Posted on 09/30/2004 7:41:42 PM PDT by Mobilemitter
In your opinion, how did the debates go? Did Kerry get the upperhand (yeah right) or did Bush come out strong?
Also, was it just me, or did Kerry seem a little too prepared for those questions? Kerry usually trips over himself whenever he has to answer something, but he glided through this.
Bush is the President of the United States. He has to act "Presidental." That means, you can't call out your opponent for being a liar, which Kerry is, and you can't make ad hominem attacks towards your opponent.
Bush had plenty of opportunities to land a knockout blow on that tool Kerry, but passed on the opportunity because it probably would have looked unseemely and unpresidental.
His surrogates will take care of the job for him, will get the message out, and will point out all of the flip-flopper's "nuianced" positions. Just wait and see.
I am glad you heard this on CNN. Let hope this is true. I think that Kerry did MUCH better than I expected. Bush appeared disorganized and formulaic. I felt that this debate hurt Bush and boosted Kerry. I think that Bush could have done better, perhaps Kerry took note of Gore's performance. He appeared unflappable...whereas at times Bush appeared to flub his words and repeat rhetoric. Again that this information was presented on CNN makes me feel more hopefull! Thanks for your post.
1. Kerry is a (fairly)good debater/speaker(so are used car salesmen), Bush is not a good debater/speaker(period).
2. Bush DOES know when it's time to stop talking and to act. Kerry will not act unless it's for his own self-grandisement and won't hurt him politically(like Clinton)
3. Only historians will be able to judge the validity of the war in Iraq, whether it was the "wrong war at the wrong time". This section of the world has been a powder keg with a short fuse for many years. Does this President have any solutions? Who knows for sure, but it's definately an issue that needed to dealt with "YEARS AGO" by many leaders, foreign and domestic, unfortunately it wasn't and the disease was allowed to fester. Our price for that inaction(so far)being 9-11. Seeing as things haven't changed there much in 2000 years, with the bloodshed and human rights issues, don't expect miracle democratic states in the middle east in our lifetime. The biggest problem this President has is having to explain these things, himself and his actions to a spoiled, impatient, "we want everything NOW" America media and citizens.
Oh and, America was attacked just as much for it's declining moral culture(YOUR friends in hollywood Mr. Kerry)as it was for it's globalist businessmen, we don't need a powwow with islamofacists to figure that out.
4. President Bush knows that for the most part America IS ON IT'S OWN in the world when it comes to not only national security but also economic issues, that these so-called "allies" Kerry keeps referring to are countrys that, for the most part, are jealous of America's achievements and that don't have the backbone any longer to make the tough decisions on tough issues around the world. Trust me, Kerry would be used as a puppet by these "allies", just as Clinton was to demean this country further.
I don't want a One World Order, Give Up Your Sovereignty President.....that's all I heard from Kerry's "experienced debater" mouth tonight.
But I also don't want a President that will break the back(and the bank)of a generous nation to help a ungrateful and unappreciative world.
BTW,for those looking for one of Kerry's infamous flip-flops, did I or did I not hear him say in one sentence that IRAQ was NOT part of the war on terror, then in another sentence say he has a plan to win the war in IRAQ because it is essential to winning the war on terror???
Rove, Kerry analysts and GW's team told GW to just hang back in the first 2/3's of the debate and let Kerry say anything that he wanted to say. They probably knew that Kerry had gotten a preview of the questions before hand.
So Kerry was loaded for bear and spewed and spewed.
This was why GW look so poed while he listened to Kerry spew lies and other mantras.
Now those lies and mantras spewed by Skerry will become hard hitting comercials for GW. If Skerry behaves the same way in the second debate, he will screw himself with his own words out of his own mouth. I don't Skerry can behave any different.
You are very perceptive. The "talking heads" missed those points, as did I'm sure, the general public. Kerry threw them in for a "feel good" effect and to subtly try to convince voters that he was the heir to that legacy. He even mentioned Ronald Reagan, as if President Reagan ever agreed with anything Kerry ever did or said! I just wish President Bush would've called him on it.
Meanwhile, Sen Flip-Flop was spending his time getting a manicure.
I agree. I was meaning to compliment him on his restraint. He is a much better President than I would be.
Shalom.
You said that beautifully! We all should take lessons from you, Miles.
"Meanwhile, Sen Flip-Flop was spending his time getting a manicure."
Good point.
I think President Bush does best when he is allowed to just say whats on his mind. I think he was trying to hard to say what his advisors told him to say. With the O'Rielly interview, he was answering without a script. Thats why he was so much more relaxed.
Ever hear of sarcasm?
I thought he really screwed up when he said he would disarm our nuclear program and the prez pointed it out clearly.
Yes, I agree. The thing that I don't understand is Bush and his advisors know this. Why do they keep trying to script him when they know it is not going to work? For example there was one part of the debate, where Bush started just speaking and he did a wonderful job. The problem is after that he went back to trying to do sound bites which doesn't work for him.
For President Bush, it shouldn't have mattered WHAT question is asked. He should have had in his head exactly what he wanted to say on that particular question, and then say it.
After all, when talking foreign policy, there are only a limited number of questions that will come up, even if the moderator tries to twist them.
Nuclear proliferation, War in Iraq, War on Terror, hunting down AlQaeda, dealing with Russia, Dealing with France, Dealing with the UN, AFrica starvation and Muslim warlords, etc.
If GWB was smart, he would have had his dozen or so set answers, and then just give them when that subject comes up.
GWB sometimes tries too much to dig for answers, and he freezes up. He should just give his set answers and to hell with the moderator.
Thats just the way the President is. He refuses to say anything bad about anyone and he won't defend himself if anyone critisizes him. Hes always been that way. I get mad sometimes and want to scream, defend yourself, man! but it hasn't seemed to hurt him so I am optimistic.
It was not a good night for Bush. He seemed weary, he stumbled over words, and sometimes couldn't put two thoughts together. On some points I don't think he was forceful enough defending his actions. And near the end it seemed to me he lost track of the country being talked about. Or was that my imagination?
That's right... no matter who wins...:-) Sorry, I couldn't resist.
I thought it was curious that Bush didn't call him on his plan--ie., what is your plan?--until I saw Mike McCurry from Kerry's spin room after the debate. He said they wanted Bush to engage on that point as they had a terrific response cooked up. (My words) So I guess Bush made the right decision, whether it was intentional or not.
Bush simply looked tired, annoyed, angry, and unprepared at times. I was very surprised and expected better.
You are right about the mistakes Kerry made and his errors of judgement--but Bush simply failed to take advantage of them.
I think the Bush team made too much of the idea that he had to keep saying the same thing. It forced his answers into a strait-jacket.
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.