Print

[gcskate27]

QUOTE (K98 @ Sep 30 2004, 08:46 PM)

Kerry is also known to be a beter orator, and that just put Bush at his weakest point. That doesnt represent real world situations where you have time to think things out.

surely a real world application would be diplomatic meetings with other countries leaders... preparation wouldnt be everything in that situation...

[thomes08]

it took bush almost 90 seconds to make a noise when it was his turn, let alone make a valid point


edit:  sorry for saying i think you're nemt, but it's obvious you are not neutral

[pug_ster]

QUOTE (The unProfessional @ Oct 1 2004, 04:53 AM)

I just don't think either one delivered anything impressive.  It was Kerry's big opportunity, and he wasn't nearly as aggressive as he should've been.

No, Kerry could've been agressive.  But it could've have a negative impact in the upcoming Bush commericals.

I expected the same old crap from Bush, talking about nothing.  At least Kerry was more elaborate about his positions.  One thing I am surprised that Kerry didn't talk about how REALLY bad it is in Iraq.

It would be more surprising in the other 2 debates.  Especially that Bush have nothing to show in the domestic issues.

Then again, Bush is leading in the polls, but Kerry won the debate.  Gore won the debate at 2000 but lost the presidency anyways.  But there will always be people voting for Bush regardless of what he thinks of the International and Domestic policies anyways.

[LepPpeR]

QUOTE (The unProfessional @ Sep 30 2004, 11:53 PM)

I just don't think either one delivered anything impressive.  It was Kerry's big opportunity, and he wasn't nearly as aggressive as he should've been. Hey Pug_ster I have one question.  What is Kerry's plan in Iraq if he wins and how does it differ from our current Presidents plan?

I agree.  I think both of them had good and bad moments.  I do not think that this will in all reality affect the outcome of this election.  They always talk about the undecided but everyone I seem to talk to already has their opinion.

[dss311]

For me, the debate was very lackluster on both parts.  All Bush could say is Kerry "doesn't have a stand", and Kerry talked in "lawyer" circles trying to pull a fast one on all of us.    I also didn't care for the format.  All they did was argue about Iraq.  I know the next debate will address the economy, but this one seemed to go nowhere.


FYI From the Net (cut and paste)
--------------------------------------
Kerry stated: 'That's why they had to close down the subway in New York when the Republican Convention was there.' (Driving home point that Bush as not done enough to protect the country.)

The NYC subway did not close at all during the convention, according to a report on cable outlet NY1, even though Penn station was shut for several hours...
--------------------------------------

Kerry also misspoke when he referred to looking at KGB records in "Treblinka Square" in a visit to Russia. Treblinka was a Nazi death camp. He meant Lubyanka Square...
--------------------------------------

LOCKHART: DEBATE CONSENSUS A 'DRAW'

Unbeknownst to Kerry adviser Mike McCurry, a C-SPAN camera quietly followed McCurry as he found Kerry adviser Joe Lockhart on Spin Alley floor and asked him his impression of the debate. Lockhart candidly said to McCurry , “The consensus is it was a draw.”

[gcskate27]

QUOTE (K98 @ Sep 30 2004, 09:12 PM)

So in diplomatic meetings you have 90 seconds to make your point, and dont know what kind of questions you're going to get? I would hope not

well for all intents and purposes, yes... at least thats what you should be prepared for, that youll get unknown questions and have difficulty relating to the other person... sort of what being a good diplomat is about... not parroting a prepared set of answers...

now im not one to say that bush cant think for himself and has to have aids feed him answers all the time, but if you keep coming back to the same 'points' (regardless of how well they relate to the issue you are being asked to discuss) that have already been adequately explained, it shows you have nothing really worthwhile to talk about...

bush kept saying kerry changes stances... kerry explained that it was true that he changed his mind: he also admitted that he was mistaken and explained why he changed his mind on the iraq issue... yet bush kept coming back to 'he changes his mind erratically'...

bush might as well not have been there and there been a cutout with signs taped to it saying: 'kerry flip-flops', 'terrorists are scary' and 'kerry hates our troops'...

would have been as effective...

*mind you i only saw the first hour so bush could have had some actual points in the latter bit of the debate that i missed...

[pug_ster]

I went to gwb's website.  It mentioned about Kerry's flip flops.  Like I said, Bush didn't say anything that would 'wow' us except he mentioned 100 times that Kerry is a flip flopper and a president can't be a flip flopper.  Bush has nothing to talk about it so he talks negatively about Kerry.  Bush would 'stay the course' in Iraq and hope the situation in Iraq would improve.  Yeah right.

Kerry did get his message out about what he is going to do in Iraq.  
- Close borders in Iraq so that Terrorists can't bring troops and Arms to Iraq.
- As absurd it may be, try to get more involvement from the UN
- Do not retreat from a secured city.

[tarheelsnipe]

he couldn't be any more aggressive without disrespecting a sitting President.  Yeah, the younger people want to see an all out rumble-in-the-jungle brawl, but it doesn't matter what we want because we (as a majority) don't vote.  I'm glad to see the heated duscussion here though.  It gives me hope that we're not a bunch of stoned slackers (a la Bill O').  Kerry's camp knows that if you show major disrespect toward a sitting president, you'll lose conservative democrat votes.  Clinton understood this concept.  Both candidates are walking a fine line trying to appeal to all the demographics.  

BTW, i was impressed with Kerry.  When Bush called him a political flip-flopper, he simply stated his position on Iraq in plain English over and over.....and that line, "Help is on the way" is a winner.  he should use that line all the way up to election day.  And the economy is a no-brainer.  A democrat led us out of the Depression, and another democrat led us out of the '92 recession.  Who will lead us out of this one?

