Posted on 09/30/2004 10:40:34 PM PDT by A Navy Vet
Also, the hard thing about these debates is that the President doesn't have all that much to gain from them. He has a margin that's likely about as big as it will get, and his mission is mainly just to hold onto that margin. Kerry needs every bit of help he can get, these debates are his last hope, meaning he's much more likely to speak out, to take chances, if you will.
Precisely. GWB sold his position -- and did what he needed to at the end: asked for our votes. Kerry didn't do that. A small thing, but telling.
Why is that applicable here? I saw nothing about Kerry that was convincing tonight. I'll give him smooth. I'll give him polished. But smooth and polished don't necessarily lead to convincing.
Whatever Clinton's faults, he was good at connecting to the folks. Bush did a far, far better job of communicating to the folks tonight than Kerry did. Kerry probably picked up a few votes, but votes that would likely have come his way in the end anyway.
Your post is right on. Kerry looked desperate to me. Bush made such nice remarks about the Kerry girls.. and you know he meant it. I think Kerry was taken aback! He doesn't know how to be gracious without it looking fake. Bush is the real deal and I think it showed tonight.
I saw JK very polished and saying unbelievable stuff that is going to be on transcript and cause him grief.
Since you are so critical of the man that we know is honest and is truly trying to protect this country, would you mind giving an explanation of what Kerry said or proposed that would make anyone choose him over Bush for the war on terror or homeland security?
That was the debate topic and I'd guess that the much touted "undecideds" tuned in to hear Kerry's plan. What was it? We know the president's.
What exactly caused Bush to place his head on that platter? Did I miss something?
Hey - I think everyone agrees Bush wasn't up to his normal speed - but don't make a federal case here - on just one debate. I'm hurting for Bush - and have already made sure one more person will be voting in Nov. in this election. That was my response to tonight - I also intend to get cash(what I can spare) to those in need of support -
It's okay to moan, I'm doing it - but get out and take that extra step to prevent this nation from suffering any more damage from the likes of Kerry and his ilk -
just my thoughts -
"I'm merely saying that Kerry articulated his points and was more focused than our President."
He DIDN'T articulate his points - maybe his attacks, but NOT his points. He didn't really have any. Nothing very memorable, anyway.
Bush did the same thing he always does -stay on message and repeat it often (and repeat and repeat). BTW, that's the way every democrat he's faced said he's defeated them.
Showing how he has a record that was wrong on the COLD WAR...WRONG on the first GULF WAR , etc -
I cannot understand how G.W. Bush NEVER brought up Kerry's 20 year Senate record!!! - not ONCE???
He did say he respected Kerry for his service in the Senate but didn't like his "record".
Yes, that was it - But the average swing voter out there thinks that is just a political type statement -
G.W. Bush needed to be somewhat specific about National Security and Kerry's 20 year record of being WRONG -
It blows me away that Kerry got out of there without having to defend ONCE his 20 year voting record.
It completely showed Jim Lehrer's bias that he didn't bring it up ONCE either as a question -
He did. He said he didn't like it. He also mentioned a number of recent votes and some back to the first Gulf War. But, in a 90-second format, you have to go with big ideas over nitty gritty. I think Bush did a better job of repeating the big ideas than Kerry did -- although Kerry has certainly improved. He'll probably pick up some Kerry-leaning undecideds. He won't pick off any of Bush's votes -- and he must have some of those to win.
With due respect, you are SO wrong. Finess is what kept clinton in office for 8 years. Clinton was the beginning of our now Bachelor, Fear Factor, Apprentice society who only wants to experience the superficial parts of our society.
Bush is sincere, but his uh's and duh's and repeated general talking points are no match for a kerryclinonesque smooth talking style.
Americans no longer look at substance and results, they are enamored with sweet talk and promises and style. This is a fact.
Gosh, that's a ringing endorsement of his performance!
I didn't like the silence either. Can't remember what it was but GB said something that made me laugh and he kind of stopped like "yall didn't think that was funny?". Maybe it's against debating rules but some clapping might have gotten the two of them fired up a little more.
Your saying it doesn't make it a fact.
Here's a fact. Flash polls after the first Bush-Gore debate gave it clearly to Gore. Smoother, sighs notwithstanding. Better style. Won the debate...
A few days later, polls gave the debate to Bush by 8 points. Initial impressions fade as folks begin to ponder the substance.
Bite your tongue. At a university headed by Donna Shalaya -- where she gave out the tickets! It would have been the ultimate stacked deck.
BTW, look for a stacked deck in St. Louis, particularly with Charlie Gibson moderating.
Got to agree..we all agree that GB isn't the world's greatest speaker. And so he comes off on TV as hesitant
and a bumbler.
However those who have watched him for the last 4 years know that his heart, intellect and passion is for the U.S.
and he has an iron resolution to defend the U.S.
He cares for and loves the troops. Kerry is a good debater, however all of his thoughts and actions show his
selfish positions and lack of judgement.
He is typical Eastern, holier than thou liberal, who has NO
idea of how you and I live or does he care.
God bless GW and the USA.
Big D in K.C.
If that were the case Al would be president right now:')
No, I was hoping for Bush to use SO many openings regarding the WOT to make a more forceful point. What I saw, was platitudes and soundbites. Look, I've known from 2000 that President Bush is not a great orator, but he's had almost 4 years to refine his "talking points" and they were simply weak.
However, knowing that a strong manager is not always the best PR voice for an organization, I will continue to support him against our WOT.
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.