Presidential Debate

[TheDagdaMor145]

I think it is only natural for us to have a thread about this. But I put the poll up there to see if anyone was going to be playing along tonight.

Edit- For those who had not heard, I believe the topic for the debate tonight will be "International Policy"



I am of the mindset that these are mostly scripted anyways. For example, both candidates will be told exactly how to respond to questions on specific issues. Not only that, but exactly how to hold themselves, the tone of voice to use, hand movements, etc. However, I will still watch the debates so in case there is something to learn about the candidates that I do not know.


As for the drinking games:
The two major drinking games I have heard of associated with these candidates are pretty easy. In the Bush drinking game, you drink every time he stumbles over his own words (Lord help you if he starts talking about the nuclear capabilities of some countries). In the Kerry drinking game, you drink everytime you yawn.

[Drakeon]

Considering theirs 32 pages of rules and that the candidates can't even directly address each other... it won't affect my choice on who to vote for (I guess it could, if something unexpected happens).

They're basically just campaign speeches that are done in intervals :p

That said, I'll still be watching them, as my Polticial Science teacher requires us to watch them.

[Unreg!stered]

I'll be watching them too, because I consider them important. However, I really hate how the moderators shield the candidates from each other and how the "debates" have simply become who can read their script the best. The candidates should be able to address each other and the moderator should only step in when a candidate has been backed into a corner for too long. It'd not only make for better TV but for better decision making if America could watch these two morons drill each other directly. Hell, what would be even better is if the audience could ask questions directly and demand a clear answer, not prepared BS. I know I'd love to drill both candidates on their issues and see how they truly act under fire.

[Bhs Crew]

Damn straight.

[Drakeon]

It's on now :surprise:

[Sage the Mage]

Hehe this is a hilarious debate.

[Drakeon]

Hehe this is a hilarious debate.

It is? :scratch:

[ScytheNoire]

Bush is getting PWNED

[Sage the Mage]

Its a rule. If Bush speaks, hilarity ensues.

[Tyran_Harasvelg]

Kerry is killing Bush. Bush has stated in almost every question that Kerry changes his views, and thats about all he said.

[Semidi]

Bush is an idiot; I could beat JK... Then again it's hard work....

[powermongor]

Bush is an idiot; I could beat JK... Then again it's hard work....

This debate isn't about who is the smoothest talker.

Bush has stood his ground, Kerry is looking like a butt. Bush isn't a smooth talker, nor was he against Gore. Gore, while flat personality-wise, still was a better speaker than Bush. Guess what? Bush won at least 2 of the debates, if not all 3.

In my book, and I have been looking at it very critically and recognizing parts where Bush has screwed up, but if the debate holds as it has been, when the analysis comes in tomorrow morning, Bush will have won the debate.

Bush has come off as honest, he hasn't been bullied, even though he has stammered thru some of the debate. He can't get personal against Kerry, that has been his biggest screw up.

Kerry, while the smoother of the two, has appeared to be something of a butt (man, I hate using kiddie language) and has said some things about things he is already on tape as saying the opposite not too long ago. He has been vague about what he will do.

Bottom line, Kerry has yet to bring specifics to the table, and Bush is still way more likeable and believable.

Watch tomorrow, most news organizations will be reporting analysis showing the debates won by Bush, or tied at the very least. I hope then that you all will realize that I understand these things better than you do, perhaps listen to me more.

[GaiaWombat]

PM, I'm not saying I disagree with you. I haven't been watching most of it, so I couldn't really say either way. But that's a pretty ballsy statement to make. What happens if Bush loses tomorrow? Are you that confident that you would put your personal reputation and dignity on the line like that for such a small thing? I can't tell you what should do. If I were you, however, I might rephrase that to make it so a little less rides on something such as this.

[Bhs Crew]

Debate's going on people. Go watch.

[Semidi]

I wasn't refering to his talking skills. (I live in Texas he sound normal to me)

I am refering to him not talking about the voting recored of Kerry, his biggest advantage.

[ScytheNoire]

powermongor, do you work at FOX?

Bush is more likable and believable?
likable? i sure don't like him.
believable? he has changed his stories more times than his underwear.

Bush is just so one-sided and a one-minded, even when he's wrong.
Kerry will admit when he is wrong and admit that a new viewpoint is needed.
when Bush's campaign says that Kerry flip-flops, that's not what he is doing, he is changing his mind based on the information given. something may look good in the morning but look really bad at night.

[Sage the Mage]

New word of the day: trans-shipment.

[Drakeon]

-sigh- I may not like Kerry, but he sounded very good in this debate if you ask me.

[ScytheNoire]

-sigh- I may not like Kerry, but he sounded very good in this debate if you ask me.
he did
i think it's important because Bush and Kerry were put on equal ground, and on equal ground, Kerry came out on top, in my opinion.

now to watch FOX's one-sided Republican broadcast.

[Sage the Mage]

My major qualm was Kerry didn't relate Putin to the Patroit Act.

[Bhs Crew]

-sigh- I may not like Kerry, but he sounded very good in this debate if you ask me.


Yes he did. It's about time. Go Kerry.

[Tyran_Harasvelg]

Kerry got the louder applause.

[Unreg!stered]

I think Kerry's taken this one. It was pretty even for the first half hour or so but after that Bush just parroted the same response. The first two times he brought up specific examples of Kerry's "flip-flopping" (god I hate that buzz word) it was very, very good, big points for him. However, he hardly ever went away from that. When Kerry would trap him, Bush would respond "we need a president who won't send mixed messages." Bush needed to use this debate to justify the war on Iraq and the pre-emptive strike, and unfortunately he didn't do much of either.

