Posted on 09/30/2004 10:35:23 PM PDT by Pokey78
But, that's the problem. These things are NEVER about substance. They are about a tilt of the head, a look at a watch, a drop of sweat. There may only be a sliver of voters out there who are undecided. But, they could be swayed by style only. Think about that; this late in the campaign and someone is "undecided"! That can't be because they are waiting for "substance." "Substance" has been around for months.
No way to honestly make this look good for us.
Im not happy in saying I though Bush was horrible last not . Composed ? He seemed rattled most of the time .NO IM NOT A DEM...dont start OK ?.I went through this last night .Im sorry , i thought the night was a disaster for us and Im sick over it . Bush had a ton of chances to smash Kerry and didnt ..Why the hell did have to go to Fla that day ..That was real smart to do .
Agree...Is it better to make believe that is went well for us last night ?
3 problems with this analysis.
First, the disclaimer that "if I didn't know anything about either guy, then..."
That is a meaningless premise. Because anybody who watched the debate tonight knows *something* about the candidates. Especially Bush, who's only been the POTUS the last 4 years. And they are not 4 eventless years, they are four tumulous years. A person who after the last 4 years who is totaly oblivious of who Bush is is not somebody who's going to vote, or watch the debates.
2nd. Bush's support is much firmer than Kerry's. As polls have shown, many more of the people who say they'll vote for Bush say they are certain, compared to Kerry who's support is much weaker. I don't think Bush lost any votes tonight, he may not have persuaded many undecided, but he is polling about 50% in many polls, so he doesn't need the undecided, just to hold on to people who already plans to vote for him. So even if all the undecided who "doesn't know anything about either guy" go for Kerry, that's not enough. Proof of this is in the Gallup post election poll, despite most people thinking Kerry won the debate, Bush still came out post-debate ahead of Kerry is "who's more likeable", who "agrees with me on the important issues", "who is more believable", and "tough enough to be president". In fact he won the tough enough to be president question 54 to 37. That's right, only 37% of the people who watched the debate afterwards think Kerry is tough enough to be president.
3rdly, I disagree that the later debates count less. They count more. Remember 84 when Reagan was terrible against Mondale in debate one, but came back and won the 2nd one. Also in 2000, Gore won the first debate fairly handily, and then got taken out of his game by W in the 2nd one, which completely turned the momentum of the race. This debate did not change the momentum of the race. Kerry proved he is a better debater, but he didn't convince that he'd be the better president.
Im with you ..Who the hell though up that idea for him to go to FLA the day of the most important debate of his life ? He looked beat and spoke horribly half the time..STUPID MOVE for sure.
What this debate shows is how hokey high-school debating society rules are. Kerry was great at throwing out "facts." The problem is that he made up a lot of facts on the fly and they were wrong. They ought to change high-school debate rules to take off points for making up lies.
Second, Bush may have missed many opportunities to rebut Kerry's absurd claims, but he got in some good telling blows. Kerry's points about letting the Chinese off the hook in NK's nuclear problem, turning our defenses over to international bodies, his contempt for Americans and his contempt for our allies were pretty well answered.
This isn't about style. It is about who you want to have as President, and Kerry with his arrogance, inability to make a decision, and recklessness with security lost it.
I agree. I love President Bush. There is no doubt in my mind that he is the BEST man for the job.
BUTTTTTT..... the point of the original post is not what he or intelligent people think (that's us by the way). He is talking about those undecideds (who if they had half a brain, they would be decided).
I personally became upset at all the facial expressions of President Bush, and found the debate much better when I rolled over, closed my eyes, and just listened to the him speak.
His facial expressions took away from his message - and you couldn't miss that - Fox News kept showing it. I felt that we saw a lot less of Kerry's facial reactions when President Bush was speaking.
Just my opinion...
He SHOULD have said a LOT of things last night and he DIDNT ..He let that horses ass Kerry slide witha lot od crap last night .Bush came off as meek and defensive..He was horrible and I for one was totally let down..
Carolyn
Bush could have put him away on so many issues.
Kerry trashed the coalition of Asian nations with the USA working to contain Korea... Bush let him go on that.
Kerry said his VOTE against the 187 billion supplemental was a mistaken way to TALK about the war... Bush failed to mention that SENATE VOTES are not just TALK. Bush let him go on that.
Bush let him go on his 20 year anti-military, anti-USA voting record in the Senate. This was a foreign policy debate. A 20 year voting record is an important foreign-policy predictor. Bush let him go on that.
We all laughed when Kerry changed his campaign team several times.
Bush should have been doing the same.
There are Bush advisors who should have been fired long ago. Now it's too late for that. Now they should be shot.
This was not a true debate. This was a series of short speeches. Bush's advisors didn't send him him with any good short speeches. Kerry's advisors sent Kerry in with a lot of good (lying) short speeches.
All of Bush's advisors --- including Rove --- should be lined up against the wall and shot. They should be replaced with a team run by Rush Limbaugh.
What a sad, sad, day. I just hope we dont get that commie traitor anti-American, anti-Christian, anti-Capitalist, pro-Europe, pro-terrorist scumbag Kerry and his scumbag lawyer boy in the Whitehouse.
Did I mention? Bush's advisors should be lined up against the wall and shot. With large caliber weapons.
We all laughed at the idea of Clintonistas sabotaging the Kerry campaign.
I'd like to know who's sabotaging the Bush campaign. Clearly somebody is doing that. Clearly somebody in the Bush camp does not want Bush to be president. I'd really like to know who that is.
AFTER CBS????
Bush spoke the truth while Kerry lied.
Bwahahahahaha-ha-ha-ha-ha!!!!!!!! IN YOUR DREAMS!!
Where do I start? AT THE END? - When TERRAYZA waddled onto the stage and the usual grimacing hug ensued? - OR EARLIER ON IN THE DEBATE? - When JOHN F. KERRY pronounced "Putin" four or five times in that unfortunate pronunciation (at least in my neck of the woods) and PRESIDENT BUSH had sense enough to call him the more glamourous "Vladimir" - IT WAS OVER!!! - I could go on, and on, and the lamestream media will try to anoint JFK the winner, but Bwahahahahaha-ha-ha-ha!!! MESSENGER, YOU and YOUR MESSAGE ARE SHOT!!!!
If televised Presidential debates were not about style then RMN would have been POTUS in January 1961.
I am not saying that the battle is over or lost. I am saying that I was very disappointed by our guy last night and I know how the MSM will play it.
I hope that the American voter is a more clear thinker than he was 43 years ago.
His Democratic opponent spoke as if only the rich got a tax cut under Bush, when in fact taxpayers in all income groups did.
The Democrat apparently misspoke when painting a dark picture of the chaos in Iraq today. He said of Iraq, "we got weapons of mass destruction crossing the border every single day, and they're blowing people up."He apparently meant terrorists, not weapons of mass destruction, were crossing the border.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6144991/ Kerry suggested that the United States has spent $200 billion on Iraq, largely because it supplied the bulk of the troops. This is an exaggeration, because it combines the amount already spent -- about $120 billion -- with money that is expected to be spent in the coming year or requested by the administration.
At another point, Kerry said "Secretary of State Colin Powell told this president the Pottery Barn rule: if you break it, you fix it." This anecdote comes from Bob Woodward's book, "Plan of Attack," but actually, Woodward reported that Powell privately talked with aides about the rule that if "you break it, you own it." He did not say this to the president -- and it turned out Pottery Barn does not have such a rule."
Did I mention? Bush's advisors should be lined up against the wall and shot. With large caliber weapons.
I totally agree..Good move also letting him tour FLA disaster areas the day of his mOST important debate ever.
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.