For the undecided out there, particularly the more uninformed among them, I think this one has to go to Kerry.
1. Kerry was able to put president Bush on the defensive right from the start and has kept him there.
2. In spite of several openings, Bush did not stick the proverbial fork in Kerry when he had the chance. He's being too nice by not going after Kerry directly.
3. The President has come accross as almost pleading in some of his responses, which makes him look unsure rather than confident. Kerry has come accross as confident, articulate and in control of the facts (which is easy when the facts don't matter to you and you are willing to lie without hesitation, and, in fact, have plenty of practice doing just that).
The proof will be in the poll numbers next week, but I see Kery's numbers going up. Hate to say it, but that's the way I see it. I hope I am wrong.
Bush is getting his ass whipped, and the tragety is he doesn't have to.
I knew I didn't watch the debate for a reason, now I remember.
The Sheep just watched Kerry make the President look weak.
And The Sheep Will Believe.
On the merits, he whipped the president, hands down; luckily, the GOP has some of the best spinners and operatives around, and debate performance is seen through the prism of post-debate spin, in part because millions who watch these debates don't know a damn thing about the particulars of what is being discussed.
This is not defeatism. This is reality, and i pray Karl Rove and Bush will learn from this.
In reply to:
"For the undecided out there, particularly the more uninformed among them, I think this one has to go to Kerry."
Disagree. Bush came across as sincere, not as pleading. Kerry did alot of talking but not much sincerity, more arrogance. Bush's strongest points:
1.Take the fight to the enemy
2. Don't allow the United States have its security determined by other nations.