Posted on 10/14/2004 6:24:03 AM PDT by blogblogginaway
Kidding? About what?
About Bush being their equal? No.
Time will prove that to be the case as it proved with the other two, especially in Lincoln's case where a good number of the country hated him or thought him an intellectual lightweight.
It's about 75,000 per day, I believe.
(steely)
In my opinion, President Bush had a 'there you go again' moment when he was asked about the women in his life. He said, without missing a beat, "You listen to them!" The place fell apart. He won the election with that line. Kerry then lamely tried to get a laugh when it was his turn, but all he got was crickets. That answer alone was a slam dunk for W!
I thought I was the only one that heard that...
Are you sure you were watching the same debate as the rest of the world?
My first impression of skerry last night was that he looked like one of the guys from the Night of the Living Dead.
President Bush looked anxious and used a forced smile for too much of the 1st part of the debate.
I would have preferred he be more direct and deadly in his retorts instead of the phony smiles.
But then again, what do I know?
I have considered the sources...and they are not all internet polls. In fact, the vast majority of them are not internet polls.
I was switching between the debate and the Astros game last night. I kept seeing commercials for the upcoming TV series about the Donald Trump-like boss who humiliates wannabe employees, and who turns out to not be a "real" boss after all. Kinda made me wonder if the country that watches cruel, demeaning crap like that show has what it takes to re-elect Bush.
When the full story comes out about this War on Terror people are going to be amazed.
"Kerry blasts Bush for not meeting with the NAACP, the Congressional Black Caucus, the "civil-rights leadership." I wish Bush would say something like, "There's more to black America than the NAACP. There's more to black America than a lot of sour left-wingers. And why should John Kerry be allowed to define the 'civil-rights leadership'? I meet with a lot of Americans — not just with approved ones."
Now that is hitting the nail squarely on the head. Democrats have been defining and using the "civil rights leadership" for years.These "leaders" attach themselves to the Democratic party much like pilot fish to a shark.
From what I've seen, the leftists are not feeling sanguinary or celebrating this morning. They clearly do not believe the gigolo won last night.
PresBush was much better in tonights debate then he was in the first debate, but he really didn't get the job done tonight to my satisfaction. Once again, Bush allowed John Kerry to walk all over his record as President, with falsehoods, half truths and outright lies. Bush could've defended his record a lot better then he did. And he should've challenged Kerry more on his liberal Senate voting record. I'm a bit disappointed in the President's performance tonight. I don't think he hurt himself, but I don't think he helped himself either.
I hope you understand that 1.) on-line polls are grossly UNSCIENTIFIC (read INVALID) and completely manipulated by leftwing computer hacks, 2.) last evenings 'flash' polls were conducted in the Mountain and Pacific time zones only (advantage Kerry), and 3.) the MSM would have declared Kerry the winner even if he had suffered a nervous breakdown after the first question!
This debate was about energizing our base and getting out our voters to the polls (particularly the millions of Evangelicals who stayed home in 2000)!! Toward this end, the President hit a grand slam!!!
Well...I certainly didn't realize we have our very own Guru regarding polls on this website! Tell me, oh poll expert, why it is that when polls (ANY KIND OF POLL) show Bush ahead - even by a 10th of a percentage point, most of the folks on here declare the poll to be valid, full of insight, truthful, and unbiased.
Then, when the poll (ANY KIND OF POLL) shows Bush behind - by even a 10th of a percentage point, most of the folks on here declare the poll to be invalid, "UNSCIENTIFIC", lacking in insight, lying, and biased, hmmmmmmmmmm?
Last: make sure you call the head of Bush's campaign and let them know that the debate last night was for no other reason that "energizing" the base and getting our voters to the polls. I'll bet they'd be surprised.
Perhaps you could post the polls?
I don't see how any 'poll' can be considered credible when the debate ended at 10:30 EST
OOOooops..I forgot that one. My fault. So...when any poll shows Bush behind ... it's (or they, as the case may be) are "not credible".
BUSH WINS BY A LANDSLIDE!!!
I could give you an intelligent answer if you posted the polls and I could see the internals.
Links please?
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.