However, Bush had several good "zingers" and for the most part was his likeable, down home style self. He seemed very sincere, and it is amazing how far that will go amongst the American public. But, in my mind Kerry took this one home. He was stronger on the issues and he finally showed some spine. Only time will tell if the American public agrees with what I saw, though.

[Andarcel]

I think it is only natural for us to have a thread about this. But I put the poll up there to see if anyone was going to be playing along tonight.

Edit- For those who had not heard, I believe the topic for the debate tonight will be "International Policy"



I am of the mindset that these are mostly scripted anyways. For example, both candidates will be told exactly how to respond to questions on specific issues. Not only that, but exactly how to hold themselves, the tone of voice to use, hand movements, etc. However, I will still watch the debates so in case there is something to learn about the candidates that I do not know.


As for the drinking games:
The two major drinking games I have heard of associated with these candidates are pretty easy. In the Bush drinking game, you drink every time he stumbles over his own words (Lord help you if he starts talking about the nuclear capabilities of some countries). In the Kerry drinking game, you drink everytime you yawn.
The Bush campaign specified those rules so Bush wouldn't have to deviate too much from prepared remarks. Don't blame TV or the debate commission.

Powermonger... I can't wait to make you eat overwhelming gobs of humble pie tomorrow.

[powermongor]

The Bush campaign specified those rules so Bush wouldn't have to deviate too much from prepared remarks. Don't blame TV or the debate commission.

Powermonger... I can't wait to make you eat overwhelming gobs of humble pie tomorrow.

I don't think I will be eating humble pie. You will have a whole lot of it in Nov. 2nd, though.

[Booms]

I really wanted to watch the debate, but instead I was busy writing something for my AP English class. I hate homework.

[Bhs Crew]

I don't think I will be eating humble pie. You will have a whole lot of it in Nov. 2nd, though.
That we will see.

This debate was much better for Kerry than Bush. Not only was he polled as the winner in the debate in many different polls (ABC and CBS were the ones I saw) but he got to establish himself. Most people in the battleground states didn't really like Bush but wanted to know more about Kerry before they voted for him. This is going to make a large difference, especially because Kerry has significantly improved his speaking style from before.

Plus that was the national security/foreign policy debate. This was Bush's strongest area. Now for the next two he has to debate such things as economic and domestic issues. Poor bastard.

[Sage the Mage]

I thought Kerry kicked Bush's *** that time, but still coulda done more.

The dems are predicting that Bush's campaign people are gonna spin it like crazy, and I see that happening.

I really got pissed at Bush saying, "Kerry wen't to Yale, but I won't hold that against him."

[powermongor]

That we will see.

This debate was much better for Kerry than Bush. Not only was he polled as the winner in the debate in many different polls (ABC and CBS were the ones I saw) but he got to establish himself. Most people in the battleground states didn't really like Bush but wanted to know more about Kerry before they voted for him. This is going to make a large difference, especially because Kerry has significantly improved his speaking style from before.

Plus that was the national security/foreign policy debate. This was Bush's strongest area. Now for the next two he has to debate such things as economic and domestic issues. Poor bastard.

Man, Nov. 3rd, you guys are going to have a hard time trying to figure out why Bush won.

[Booms]

Bush was spinning it before the debate even started.

http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,65142,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_1

[Bhs Crew]

Man, Nov. 3rd, you guys are going to have a hard time trying to figure out why Bush won.
Powermonger, would you mind just waiting til the election happens like everyone else. It's fine to say who you think will win, but it's incredibly annoying to hear you repeat the same line 2000 times. Leave it alone. We'll see what happens soon enough.

[Semidi]

ya about that... anyone want to bet on it (WoW money)? I got 50 gold on bush 4 teh win, any takers?

[Bhs Crew]

Works for me. Shall we settle it when WoW comes out?
Though I don't think you can transfer money from one server to another. Damn.

We'll figure something out. You're on.

We are surrounded by witnesses.

[Essex]

Kerry did better than I expected, it just depends on if the general populace is intuned to things like we more political people are.

There were a few things I would like to have whispered in Kerry's ear. The moment he said the word "body armor" I wanted to slap him. Don't mention that... it's been used against you, I know you meant well, and actually had a good point when you were talking about it but don't ever mention body armor.

Secondly why are you letting bush get away with saying that Afgahanstan is free? The taliban is slowly creeping back in (I'm glad he mentioned elections being pushed back) Don't let Bush say we won in Afgahanistan when we haven't. Also comment on how little (or at least how little we hear about) rebuliding efforts are going.

Also he almost got in a hissy about Bush not following the rules, don't mention the rules, everyone things the rules are stupid if you bring it up it sounds like your the one who made them all up.

He did a good job of thinking the camera could always be on him, Bush didn't he made a few smirks, and unhappy faces and interupted the moderator a few times, how much that affects things who knows.

I think Kerry did well in the debate where Bush had an edge, I'm looking foward to the domestic issue debate. I would also LOVE for them to be able to ask each other questions, quiet frankly I'd start asking him direct questions in the last debate because hey it's the last debate what is Bush gonna do walk right out of it and look bad in front of the nation?

[Felicia]

On the debate, and issues presented and answers followed... Kerry was very vague on his answers, and constantly hammering Bush, much like Gore did. Bush pulled through the defense (although he was pretty much there since the first question.) Both of them ran the clock too much.

