I'm feeling pretty good after talking to my dad about the debate. He's fairly moderate, and he said that Kerry didn't seem convincing to him. He said that too much of Kerry's message seemed to focus on how he would do better, even though he didn't have a plan that was very different from Bush's, and how he would have done things differently. He thought Kerry had a few good points, but that Bush has done good and he didn't think it was necessary to change presidents in the middle of the war unless Kerry had a vastly different plan that would work better.
Swing voters can smell insincerity right through the tube.
Kerry was better on style. Because of his inconsistencies, Bush was better on substance. It was a draw in my humble opinion.
Actually, my thirteen year old daughter made me feel better. For extra credit at school, she was to watch the debate and write a short report on who won, and why. She watched the debate with two of her classmates in a seperate room from me. My wife and I never talk about politics at home, so her report was not influenced by anything I said. Anyway, part of why she thought Bush won was, and I quote from her report "it seems like all John Kerry does is put down Bush, but George Bush never says anything negative about Kerry." She then says "Kerry always says that his plan if he wins is so much better than Bush's, but in my opinion, all Kerry says is negative things."
My husband is definitly a moderate (leans to the left just a tad) but he thought President Bush won big. Interestingly, I didn't think President Bush won "big", but held his own. My husband thought Kerry insulted his intelligence ( BTW, he's a MENSA member) and was condescending. I was surprised at his take on it, but am glad to hear it.