[goldstategop]

My theory is Bush went "soft" to get women on board. It may be smart strategery that may end up paying long term political dividends. Bush will take a tactical loss to secure the big prize.

[EGPWS]

The Bush-Kerry Face-Off

Bush still has one, Kerry's has fallen off and has been lost, however the MSM is diligently looking for it and when it's found will let EVERYONE know.

[counterpunch]

After this debate, the general feeling most will probably have is that Kerry is critical of Bush—quelle surprise!—but they still will not have any idea what John Kerry would do as president.

That's a good summary. Bush could have made an effort though, to point out just that, that Kerry offers a lot of criticism, but no plan of his own. Kerry's only plan so far has been a dumbed down version of exactly what we're already doing, and he's trying to sell it as a bold new direction. In a way, it should be a ringing endorsement for Bush, something he should have seized upon.

[Troublemaker]

I know a number of people thought that the Iraq War/terror war debate would help Bush, but I disagree. I go to a number of football games and there are always those jackasses that sit in the stands and know how to coach the team better than the coach....until you gave them the chance. Kerry is one of those jackasses and he has the luxury of sitting in the cheap seats and questioning decisions he has never had to make. That's easy and can only put Bush on the defensive. Anytime the subject moved off Iraq (No. Korea, Iran), Kerry stubbed his toe.

Kerry won't have that luxury from now on as he has a longtime Senate record where he has had to make decisions. Bush need to hammer him on this record and show him for what Kerry is....an extreme leftist who is out of touch with the average American. The flip-flop stuff is nice and contradictions should be pointed out, but Bush needs to move on past that and attack his liberal record and liberal ideology.