Posted on 09/30/2004 5:57:19 PM PDT by Admin Moderator
Thread 1 - Pre-Debate discussion
That is an excellent example.
Cyncooper, thanks for your feedback. I have gotten tons of FRmail stating the opposite of your sentiment.
Perhaps the untrained eye of the American public will be forgiving to W, but the polls I saw last night had Kerry ahead in some polls 88-12.
Coming across as agitated and defensive is never going to win you a debate. Americans have about a 10 minute attention span, and to those who tuned in early and then tuned out, W was hostile and defensive and Kerry was under control. Are they listening? I doubt it- and if they tuned out they didnt' even get to hear Kerry contradict himself. W got control of himself and really did well with the Korea question and did great showing the personal side talking about the soldier's family he met with- that's what he's good at. But in the beginning he was coming across as defensive.
The silver platter question from Lehrer was not looking for a personal attack. Lehrer, no matter how cracked his questions, is a professional moderator and would not be fishing for a personal attack. The things that Kerry had said before Lehrer asked for a retort were so easily responded to, that I think Lehrer was looking for W to state the obvious- it really shocked me that W did not have a comeback. I think Lehrer was looking for a logical response, not a personal attack.
Maybe to the untrained eye, W shone last night. I pray it's so. But just because I adore the guy- and THAT is not up to debate of course- doesn't mean I can't judge him accurately. I think a lot of people want Bush to win so badly they can't see that in the first half of the debate he was not at his best. The next one is town hall, which is 100% W's forte. He should really do well.
Welcome to FR, we can always use a prayer or two.
I have a trained eye, as does lawyer Hugh Hewitt, who saw it my way.
Be of good cheer.
:)
A good Debater does not make a good President. Most people know Kerry has been debating in the Senates for 20 years, or the times he showed up. President Bush has reason to be defensive, he has been called a liar, like Hitler, had movie of lies out about him, and a media that lies about him.
I think if americans are too stupid to see what was happeing get what they deserve when they vote for kerry.
"I don't think Kerry's comments will stand the test of time while Pres. Bush's comments will."
Yes, I think so, too. He also tied himself back to VietNam and said he would be loyal to our Armed Forces, setting himself up (just as he did at his convention) for the Swift Vets ads.
I want to see Laura debate Terayza.
I wouldn't be surprised that RUSH doesn't "pick up" on this point in some fashion today...
I watched c-span's split screen format and Kerry looked terrible, in fact his profile looked like the well known drawing of a haggard old woman.
now I realize that looks should not be the deciding factor, but they were in the Nixon/Kennedy TV debate.
when Kerry's eyes were wide open they looked hollow, vacant, perhaps stupid, his face had gone from bright orange to washed out ashen white and his constant nodding of his head, while Bush was speaking, was truely weird.
and while Bush left us momentarly hanging in some of his commentary, Kerry's answers were boring, confusing and non-responsive.
wonders of wonders, CBS gave the debate to Kerry based on their "metered" polling.
but like Bush said in response to one of Kerry's answers about fighting on two fronts in the war on terror, and I paraphrase - we're capable of walking and chewing gum at the same time...rto
I think Kerry had a pre-planned debate strategy...and it worked. Throw out so many lies and distortions that:
A) Bush will have to make an on-the-spot decision to either counter the lies or stick to his message (Bush chose the latter, correctly IMO).
B) Get Bush visibly irritated...another success.
My biggest disappointment was Bush's failure to frame the debate from a "September 11" perspective. He hardly mentioned it.
Lastly, a note about Jim Lehrer. Could he not have asked just ONE QUESTION about Kerry's record in the Senate or the poor decisions he's made in this campaign (Vietnam-centered convention)? Every single question was pulled from the Kerry talking points memo.
Bush actually made a reference to Kerry's thinking being pre September 11. Can't have harped on that too much. Did well.
Every single question was pulled from the Kerry talking points memo.
Lehrer was outrageous, especially at the end with the question to Bush asking if he personally thought Kerry lacked the character to be president. I was shocked. President Bush handled it very well.
Let's hope. Too bad the polls agree with me this morning.
:-(
1. Kerry won on style but many sound bites will come back to haunt him -- global test; we didn't need that tax cut; and many more.
2. By getting Kerry back in the game (to some degree), Bush has given pseudo hope to the RATS. As a consequence, rather than abandoning Kerry now in order to save RAT Senate and House candidates, Bush may have ironically helped our down-ballot candidates.
3. I believe there was some danger of the President peaking too early, as Nixon did in 1968. Don't need to worry about that now.
4. Women co-workers tell me that suburban Moms and moderate women do not want a president fighting in the mud... that Bush was smart to remain "above the fray."
Remember the MSM in 1980 believed that Carter beat Reagan in their debate, because Carter controlled the tempo and direction of the discussion, Reagan was on defense etc etc.
Sound familiar?
Another point I wish Bush had made.
Kerry's strategy included making Iraq into a "distraction", going after Saddam rather than bin Laden. He said it repeatedly.
Bush team should boil down an answer: Of course we're tracking down those who have already attacked us. But, after 9/11, it is ESSENTIAL to also deal with FUTURE threats BEFORE they fully develop. You can't ignore future threats while hunting down those who have already attacked. (Japan/Germany example would work here, too.)
No, the polls actually agree with me.
I have stated Kerry did well on style. From there Bush won over voters on substance.
Will ping you to a thread that offers evidence.
I hear that the President was very tired after visiting hurricane victims, earlier in the day. I can see how that would drain him mentally. It all makes sense now.
I hope this becomes widely known, for it points out the contrast between Kerry and Bush. Bush cares more about hurting Americans, than his own personal ambition. He should have rested, like the Senator did, but he went out to encourage the people of Florida.
Kerry is blind with ambition and self promotion, to the exclusion of the needs of Americans.
Here, here! Send that advice to the President and the RNC
RNCommunications@gop.com
President@whitehouse.gov
TO: Bush cares more about ENCOURAGING hurting Americans, than promoting his own personal ambition.
Sorry I took so long to replay, somebody took my internet away last night right in the middle of typing another reply! (I'm at the whims of mother nature and whatever the current EMCON is.)
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.