Gore was much more clearer on the issues than Kerry ever was. He layed out specific, detailed ideas on how he would handle certain situations. Bush did this too, however this debate Bush didn't offer much in the way of specifics, but he did say that he wanted to extend the Patriot Act, and keep his doctrine. Which works for security. Bush's largest mistake, however, was questioning Kerry on where he's going to get the money for some of his plans.

Kerry went off attacking Bush on nearly every answer. This doesn't exactly help. Yes, we know that Bush did bad things, you don't exactly have a clean slate either Mr. Kerry. Please tell us what you're going to do differently than Bush. While he did give out some idea, Kerry probably doesn't have everything in his mind on how it would work. What he did say was pretty much already what Bush's administration is already doing. If we were to look at it as a popularity poll, Kerry would seem like someone who is a bully, and Bush is the underdog. It should be noted that Americans tend to favor underdogs. On the other hand, Americans also seem to enjoy bullies every now and again.

In the end, this debate was disappointing. Neither one gave good strong answers for international policy. Kerry dislikes the war, but supports it, Bush supports the war, but feels more needs to be done. Both agree on strong foreign policies and alliances. And that pretty much sums up the debate. At this point, if neither president had any other plans but the issues presented in this debate, it really wouldn't matter who would be president. In this case Bush would probably get the Patriot Act extended, Kerry wouldn't use the Patriot Act, but would continue with the war efforts. He might send more troops into Afghan, though I suppose he might have a harder time handling the war than Bush.

In the end, Bush probably holds the edge on the debate. Kerry just a smidge behind. Though this means little on who would be president.


Fun fact: The founders of the Constitution came up with the Electorial College in order to avoid something they called 'mob rule' in which, they feared that if a smooth talking policitian that could win the hearts of the uneducated and influence people to do things that they may not think is right, it could be bad for the government. Mob rule proved true on three occassions, Adolf Hitler, Napolean, and Joseph Stalin. Though on each case, they all proved good for the country (at least in the short run).

[Bhs Crew]

In the end, Bush probably holds the edge on the debate. Kerry just a smidge behind. Though this means little on who would be president.
Not according to the polls. Why always so cynicle anyway?

[Sage the Mage]

Bush actually showed an adept manipulation of logic during the debate, I can't go into specifics unless someone gets me a transcript or something. Iraq was a an example, and so was the spending money on nuclear arms control, I believe

While he did give out some idea, Kerry probably doesn't have everything in his mind on how it would work. What he did say was pretty much already what Bush's administration is already doing. If we were to look at it as a popularity poll, Kerry would seem like someone who is a bully, and Bush is the underdog. It should be noted that Americans tend to favor underdogs. On the other hand, Americans also seem to enjoy bullies every now and again.

Another Kerry weakness. He actually does have a plan, but you probably recall him saying, "Go to my website for a more thorough explanation" or something like that. Americans are lazy, we're not going to do that.

But don't forget the studdering and long pauses and "Let me finish talking" of Bush.

[Essex]

i also thought it was intersting that bush seemed to forget the rules sometimes. Like he would ask to reply to something Kerry had said when it was already his turn to reply to Kerry's comment.

[powermongor]

Not according to the polls. Why always so cynicle anyway?

Give ppl the night to digest what they heard. The news channels are going to be picking the debates apart for the next week, this will surely influence opinion. Much of what Kerry said was baloney, and contradicted taped statements he has made in the last year. Just wait, some really negative ads are coming Kerry's way.

Kerry did one stupid thing for sure, he said that the US ought to lead the way in nuclear disarmament by dismantling our current nuke development programs. That was a definite faux-pas in this election. That really scared me, since there is a good chance Kerry might win (a small one, you never know what schemes the democrats have cooked up to steal the election.)

[Bhs Crew]

That really scared me, since there is a good chance Kerry might win (a small one, you never know what schemes the democrats have cooked up to steal the election.)
And an even better chance that he'll win it outright.

I don't know why that scares you so much. He didn't say he'd dismantle our nukes, he said he'd shut down that particular bunker-busting nuclear bomb that we're developing.

What could we possibly do with a bunker busting nuclear bomb?

[Sage the Mage]

Bhs remember this is Bush. He wants to bust bunkers, in the most expensive way possible.

[Andarcel]

Bush actually showed an adept manipulation of logic during the debate, I can't go into specifics unless someone gets me a transcript or something. Iraq was a an example, and so was the spending money on nuclear arms control, I believe



Another Kerry weakness. He actually does have a plan, but you probably recall him saying, "Go to my website for a more thorough explanation" or something like that. Americans are lazy, we're not going to do that.

But don't forget the studdering and long pauses and "Let me finish talking" of Bush.
According to Felicia, Americans are far less lazy than we think they are. Probably they're all now racing to the campaign websites to thoroughly inform themselves.

Bush caught Kerry on a couple points of fact, but they were minor. Kerry presented both an attack on Bush and an alternative policy tonight, and Bush's only response was to stutter about imaginary contradictions and the necessity of a leader being obstinately committed to failing courses of action. That's the subjective view.

Objectively, Kerry has been having trouble because Bush has created an image of him being indirect and indecisive. Tonight, he was clear, confident, straightforward, and incisive. He just beat the image, however briefly. Bush did not. He stuttered, often failed to react adeptly, provided no defense of his current Iraq policy (hello, Felicia, how about you maybe hold Bush to the same standard you hold Kerry?), and simply looked lost without Cheney standing protectively nearby. End of the day: Kerry won. Americans don't want an underdog president right now, they don't want someone who looks cuddly, they want someone who projects authority and assurance, not facial ticks.