[gronne]

I suppose Kerry had to have a conservative approach when speaking to the american people, but seriously, he could've beat him into submission if he wanted. There has never been easier to accuse someone for their mistakes like Bush. Too bad Kerry has such an Achilles' heel, as the approval of the war. I think that had to make him more conservative. Now, if this was seen like a win for Kerry, I wonder how it would look like if he really attacked him. Only 60 million saw the debate, such american ignorance.

[Ween311]

QUOTE

Only 60 million saw the debate

Where exactly does that number come from?  How does anyone know what I am watching on TV, or through a webcast at work, or even on the radio while I work out.

[scorpionking77]

[Spency234]

QUOTE (scorpionking77 @ Oct 1 2004, 01:59 PM)

Our politcal system needs to be blown up and start from scratch. this two party one mind crap is getting old and as a human race we are not going anywhere. I wish i cld just mod my car into a sup up  nasa approved space ship and fly somewhere where there are less ignorance and greed.  Just start up my planet with 23 males and 12 females. whos with me

Sure why not, just one thing.

Can we have a few more females??

[Baner]

QUOTE

Kerry did get his message out about what he is going to do in Iraq.

-He complains that Bush spends billions of dollars in the war.
-States that he wants to pull the troops out of Iraq.
-Wants to put troops in Afghanistan(sp?) to find Bin Laden. (I thought I heard somewhere that people think he's in Siberia)

Doesn't relocating (is it 100,000 troops?) cost a good bit of money? Wouldn't restarting the war in Afghanistan and ending the war in Iraq cost the same amount as keeping the war in Iraq? Kerry had good points,but he left gaps. Sadly, Bush overlooked them.

Also with the "Allowing Bin Laden escape from Tora Bora", it reverts back to the great saying, "Damned if you do, damned if you don't." If he did find Bin Laden then this war might have been over, but if he didn't catch Usama then Kerry would have been asking why he sent all those troops on a wild goose chase.

I wanna run for Pres. , too bad I'm a foriegner .

QUOTE

Tbh I can't see Bush winning any debate's with Kerry unless arm wrestling or snap crops up in the next debate/s.

We all know that speaking isn't Bush's strong point, and Kerry going to the best dabating college in the country helps out just a little bit...
It's hard to take the advantage over someone who hasn't had the chance to do anything wrong, and when your debating the Pres, especially in a time of war, you have tons of ammunition to use.
I agree with whoever said that in the real world, you're not going to have 90 seconds to annouce a topic to the world. Sure, you might have a time limit to talk to foriegn officials, but it won't be 90 seconds, and you'll most likely be having a converstation with them, not having to worry about this making or breaking you because of your one statement. When talking face to face to a person, you can always "Sound out" what your trying to say. Drawing examples and so-on.

QUOTE

Where exactly does that number come from? How does anyone know what I am watching on TV, or through a webcast at work, or even on the radio while I work out.

Taken from a census of people who have boxes that are attached to thier tv sets that monitor what they watch. They are placed in random homes, making sure to take an accurate reading. I forget the ratio of houses that have them.

Edit: My 2 cents... Kerry had that one.

[thomes08]

QUOTE (Baner @ Oct 1 2004, 07:22 PM)

-He complains that Bush spends billions of dollars in the war. -States that he wants to pull the troops out of Iraq. -Wants to put troops in Afghanistan(sp?) to find Bin Laden. (I thought I heard somewhere that people think he's in Siberia) Doesn't relocating (is it 100,000 troops?) cost a good bit of money? Wouldn't restarting the war in Afghanistan and ending the war in Iraq cost the same amount as keeping the war in Iraq? Kerry had good points,but he left gaps. Sadly, Bush overlooked them. Also with the "Allowing Bin Laden escape from Tora Bora", it reverts back to the great saying, "Damned if you do, damned if you don't." If he did find Bin Laden then this war might have been over, but if he didn't catch Usama then Kerry would have been asking why he sent all those troops on a wild goose chase. I wanna run for Pres. , too bad I'm a foriegner . We all know that speaking isn't Bush's strong point, and Kerry going to the best dabating college in the country helps out just a little bit... It's hard to take the advantage over someone who hasn't had the chance to do anything wrong, and when your debating the Pres, especially in a time of war, you have tons of ammunition to use. I agree with whoever said that in the real world, you're not going to have 90 seconds to annouce a topic to the world. Sure, you might have a time limit to talk to foriegn officials, but it won't be 90 seconds, and you'll most likely be having a converstation with them, not having to worry about this making or breaking you because of your one statement. When talking face to face to a person, you can always "Sound out" what your trying to say. Drawing examples and so-on. Taken from a census of people who have boxes that are attached to thier tv sets that monitor what they watch. They are placed in random homes, making sure to take an accurate reading. I forget the ratio of houses that have them. Edit: My 2 cents... Kerry had that one.

i'm in a hurry to go home so i only read your first comment on kerry and iraq.  and i think you couldn't have taken his position on what he wants to do out of context anymore if you tried.  Who's talking about taking 100,000 troops out of iraq to put them in afghan?  not kerry i know that.

and he NEVER has said he is going to stop the war in iraq and focus on something else.  he said the opposite.  he knows we have to stay there and get the job done.  

The only think bush overlooked was the comments kerry made about all the other countries gaining or close to gaining nukes under bush's leadership because we have are hands so tied with an unplanned iraq war.

you're basically being fox news the way you are either lying about kerry's position, or you just didn't listen to what it was and made your own judgment and passed it off as fact.

thomes08

[fishlord]

poor goergie. his low iq really puts him at a disadvantage in thngs like a debate...  maybe they should arm wrestle instead to even out the chances.