on message and tries to be liked (especially with women now). The Kerry mistakes should be slammed by surrogates and commercials. I hope to see a "global test for preemptive force" running by Monday. The talk radio echo chamber will disect Kerry all next week. Just like the Al Gore debates which the media think Gore won, this will be a Bush victory in 6 - 10 days. Bush made zero mistakes - Kerry made about six.

Well, I am. And actually, I have done a great deal to stir up excitement within the base. Without spinning or faking, there are many very positive things I can and do say about Bush, and his prospects. But that doesn't mean I claim him to have more brainpower than he has.

If the purpose of a forum like Free Republic is to have a candid discussion among conservatives, then I must give my honest assessment of Bush's performance, not a pep talk. I also shared my view of why Bush is not as good a debater as he ought to be.

Honest talk is never "terrifying." What is terrifying is putting our heads in the sand and pretending this election is easier than it is, that our candidate is perfect, and that Kerry is perceived by the general public to be as much of an idiot as the Republicans base perceives him to be.

Also terrifying is the low intellectual level of some of the comments on FReep. Your post is a fine example.

No, of course he shouldn't say "you're an idiot, John."

He should, however, have made clear how liberal Kerry is across-the-board on foreign policy. He should have used his Senate record. He should have said much more than he did.
Bush was too defensive and too repetitive.

How across-the-board do you want him to get in a thirty second rebuttal? He is a broad thinker, not nuanced like Kerry. Kerry was caught up in the quagmire of his own rhetoric, while Bush's repetition was effective. We know where he stands and not Kerry (or at least I don't).

No need for nuance. Bush just needed to make a few more points than he made. Repetition can be effective, but he was repeating things he's said throughout the campaign. I'd like to see him say some new, equally effective things against Kerry.

I am sorry, but the intellectual superiority of defeatism is lost on me. I guess the only assessment worthy of Free Republic is that of negativism, because if one believes that the outcome of the debate this evening is positive, such a person must lack the intellectual capacity of yourself, as you seem to believe other Freepers do.

If you believe in discourse among conservatives, please do not misrepresent what I said. I did not suggest your statement was that your intellect was greater than that of the president - TRUST ME, and for the record I saw not an ounce of intellectual analysis of the debate from you. I do know how difficult this is - I have been working hard on his campaign as a volunteer.

I never claimed or implied that "defeatism" is "intellectually superior." Really, you should read more carefully.

Defeatism is a consistent tendency to give up, and to say things that encourage others to give up.

I am not a defeatist. I am a realist who sometimes feels that a negative judgement of a situation or performance is the correct one, and at other times takes a far more positive view. It depends on the situation, see?

Bush wins this debate because Kerry let slip soooo many disastrous quips that well might have been forgotten by the viewers, but which will be ballooned into importance by Talk Radio over the next few weeks.

One thing I noticed was that our President used a solid foundation on which to build the arguments of this debate. Liberty, Democracy and Freedom. Matter of fact, going through the debate I noted that - President Bush used the words:
Liberty - 4 times,
Freedom - 7 times,
Democracy - 4 times
and Free - 20 times.

And how rightly so. What good is Liberty and Freedom and Democracy if first YOU are not FREE. Kerry used the words:
Democracy twice,
Freedom twice,
Kerry used the word "Free" - twice. - - - Never used the word "Liberty".

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.