And their timing was generally superb. Try debating and see how hard it is to get within even ten seconds of the time limit either way with extemporaneous speeches.

[Andarcel]

Give ppl the night to digest what they heard. The news channels are going to be picking the debates apart for the next week, this will surely influence opinion. Much of what Kerry said was baloney, and contradicted taped statements he has made in the last year. Just wait, some really negative ads are coming Kerry's way.

Kerry did one stupid thing for sure, he said that the US ought to lead the way in nuclear disarmament by dismantling our current nuke development programs. That was a definite faux-pas in this election. That really scared me, since there is a good chance Kerry might win (a small one, you never know what schemes the democrats have cooked up to steal the election.)
Lol. Powermonger already prepares to be proved wrong about the debate, and even suddenly betrays doubt about the results of the election. A good chance? Whatever happened to the victory celebrations?

How about you start giving us Kerry quotes that contradict each other? I keep hearing about them, but every detailed piece of journalistic investigation I've seen on the topic has concluded that the fabled Kerry flip-flops are as factual as Nigerian yellowcake.

[Sage the Mage]

I was speaking of when Bush actually said, "and let me finish" or something like that. Seems to have gotten a little angry or something.

[Mastgrr]

My major qualm was Kerry didn't relate Putin to the Patroit Act.
I don't think Kerry was even going near talking about the Patriot Act because it'll loose him voters who think it's needed to fight terrorism. It's all about projecting who is the best president to keep the American people safe.

I saw the Presidential Debate. I woke up 3 AM in the morning and saw the whole damn thing. VERY interesting. I don't think Kerry won though, since I thought Bush said some very consistant things. It kind of explained to me why Bush is acting the "bully" policy the way it's carried out. It's interesting.

[powermongor]

And an even better chance that he'll win it outright.

I don't know why that scares you so much. He didn't say he'd dismantle our nukes, he said he'd shut down that particular bunker-busting nuclear bomb that we're developing.

What could we possibly do with a bunker busting nuclear bomb?

I imagine its a tactical wpn, highly mobile and very potent. There is truly no more doubt in my mind that Kerry is the man the terrorists want to see as our next president.

[ScytheNoire]

I imagine its a tactical wpn, highly mobile and very potent. There is truly no more doubt in my mind that Kerry is the man the terrorists want to see as our next president.
right, cause Bush has just had them on the run. ya, he's done so much to stop terrorism.
Bush has created more terror than any terrorists have.

i think one thing most Americans don't understand is that voting for Bush is shooting the finger at the rest of the world. if they do that, they will continue to lose allies and support. it's not too far off that Bush could get the United States kicked out of the UN. that would be funny.

remember, Bush wasn't elected president by the people, he was elected president by the Supreme Court in a 4 to 3 vote.

[Mastgrr]

I imagine its a tactical wpn, highly mobile and very potent. There is truly no more doubt in my mind that Kerry is the man the terrorists want to see as our next president.

Wow. What are you going to say next? That John Kerry looks "French"?

I have a link where some terrorists, I think those who did the Madrid-bombings, say they want Bush to be reelected. Best of all: It's from FoxNews. I don't have time to dig it out right now, but maybe in an hour or so.

[Glurin]

I only caught the last half hour or so of it.

Kerry is definetly the better speaker, but he's way too vague with his answers. Even the few specifics he gave were very vague. He seemed more concerned with attacking bush's policies than presenting his own. There were some contradictions in what he said in the debate to what he said before, which isn't going to help him. He did try to explain the "flip-flops" by saying its just changing his mind due to new information, but there is a big difference between adapting to new info and changing your views with the political winds. Kerry does way too much of the latter.

Bush sucks at speaking, but he provided more specifics and was consistant with his answers. There were a number of times that I got the distinct impression he was trying to buy some time to think about what to say. Especialy when accusing kerry of mixed signals. Its obvious that bush honestly believes in what he is doing and that he believes its the right thing to do. The problem is that maybe he's a little too firm. Kerry changes his mind too much and bush changes his mind too little.

What could we possibly do with a bunker busting nuclear bomb?

"bunker busting nuclear bomb" sounds like something to use on large underground complexes to me. You wouldn't need a nuke on a simple everyday bunker. All I've got to go by at the moment are those four words though, so I'm just makeing a guess.

it's not too far off that Bush could get the United States kicked out of the UN.

Interesting, considering how some feel its not too far off that we should leave the u.n.

"You can't fire me! I quit!!!"

[Unreg!stered]

Not according to the polls. Why always so cynicle anyway?

BHS, Scythe, etc.,

Felicia has a good point. Do not underestimate how far the Dubya charm will go. You have to remember not only is the average political intelligence of these forums much, much higher than that of the American public as a whole but I'd say its not too much of an assumption to believe that the majority of the people voting in the CBS and ABC polls were more equipped to handle politics than the average American. While we can dissect this debate on the issues for days on end what really matters is what did Joe and Jane America see? Did they see a bewildered Bush and a strong Kerry? Or did they see Mr. Kerry as a bully and Mr. Bush fighting back to the best of his ability? America loves the underdog, as Felicia said, not to mention Bush, while not as strong as he needed to be on the issues, did have his trademark charm, even during his periods of anger.

