Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: West Coast Conservative

the purpose of the debate is not to win the debate, it's to win the election.

Bush won the debate handily if you have it in proper perspective. He stood his ground while kerry flailed away. Kerry came across as mean and negative, bush came across as composed and presidential.


6 posted on 09/30/2004 9:34:43 PM PDT by flashbunny (John Kerry: The Boston Flailer!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: flashbunny

Much like the first debate in '84 was not good for Reagan, but did not change a lot of minds, it looks as if tonight will not shift too many votes away from GWB though his performance was not great. I was surprised at Bill Schneider's numbers, but very pleased that despite Kerry's perceived "victory" tonight, a majority of those who say he did well still trust Mr Bush more on the Iraq issue.


11 posted on 09/30/2004 9:37:26 PM PDT by TNCMAXQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: flashbunny

Your vote and mine are not the ones to worry about. It's the undecided voters who may have a completely different perspective. And to be honest, I'd stop short of saying Bush looked more "composed"...he was clearly flustered at several times in the debate.


13 posted on 09/30/2004 9:37:36 PM PDT by jambooti
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: flashbunny

I do not see the angle where Kerry "won" at all. Sorry.


21 posted on 09/30/2004 9:39:40 PM PDT by Time4Atlas2Shrug (I have an opinion and a modem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: flashbunny
the purpose of the debate is not to win the debate, it's to win the election.

People also thought Gore won the first Bush-Gore debate.

Still, I think the President was a little flat in the middle. On the other hand, he started the first Bush-Gore debate a little flat, too. In the end, he picked up steam in the following debates when and where it counted.

Plus, importantly, the real decision on a debate takes a day or so to shake out. People filter in the commentary by the candidates for the next day or so after a debate. There will be responses from the outside to expand on some of the points where the format didn't lend itself to further expansion.

32 posted on 09/30/2004 9:42:38 PM PDT by Exigence
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: flashbunny
Man, in the live thread you would have thought that Kerry was turning GW into hamburger meat.

In boxing, an opponent trailing a champ, has to score a KO to win the bout. He might land alot of blows on the champ, but without the KO, the champ keeps the crown.

Prior to the debate, Bush was way ahead on points regarding the Iraq situation. Kerry landed alot of punches on the president, but no KO.

34 posted on 09/30/2004 9:43:05 PM PDT by Don'tMessWithTexas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: flashbunny

Bush was NOT composed...but, a little righteous indignation can be a good thing. Still, he is capable of better than he showed tonight.


94 posted on 09/30/2004 10:01:38 PM PDT by des
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: flashbunny
That's right. The purpose is win the "election" not the debate. What's disturbing though,is the number of people who watched the debate who have paid no attention whatsoever to the previous rantings, flip-flops and incoherent ramblings of Kerry. Do they think this is who he is? Do they know this is just who he is TONIGHT!
110 posted on 09/30/2004 10:07:26 PM PDT by mvilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: flashbunny
He stood his ground while kerry flailed away. Kerry came across as mean and negative, bush came across as composed and presidential.

Thats a crock. I support Bush and he came across as defensive, mean, and in the split screen it was evident that Kerry was pissing him off. He was visibly angry but not able to direct his anger in suitable ways. I will admit if you were listening on the radio he came across much stronger there than on TV.

147 posted on 09/30/2004 10:46:45 PM PDT by Dave S
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: flashbunny
He stood his ground while kerry flailed away. Kerry came across as mean and negative, bush came across as composed and presidential.

Agreed. An incumbant is naturally defending his record. In fact, it 's the obligation of the challanger to do just that: Challange.

Kerry did the nation a service tonight and forced Bush to defend his decision to go into Iraq. Bush defended his decision with passion and conviction in his own non-eloquent fashion.

Overall a substantive debate.

164 posted on 09/30/2004 11:17:20 PM PDT by zarf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: flashbunny

It sure is interesting how differently so many of us saw W's performance. I only caught the last half, but thought he was nervous, slurring many words and choosing some very poor and weak responses. I would definitely not describe him as 'composed'.

However Kerry came across as an excellent and effective debater, but not a great potential president. It reminded me of watching an impressive performance of King Lear. You can appreciate the performance, but know all along that you are watching an actor, not the real King Lear.

W. made his points, and all and all, I don't think it was a disaster, and I do think W. will do better next time. Unfortunately the first debate is the one that usually gets the biggest audience.


165 posted on 09/30/2004 11:24:59 PM PDT by anyone_but_kerry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: flashbunny

Ah, but Kerry was polished and smooth in his delivery; Bush spoke in simple sentences and repeated himself a LOT. And a lot of people look only at delivery and not substance. I think those people (I only hope that it is very few) will be persuaded by Kerry's smoothness to vote for him. W was having to be constantly on the defense; he's too much of a gentleman to put the truth about Kerry out there plainly. I pray that a majority of people watching will have the discerment to see that Bush is RIGHT in his defense and homeland security policies and that Kerry is just a naive, blowhard who WILL resort to lying; he knows W won't.


185 posted on 10/01/2004 12:22:09 AM PDT by Mockingbird For Short ("God and George W. Bush, a Spiritual Life" by Paul Kengor--- a great read.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: flashbunny

I heard most of (~45 min from 9:30 to 10:15 EDT) the joint-news conference on the radio. I saw the end on Fox. Bush was whinning. It sounded awful. Bush was not as calm and confident as I have been led to believe. Electioins are decided on impressions as much as issues at this point. The impression was bad. :-(


243 posted on 10/01/2004 7:34:33 AM PDT by sefarkas (why vote Democrate-lite???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson