Posted on 09/30/2004 9:27:18 PM PDT by Pokey78
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.
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.
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.
Kerry also blew it at some points.
But Bush had the opportunity to destroy him, and didn't.
"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.
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?
bttt
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.