I'm not calling the American people dumb, by any means, but we here on these boards generally know much more about politics, the candidates, and the campaigns than the average American. It'll be a few days before we see how the public as a whole feels about the debates.

[ScytheNoire]

that's the scary thing, Americans are morons and they have the power to elect the most powerful person in the world. scary, scary stuff.

[Tevush Kasht]

that's the scary thing, Americans are morons and they have the power to elect the most powerful person in the world. scary, scary stuff.

It's not a privilege restricted to Americans. Most people are morons all over the world.

[Sage the Mage]

It's not a privilege restricted to Americans. Most people are morons all over the world.

Technically, we're better at this, seeing as the majority of Americans do not vote. You people and your lack of apathy!

[Andarcel]

I don't think I will be eating humble pie. You will have a whole lot of it in Nov. 2nd, though.
Ok. From ABC News' The Note:

1. Kerry aides to a person euphorically claim that their guy won. Many Bush aides last night weren't even claiming that the president won. (If they did this morning, we didnt' see it). All of the Bush post-debate talking points simply echo their pre-debate arguments — they did not attempt to build anything new off of this debate. And the "greatest hits" TV excerpts and commentary the Bush campaign sent reporters included some calling the debate a tie.

2. The instant polls done by ABC News, CBS News, and CNN/Gallup show more people thought Kerry won.

So, powermonger, enlgihten us all with the lofty understanding you displayed last night. Tell us how you understand these things better. Please, share the wisdom.

Seems Bush isn't the only one making "colossal errors of judgment."

Since I haven't made any claims about the outcome of this election, it hardly reflects on me if Kerry loses. No humble pie there. However, if Bush should lose... let's just say you'll be the mockery of the forums.

Oh, and on terorrists wanting Kerry to win? You have no idea what you're talking about. Those who do (http://www.juancole.com) say 1)terrorists really don't give a crap about the American election, and 2)If they do, they prefer the man singlehandedly responsible for mobilizing the entire Muslim world against America.

[Unreg!stered]

It's not a privilege restricted to Americans. Most people are morons all over the world.

Completely agree. :thumbsup:

[Bhs Crew]

I imagine its a tactical wpn, highly mobile and very potent. There is truly no more doubt in my mind that Kerry is the man the terrorists want to see as our next president.
I still don't understand why? If Bush has given the terrorists everything they wanted (a war, recruits, easy targets in a local country to shoot at) why would they want him out of power?

[AgeOfAbnegation]

Makes me wish I had watched the debates :p. Anyone have a link to the text?

[powermongor]

Ok. From ABC News' The Note:

1. Kerry aides to a person euphorically claim that their guy won. Many Bush aides last night weren't even claiming that the president won. (If they did this morning, we didnt' see it). All of the Bush post-debate talking points simply echo their pre-debate arguments — they did not attempt to build anything new off of this debate. And the "greatest hits" TV excerpts and commentary the Bush campaign sent reporters included some calling the debate a tie.

2. The instant polls done by ABC News, CBS News, and CNN/Gallup show more people thought Kerry won.

So, powermonger, enlgihten us all with the lofty understanding you displayed last night. Tell us how you understand these things better. Please, share the wisdom.

Seems Bush isn't the only one making "colossal errors of judgment."

Since I haven't made any claims about the outcome of this election, it hardly reflects on me if Kerry loses. No humble pie there. However, if Bush should lose... let's just say you'll be the mockery of the forums.

Oh, and on terorrists wanting Kerry to win? You have no idea what you're talking about. Those who do (http://www.juancole.com) say 1)terrorists really don't give a crap about the American election, and 2)If they do, they prefer the man singlehandedly responsible for mobilizing the entire Muslim world against America.


Remember that game from the late 80's called "Mouse Trap"? I feel that Kerry helped build his own mouse trap, and in the next couple of weeks he will be his own undoing. The immediate reaction is that Kerry won, but now Bush knows more about the new and improved Kerry, he knows how Kerry is going to come at him, and some of the things that Kerry said in the debate are going to haunt him for sure.

Are there any polls out yet asking who ppl will vote for after watching the debates? The #'s arent going to change to give Kerry the edge, Bush should still be the favorite. If Bush can hold his ground in the next debate which I think is on the economy, then he takes away Kerry's biggest topic.

Bottom line is that the true winner, when it will be all over, will be Bush.

[xXxDraGoNxXx1123]

Are there any polls out yet asking who ppl will vote for after watching the debates? The #'s arent going to change to give Kerry the edge, Bush should still be the favorite. If Bush can hold his ground in the next debate which I think is on the economy, then he takes away Kerry's biggest topic.

I really hope you aren't expecting Bush to win a debate on the economy... if you are then you simply haven't been paying much attention the last 4 years. He can't hold his ground, the floor fell beneath him long ago.

[Drakeon]

I think everyone knows that Bush's strongest issue was supposed to be Foreign Policy, although recalling last nights debate, maybe that wasn't the case? >_>

I really think Bush's people shot themselves in the foot with all the rules, I think it hampered Bush more then it would of hurt him, but then again, hindsight is 20/20 :p

[Sage the Mage]

My prediction for Bush's debate with Kerry on the Economy:

"You said the tax cuts were for the richest Americans when they were in fact for everyone." Then he'll go on about new jobs being created, work 9/11 in there sometime, and of course completely ignore the whole deficit thing. And obviously he'll try and show that Kerry flip-flopped somewhere.

Did anyone catch Bush's reference to himself running for president? He hinted about he changing about regime change. Now isn't that an um...flip flop?
Just find the Bush vs Bush debate somewhere.

Debate transcript: http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/09/30/debate.transcript.1/index.html

[powermongor]

I really hope you aren't expecting Bush to win a debate on the economy... if you are then you simply haven't been paying much attention the last 4 years. He can't hold his ground, the floor fell beneath him long ago.

Whatcha gonna do, when Bushiemania runs wild on you?

I'm Powermongor, and I approve this message.

[Eiger]

Well, shucks! I just loved watching Kerry kick Bush's butt last night. Just loved it. I had been looking forward to the debates, and particularly this one, for months. Kerry's at his best in debate and it was about time that he really got to take Bush on face to face. And damn if he didn't look good. I thought Kerry was authoritative, informed, quick and made most of the points that I was hoping he would on Iraq and Afghanistan. I loved how Bush stumbled and often didn't appear to have a full grasp of issues. He's just too simple and repetitive for my tastes, among other things. But it was awesome that Kerry put Bush on the defensive, where he belonged, for much of the debate. I rather thoroughly enjoyed watching Bush frown, purse his lips, and get angry while Kerry talked. And then his hesitant answers really emphasized how uncomfortable he was, especially compared to Kerry. Mostly, a rather enjoyable time. Kinda like the Super Bowl of politics and Bush lost!

And apparently most people responding to tv news websites thought so too! All favor Kerry (except one obvious one), some by significant margins: CBS 88.5% - 10%, CNN 71-22, MSNBC 61-39, ABC 45-36, and last, and certainly least, Fox at 40-40. That's a bit of a surprise that Bush couldn't even pull out a victory on Fox.

[Eiger]

Makes me wish I had watched the debates :p. Anyone have a link to the text?
A couple of the tv news websites have video - that's what you'll really want to see to get the real flavor of it.

[powermongor]

Well, shucks! I just loved watching Kerry kick Bush's butt last night. Just loved it. I had been looking forward to the debates, and particularly this one, for months. Kerry's at his best in debate and it was about time that he really got to take Bush on face to face. And damn if he didn't look good. I thought Kerry was authoritative, informed, quick and made most of the points that I was hoping he would on Iraq and Afghanistan. I loved how Bush stumbled and often didn't appear to have a full grasp of issues. He's just too simple and repetitive for my tastes, among other things. But it was awesome that Kerry put Bush on the defensive, where he belonged, for much of the debate. I rather thoroughly enjoyed watching Bush frown, purse his lips, and get angry while Kerry talked. And then his hesitant answers really emphasized how uncomfortable he was, especially compared to Kerry. Mostly, a rather enjoyable time. Kinda like the Super Bowl of politics and Bush lost!

And apparently most people responding to tv news websites thought so too! All favor Kerry (except one obvious one), some by significant margins: CBS 88.5% - 10%, CNN 71-22, MSNBC 61-39, ABC 45-36, and last, and certainly least, Fox at 40-40. That's a bit of a surprise that Bush couldn't even pull out a victory on Fox.

So how does all this affect how ppl are going to vote ultimately? I still believe that Kerry made some definite mistakes that wouldn't help him get the average voter.

I want to see the next round of polls asking how ppl will actually vote in November... Bush will still be leading. Ppl weren't expecting Bush to be the best debater in the world going into the debates, yet he still was leading in all polls.

[Eiger]

We'll see. In Kerry's Senate race against popular Mass. governor William Weld, he was behind in the polls until the debates when he chucked Weld to the side. He's known as a fast closer. I can't imagine that Bush will do as well in the next two debates as he's hung his hat on security, Iraq, character, and "flip flopping". Only time will tell and it's clear Kerry will be prepared. Should be interesting!

[Booms]

Watch tomorrow, most news organizations will be reporting analysis showing the debates won by Bush, or tied at the very least. I hope then that you all will realize that I understand these things better than you do, perhaps listen to me more.

Hahahahahaha. :lol:

Sorry, couldn't help myself.

[GaiaWombat]

Personally, I don't exactly love Bush. However, I think Kerry is the greater evil in this situation. If I had the opportunity, I would definitely vote Bush.

One thing I would like to point out: I still don't know what Kerry would do differently than anything Bush is planning in Iraq right now. I have yet to have seen Kerry providing a matter-of-fact plan that is superior to what Bush is doing right now.

This is pretty funny. http://www.johnkerryads.websiteanimal.com/

I think there's far too much extremism in here right now. ScytheNoire and powermongor seem to be opposite ends of the spectrum, both going a bit too far imo. Be reasonable, guys, and don't get so angry at the mere mention of one candidate or the other. Being level-headed will get you a lot more respect in the eyes of others.

[Booms]

The only person to blame for polarizing the people is Bush.

[Graav Wolfsong]

I pretty much expected Kerry to pwn Dubya in the debates. After all, Kerry is a master debater (:p) dating back to his shool days while Bush even has trouble reading off a teleprompter.

The moment I liked best was when Bush tried to defend the Iraq war and resorted to obviously misrepresenting facts when he said "The enemy attacked us first" (Wich is of course correct concerning the war on terror but not when defending the invasion of Iraq) and Kerry called him on it saying "Saddam didnt attack us, Bin Laden attacked us, Al Qaeda attacked us".

I think that kinda showed the difference between their current stances on, and understanding of the war in Iraq and the war on terror.

[Glurin]

The only person to blame for polarizing the people is Bush.

Hate to burst your bubble, but have you forgoten that the 2000 election was between Bush and Gore? Things have been polarizing all during the Clinton years. The 2000 elections, not Bush OR Gore, but Bush AND Gore added fuel to the bonfire. The same thing is happening this year with Bush AND Kerry.

[Felicia]

Only problem with this debate (and perhaps all future debates) is that nothing major came out of it. Neither one of them was allowed to directly talk with each other and all that was stated was the same right and left side plans and ideas that we heard and knew about already.

Whatever happen to fun debates like Reagan, Perot, and Quayle? Oh wait, Dukakis and Bush 41 didn't like those kinds of debates.

[WiglyWorm]

Here is the transcript of the debates (http://www.debates.org/pages/trans2004a.html)


And of course if you don't like reading here are video highlights of the debate (http://content.collegehumor.com/media/movies/duhbate.wmv)

My favorite Kerry quote:

But this issue of certainty. It's one thing to be certain, but you can be certain and be wrong.

It's another to be certain and be right, or to be certain and be moving in the right direction, or be certain about a principle and then learn new facts and take those new facts and put them to use in order to change and get your policy right.


My favorite Bush quote:


As the politics change, his positions change. And that's not how a commander in chief acts.


I'm sorry... but um.. you shouldn't change your position "just because" new facts come to light? I'm sorry but as of right now you are not my president.

Edit: added quotes since i was reviewing the transcript anyway

[SaroDarksbane]

I didn't watch it because, as Maddox would say, I would rather be hit in the chest with projectile diarrhea than watch any more of those two speaking. Bush still can't say "nuclear" correctly according to my friends, so I can't say I made the wrong choice. And Kerry, he just infuriates me.

My friends, however, thought Kerry came out very well in the debate.

[sphockey04]

On a side note...we went and played the Bush drinking game, by the end of the debate we were completely trashed! :drink:

[Mastgrr]

http://www.nypost.com/news/nationalnews/31186.htm

YAY!

I feel GREAT!

[SaroDarksbane]

I feel GREAT!
REEEALLLY great? *OOoooffff*

This election is going to be close. Maybe not as close as Bush/Gore was, but close nonetheless. I won't rant and complain if Kerry wins. Hell, maybe he'll make a good president; I just can't in good conscience vote for him at present.

It's true that I can't stand to see him speak, but I got around the same thing with Bush by a simple means known as a "remote control". :D

[Booms]

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/10/03/election.poll/index.html

w00t, CNN also says that Kerry won.

[powermongor]

Take these polls with a grain of salt:

1. These polls only use a sampling population of about 1000 ppl or less to try to figure out how 10's of millions of ppl will vote. These are scientifically accepted sample sizes, and that poll was within the margin of error for hte poll, but I am not going to lose to much sleep over it. The only "massive" poll I have seen for this election was that AOL poll like a month ago, and I think they asked 10,000+ ppl and it was Bush by like 4 or 5%.

2. A national poll is valid only if the national vote elected the president. It's all about how the electoral votes fall. Democrat states are highly democrat, whereas there is a greater mix in Republican states. This means that if a repuclican state goes republican, they get more non-republican apportioned electoral votes than a democrat state would get non-democrat apportioned electoral votes. BTW, after the last census reapportioned the electoral votes, the demographic shifts favor Bush if he were to take the same states he did last time.

3. These polls do not get ppl whose main line is a cell phone. Many white-collar office workers and blue collar business owner alike live thru their cell-phones. I was working in an office job in Texas a cpl of years ago, I was putting in 60 hrs a week. You can argue with me, but I am going to say that a majority of these ppl are going to vote republican.

[Booms]

Hehe, it's sorta funny how you go from saying that the polls will say Bush won to the polls are worthless.

[powermongor]

Hehe, it's sorta funny how you go from saying that the polls will say Bush won to the polls are worthless.

It is, isn't it? :buddies:

[Tevush Kasht]

I still fail to see how this electoral vote system is good by the way.

[powermongor]

I still fail to see how this electoral vote system is good by the way.

It was done to prevent mob rule, and to ensure that each state's interests would be represented in an election.

[WiglyWorm]

Actually it was invented as a joke by Benjamin Franklin while he was drunk, to prove how silly it would be.. but they ratified it.

[Sage the Mage]

The only "massive" poll I have seen for this election was that AOL poll like a month ago, and I think they asked 10,000+ ppl and it was Bush by like 4 or 5%.

AOL? That's even more of a reason to not vote for Bush.

[Bhs Crew]

Man the national polls being worthless is news to me. What we need is someone (A guy named Bhs Crew (http://www.rpgforums.net/member.php?u=101453) for example) to keep posting a link to very good state polling site (like this one (http://www.electoral-vote.com/)).

[Bhs Crew]

I still fail to see how this electoral vote system is good by the way.
It has its problems. The best solution is for states to vote to give out their electoral votes by district (1 for each congressional district and two for the person who wins the state), as Maine and Nebraska have already done. Colorado is voting to do it this year. Hopefully they will be successful and more states will follow.

[powermongor]

It has its problems. The best solution is for states to vote to give out their electoral votes by district (1 for each congressional district and two for the person who wins the state), as Maine and Nebraska have already done. Colorado is voting to do it this year. Hopefully they will be successful and more states will follow.

*raises pinky finger to lips*

Whichever system helps ensure a Republican victory is the most logical choice. :thumbsup:

[Booms]

Everyone should go campaign in Florida and Ohio for Kerry.

