|
2nd Debate - Who Won (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| NYCTrancefan |
| quote: | Originally posted by xKaoSx
It was a push the 1st hour then last 1/2 hour Kerry pulled away.
I still cant believe Bush was asked point blank admit 3 things, out of the THOUSANDS of decisions you made, you made a mistake on?
NO ANSWER
Sheesh |
That's some straight talking politics for you, doubt that woman was satisfied with his answer or lack thereof.
You have to love Pat Buchannan however, "George Bush knocked out John Kerry after the first question and he was down for the count":clown::stongue: |
|
|
| D-res |
| quote: | Originally posted by Arbiter
Source? |
im not going to search for a source. if you were too lazy to pay attention to kerry's rambling and skewed opininos from the beginning of the whole thing then thats your own problem. if i stumble across a source, ill let you know though ;) |
|
|
| auujay |
| quote: | Originally posted by D-res
i just hate hearing kerry say at the very beginning of campaigning that he is completely against the war, etc etc. and now he says that he will hunt down the terrorist? anyone who says kerry doesnt flip-flop is just stupid.... |
I know this does not spcific answer what you are saying but it is a start. It is an analysis of the Bush add attackng Kerry on those very things. It is done by the non partison group that even Cheney referenced in his debate (http://www.factcheck.org).
"Selective use of Kerry's own words makes him look inconsistent on Iraq. A closer look gives a different picture."
I highly recommend this website for everyone. It really cuts through the BS/exagerations coming from both sides.
EDIT: And here is an article about his "being on the wrong side of defense" as Cheney said in Tuesdays debate.
"Did Kerry Oppose Tanks & Planes? Not Lately" |
|
|
| Arbiter |
| quote: | Originally posted by D-res
im not going to search for a source. if you were too lazy to pay attention to kerry's rambling and skewed opininos from the beginning of the whole thing then thats your own problem. if i stumble across a source, ill let you know though ;) |
Ah, I see. Well, you know what they say: "there's no source like no source." |
|
|
| Spacey Orange |
| Poor Georgie, he forgot to take his nap again this afternoon. Maybe that's why he's so testy. :( |
|
|
| Renegade |
It was a similar story to the first debate. Bush started off okay, but as the debate progressed his attention span began to wane and wheels gradually fell off.
Bush actually came across okay on the Iraq and terrorism issues, although Kerry really did miss some opportunities to go for the jugular on a few occasions. He should have really exploited the reports that have come out during the week about Iraq's non-existent WMDs and the CIA report about the lack of evidence supporting a Saddam / al Qaeda link that undermined the administration's pretext for an immediate unilateral invasion. Bush came across as more emphatic and enthusiastic than the last debate, but it was all rhetoric rather than substance, so hopefully the undecided voters see through it. You could tell that he and Rove had been burning the midnight oil, rote learning things Bush had to get into his responses and repeat at every opportunity like the out-of-context "global test" quote, the "wrong war at the wrong time" quote and the blind assertions - against all available evidence - that Saddam really was a threat, that the current situation in Iraq can give us cause for optimism about its future and that we are "winning" the "war on terror". I did, however, like the Freudian slip at the end:
"The truth of that matter is, if you listen carefully, Saddam would still be in power if he [Kerry] were the president of the United States, and the world would be a lot better off."
Oh how right you are... :p
So, while Bush's comments on Iraq and terrorism lacked any genuine substance, the way he carried them will definitely mean that he will come across, in the undecided voters minds, as the winner in this category. Given what happened during the week, Kerry should have murdered him in this section, but compared to last week he just didn't come across as certain or credible on these issues.
On tax and economic issues, however, you'd have to say that Kerry came out ahead. While a lot of it went over my head (especially anything to do with the American tax system and the candidates respective jobs growth plans), Kerry's ability to reference figures, names and quotes to back up what he was saying really did put him up over the top. I didn't realise it until tonight - and I'm not sure how much weight this is going to have with the average American voter - but the man's mental capabilities (especially compared to that of his opponent) really are quite immense. While Bush was relying on general rhetoric, rote learned phrases and endless repetition to get his points across, Kerry was always ready with just an endless string of names, quotes and statistics to back up what he was saying. As I said, much of this section (as a foreigner) went over my head, but Kerry's ability to back-up his arguments and policies with such evidence made him all the more credible in my opinion. Plus Bush was relying on the whole "we cut taxes and raised a massive budget deficit because we were in a recession" card, when surely any right-minded voter would be asking: "Well why didn't you repeal the tax cuts once the economy had recovered then, champ?"
When it came to the mixed bag section towards the end, however, Bush really lost it. He has absolutely no ability to think on his feet or come up with reasonable, rational arguments to support his stances. His pseudo-moral ramblings on abortion and stem-cell research were especially cringe-worthy and devoid of any rational substance whatsoever. His comments on the supreme court judges were similarly asinine and who knows what the he was talking about in the "three mistakes" question. Once again, when he doesn't have the luxury of just being able to recall rote-learned statements written by Karl Rove in his answers (as he did throughout the Iraq and Economy questions that he'd obviously been well drilled on after the first debate), he really does just come across like a simple-minded idiot. This isn't just partisan name-calling either: I would be genuinely embarrased to have that man represent my country on a global stage.
However, for all this, I voted the debate a "tie". Howcome? Basically because Bush was able to "carry" himself much better than Kerry (that is, on the most superficial of levels, he came across as more certain and decisive) and - unless the average undecided voter was studying the debate particularly enthusiastically - I doubt that most of Bush's failings (especially his transparent linguistic and rhetorical tricks) would be overly apparent, nor would Kerry's greatest attributes (his mental capacity for facts and his ability to construct well-worded, well thought-out arguments on his feet) be likely to carry too much weight. Kerry won the battle of words, Bush (unlike in the first debate where he was fairly subdued) won the war of personalities.
I doubt that this debate will have changed too many people's minds either way, so bring on the last one I guess.
EDIT: -
http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=101256
:stongue: |
|
|
| tecnolover |
Do you want what the cable tv polls say or the majority think??
If you want the truth based on majority of americans-Kerry won the first debate but not by much, mainly because Bush didn't attack Kerry for many exagerated comments. Even still it was very close. In the second debate Bush won decisively.
If you want to know what US cable tv say, Kerry won both. Judge for yourself. None of these debates really matter except to the few undecided voters who are still unsure. The US media is favoring Kerry and using the polls to try to capture those few undecided voters. The majority of americans had already decided who they would vote for a long time ago when Kerry was chose as the dem. candidate. For the majority of americans these debates are meaningless because they already know both candidates credibility and credentials. Again, these debates willl only affect the undecided voters. |
|
|
| xKaoSx |
That is too 'n funny. |
|
|
| xKaoSx |
| was it me or was Bush winking a lot at someone in the audience? |
|
|
| LiquidX |
| quote: | Originally posted by xKaoSx
was it me or was Bush winking a lot at someone in the audience? |
Yes, I saw him winking, or it was some type of nervous thing.. |
|
|
| ierxium |
| quote: | Originally posted by xKaoSx
was it me or was Bush winking a lot at someone in the audience? |
I think he has the Clinton syndrome. :) |
|
|
|
|
