Posted on 10/01/2004 5:03:13 AM PDT by SterlingSilver
Snap polls of viewers by many news outlets right after the debate began to reveal that those polled thought that Kerry "won" last night's debate... As this debate is further reviewed, any victory bestowed on Mr. Kerry may be found to be premature.
If the number of lies, misquotes, factual inaccuracies and misstatements used by each candidate is any indicator of "victory", then Kerry was clearly the big winner in a shutout.
In a debate, even in a "question/answer" format as in last night's event, if the facts and information that you use to undermine your opponent or advocate your position distort the truth or are just not factually accurate, any victory awarded by those who believed your inaccuracies as truth is simply misplaced.
Kerrys representations of the amount of money spent so far on the Iraq war; the actions of US troops in Afghanistan, the size of the Iraqi security forces, what countries were a part of the coalition in the invasion of Iraq, which US Administration placed sanctions on Iran, his statements about North Korea, his claim that there was a lack of UN sanctions for the Iraq war, his assertion that the NY subway was shut down during the Republican Convention, his accusation that the Bush administration cut funding for fire fighters, that only 5% of seaborne containers coming into the US are inspected, etc., etc were all riddled with false information and inaccurate facts designed to distort the truth about Bushs policies, actions and positions, as Kerry strived to appear to have a broad command of the facts and prevail in this debate.
Frankly, I could fill this page with dozens of additional examples of Kerrys inaccuracies as simple as when Kerry 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...or as complicated as his misinformation to the audience about his one consistent position on the Iraq war.
For those interested in the real truth, there are plenty of scattered resources available that prove Kerrys command of the facts was more a command of falsehoods, but the most clearly organized resource that I have found is at the Bush Cheney 2004 website: The Facts for Debate #1 Thursday, September 30th, 2004 http://www.georgewbush.com/debatefacts/Debate.aspx?stamp=9/30/2004%2012:00:00%20AM
When the final analysis is complete, and all the facts are vetted in the next few days, the real winner of this debate will be that candidate that was the most honest with America
and that is simply not Mr. Kerry.
But, but, but Kerry has a PLAN. And it's better than the other guy. That's certainly enough for me. (/sarc)
Sorry for the technical error... here's the URL link mentioned:
http://www.georgewbush.com/debatefacts/Debate.aspx?stamp=9/30/2004%2012:00:00%20AM
I don't think Bush was prepared for the level of disinformation Kerry pulled out during the debate. Bush doesn't play dirty because he knows it always comes back around.
So Bush played a straight debate. Kerry pulled off a short term coup. Now Kerry has to suffer the consequences. He has to put up with "negativity" from his opponents who are going to examine what he said and tear it to pieces.
The truth is out there.... It is just too bad for Kerry he didn't see fit to use more of it in the debate.
Rush had an opinion the other day which I have been believing for sometime.
That being that the press would play this debate up for all its worth for sKerry. And I think that is what is happening.
On the other side I was a little miffed at the WH building up this debate in favour of GB or letting the press build it up as though this was GB's strong suit.
Frankly, GB is not the strongest debater in the world. He does hold his own and stays on message. But the WH should not have let the MSM build Bush43's expectations up before this debate.
One thing I can say, though. More people whom I associate with are paying more attention now, and they're asking me my opinion. When I say, "Kerry lied," and they ask for examples, I give them and they're INSTANTLY pro-Bush.
It's good to be on the right!
Lawyer Speak vs The Regular Guy!!
In a TV medium, style is everything. Just look at the Kennedy-Nixon debates where Nixon won on substance but looked horrible to the young energetic Kennedy, so Kennedy won.
I don't see how anyone can honestly say Bush was stylish yesterday. He looked exhausted, took abnormally long pauses searching for words, mangling them when they came out, and at times seemed frustrated.
Substantively, at least IMHO, Kerry came off like a high school senior running for student council with his vapid "I can do it better," mantra. How, Mr. Kerry, how? He seemed in command, but there was nothing behind what he was saying.
But that is not what the media picks up on. Its all about the shake, rattle, and roll. This is a best of 3 contest, and yesterday was a tie since I don't think it will change any minds, and Kerry had his share of gaffes too. Plenty of time to go for the kill next time, but I will be disappointed if the President doesn't bring his game face next time. Time for the KO. Let's not forget that Kerry is a closer, and another lukeware debate performance from Bush could start to make "undecideds" flip back to Kerry.
Yes, excellent link!
Kerry showed to be a more polished and smooth presenter, albeit of lies, inacuracies, and misquotes...Bush showed once again to be honest, solid, and a man of vision.
How right you are, I must admit I am depressed today, I thought W had a great chance to put the lurch away.
"I will get rid of the nukes in the former soviet block in 4 years" GIMME A BREAK - HEY Lurch, they belong to sovereign countries, what does the idiot think, wow Kerry won, lets give him all of the nukes right away!
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.