[Bhs Crew]

Look, I already bought 500 votes in each and it cost me an arm and a leg. There's only so much one person can do.

[Sage the Mage]

What? You haven't sold your body for votes yet?

Eh I don't trust polls 'cause I've never been polled. Do they operate by phone?

[Kronious]

BUSH or KERRY
The good news is one of them going to lose
The bad news is one of them is going to win

[SaroDarksbane]

BUSH or KERRY
The good news is one of them going to lose
The bad news is one of them is going to win
Haha, so good. I'm keeping this one in my quotes doc. :D

[Eiger]

It has its problems. The best solution is for states to vote to give out their electoral votes by district (1 for each congressional district and two for the person who wins the state), as Maine and Nebraska have already done. Colorado is voting to do it this year. Hopefully they will be successful and more states will follow.
That system has problems, too. For example, here in Washington with 11 electoral votes and 9 congressional districts, it's conceivable Kerry would win only two districts, maybe three. Those two would be by very large margins and would provide enough overall votes for Kerry to take the state. So basically, Kerry wins the state and only gets four, maybe five, out of eleven electoral votes? No thanks.

I'd only surely support a change to a totally direct vote for President (no electoral college, popular vote determines the winner). One in which the electoral votes are divided by proportion might also work (win 60% of the vote and get 60% of the states electoral votes), but I'd prefer a straight popular vote for President. It's the fairest way to go - and the only one in which one person has exactly one vote (rather than 0.9 or 1.1 or such, depending on your state's population at the time.

[Bhs Crew]

Yeah that would work. Take the percentage of electoral votes. Round off.

[AgeOfAbnegation]

Bhs needs a reachable solution plz.

[Bhs Crew]

Bhs needs a reachable solution plz.
I don't have the slightest idea what you are talking about. Hehehe.

Anyway, the good part of Eiger's plan is that it can still be done in the states. The trick to get the majority to sign off on it, as many of them will not want the minority party to start getting some electoral votes, especially while other states are still using the winner take all method.

My hope is that as some change others will follow. People will put the fair choice ahead of their own partisan maneuvers. I'm naively optimistic like that.

[Eiger]

Part of the problem with keeping the electoral college is that people (parties) will seek to gain advantage with any change. The current system works reasonably well enough - I believe there's only been two electoral college winners who lost the popular vote - so basically it's good in about 95% of presidential elections. I'm more afraid of a solution that's not a straight popular vote, creating more problems or bias than it solves. Maybe we ought to leave well enough alone - that is unless we just boot the college entirely.

[Bhs Crew]

Part of the problem with keeping the electoral college is that people (parties) will seek to gain advantage with any change. The current system works reasonably well enough - I believe there's only been two electoral college winners who lost the popular vote - so basically it's good in about 95% of presidential elections. I'm more afraid of a solution that's not a straight popular vote, creating more problems or bias than it solves. Maybe we ought to leave well enough alone - that is unless we just boot the college entirely.
People are going to seek advantage anywhere, and while changes are being made there might be an election where one side got an unfair advantage (these things happen). Yeah one side might get a few unfair electoral votes, but that is already happening.

The main thing I like is states that are forgotten can pass a law making their electoral vote representational and suddenly they become important again. I'd love to have the presidential candidates over in California for some other purpose then raising money.

[Drakeon]

People are going to seek advantage anywhere, and while changes are being made there might be an election where one side got an unfair advantage (these things happen). Yeah one side might get a few unfair electoral votes, but that is already happening.

The main thing I like is states that are forgotten can pass a law making their electoral vote representational and suddenly they become important again. I'd love to have the presidential candidates over in California for some other purpose then raising money.

Yea no kidding, California is always a blue state so it never gets any adds (which is a good thing) and never gets any of the candidates out here (which is a bad thing). We're simply ignored because the state ALWAYS goes democrat, I wanna see whats its like to live in a "battleground" state just once :(

[Bhs Crew]

Well we'll just have to get that voter innitiative passed. (Hopefully there will be one on the ballot in the future.) How many signatures you need for one of those things here anyway?

[Sage the Mage]

In other news, Poland is going to significantly reduce their troops in Iraq. Sucks for Bush.

[Drakeon]

Well we'll just have to get that voter innitiative passed. (Hopefully there will be one on the ballot in the future.) How many signatures you need for one of those things here anyway?

Not entirely sure what you mean, but the Recall took like 900,000 votes to get started if thats any help... :p

[Bhs Crew]

The way to change how we award our electoral votes would be a voter initiative. To put one on the ballot we would either have to pass a bill through the legislature (good luck) or collect enough signatures.

[Bhs Crew]

A few notes to wrap up the the first Presidential debate:

American Research Group has more data on the debate. Kerry gained in all three panels they used. In the random telephone interviews, Kerry now leads Bush 49% to 46%.

The Gallup Poll puts them even at 49% to 49%, a big change from previous Gallup polls.

Zogby gives Bush a 1% lead. He also says that according to his poll taken Oct. 1-3, people think Kerry won the first debate by a margin of 2 to 1.

Pew puts Bush ahead 48% to 41% among registered voters.

CBS says they are tied.

[Mastgrr]

In other news, Poland is going to significantly reduce their troops in Iraq. Sucks for Bush.
If you saw the Daily Show the day after on the debate you'll laugh everytime you hear Poland...

But am I the only one that really hate the way this debate is made? It seriously sucks that they can not speak to each other, with that it's heavily moderated. Sucks like heck.