Draginol Draginol

Kerry 1, Bush 0

▼

Kerry 1, Bush 0

First debate results

from JoeUser Forums

With the first debate over, I think it was pretty clear that Kerry gained more than Bush.  Neither scored any knock out blows on the other and the # of memorable sound bites is going to be minimal. But overall, Kerry did what he needed to do.

Expect to see the polls narrow considerably.

politics
27,347 views 101 replies
Reply #26 from JoeUser Forums Top
"A candidate who cannot answer quickly and decisively is obviously a candidate who does not have answers, but is searching for them."


As I said earlier, I think he had answers, I think he was just told to stick to a set of talking points and "Whatever you do, don't wing it." A shame.

And Kerry did hold up a finger a time or two to get a 30 second rebuttal in when Der Lehrer was moving on.

Reply #27 from JoeUser Forums Top
I'm a Bush supporter and I saw the debate as a draw.

Kerry managed to make me not fear having him as president. Though there were a few things that I completely disagree with him on, especially North Korea. I don't quite get the consistency between getting a coalition for Iraq vs going it alone with North Korea. I was happy to see that both had roughly the same position on the future of Iraq, which was to keep the troops there until the process was finished.

Bush didn't say anything new, which is what I expected. His verbal pauses were driving my wife crazy with all of the "umm..."'s that he was doing. My favorite line of Bush's all night was something to the effect of "You already know where I stand on that issue, what more can I say?"

I wouldn't say that the only people who saw the debate as a Bush win were Bush supporters. Listening to the radio this morning, about a quarter of the callers said the debate was a win for Bush, half called it a draw, and another quarter called it for Kerry. Supposedly all of them were undecided as to which candidate they were going to vote for.
TouchTasks - Access tasks with ease on Windows touchscreens.
Reply #28 from PolMach Forums Top
Just a quick note, in the 2000 election everyone was saying Gore won the first debate for about 2 days afterward, then as the substance of the debate was talked about more and more people changed their minds on who won.
Reply #29 from JoeUser Forums Top

Reply #25 By: jkueser - 10/1/2004 9:32:53 AM
I thought Kerry won, but was a little disappointed that he didn't take a little tougher, more direct stance on a few issues.

For example, the "flip-flop" issue, he only hinted at. He could have deflated Bush's bubble there by simply stating that he changed his mind on the issues as the situation changed. If he would have come out and said, "I realized that I was wrong, and tried to take steps to correct my mistakes, unlike President Bush, who will not admit that he is wrong, and won't take the steps necessary to correct his mistakes" that would have made me real happy


You are correct in your assesment. But the fact remains that he didn't do it. He flip-flopped and then left it alone instead of trying to fix it.
Reply #30 from PolMach Forums Top
Dear God, Kerry supporters have been waiting for the other shoe to drop since the dem. primaries and did it ever. Not only did Kerry give Bush a sound drubbing, he managed to do so with grace and even managed a small bid to seize the national security issue from Bush. Bush responded with the same tired Rovian rhetoric that paled in the face of Kerry homework and manuever. For those feeling that Bush won the debate, there is also a sensation that the Bush wave has crested and is now tumbling towards craggy rocks on a barren shore.

This appearance by Kerry dispirits those reveling in the Bush "macho" image when watching him squirm and crumble underneath Kerry without white men past ten years his senior propping him up. Today is a new dawning on an emboldened democratic voter base, prepare to watch Kerry stay above Bush in the polls from now till the NEW COMMANDER IN CHIEF takes over.
Reply #31 from JoeUser Forums Top
Deference, I think you're borderline delusional. Edging Bush in the debate will help but not to the extent you're imagining.
Reply #32 from JoeUser Forums Top
This year is the first ear i get to vote so Im trying to get my facts straight. Im find that sifting through the political mud on this extremely difficult. But through the Bush supporters whining about flip-flopping, and the kerry supporters whining how stupid Bush is, I found that Kerry won the debate, he completely out manuevered Bush on a number of the main speaking points. Bush's stuttering and pauses were extremely troubling. He's the president aready, has been for 4 years, why cant he answer the questions about what his presidency has been focused around. What has he been doing for the last few years? After the debate it seems he doesnt even know.

"You forgot about Poland."
Reply #33 from JoeUser Forums Top
I'm with Deference on this one!!! And I hope you all will be good losers when the time comes!
Reply #34 from JoeUser Forums Top
Gideon,

My point was that it surprised me, not that debates are normally scored that way, but that you score them that way. Do you really think it matters if the President leans against the podium? Why?

I disagree that Bush comes off as searching for his answer. He comes off as a guy that stammers and sputters and that is exactly what we expected of him. If Bill Clinton had been up there with the big pauses and the stammers it would look bad. But doesn't it look just like business as usual with GWB? The people who think that makes him look like an idiot already believe he is an idiot...so what?

Do you really think that his stammering brought out the fact that he was trying to remember his talking points? So what? We all know they both have talking points...only a real fool (and a likely non-voting fool) thinks they were coming up with this stuff off the cuff. The last thing Bush needed to do was go "off-the-cuff" that would have been a disaster.

I believe that Kerry is a better debater, I believe that Kerry had a better debate, I believe he looked more Presidential (whatever that means), Bush looked tired, angry, blah, blah, blah.

I also believe Kerry will bounce about 4 points on average (3 short of a lead from the last poll average I heard) and then will sink. They will be hammering him on the very things he said very soon and I think it will play and play well. So if you want to say Kerry won today, I agree...but I think he starts losing ground from the debate by next week. This is really a loss.

I could be wrong...we will see. If I am right though my prediction is they will pin it on Edwards. Claiming that he did not make the case against Halliburtan Dick...and that hasn't even happened yet.
Reply #36 from JoeUser Forums Top
Wisefawn, regardless of who wins, I'm not a loser. But I wouldn't count on Kerry winning. I think it's unlikely unless he wins the other two debates pretty thoroughly.
Reply #37 from PolMach Forums Top
This was pointed out by Lee1776 on a similar thread.

Reply #17 By: Citizen Lee1776 - 9/30/2004 10:49:40 PM
I did notice one thing that may help change this from a tie to a win for Bush.

Early in the debate Kerry said that Saddam was not a threat.

Bush countered with restating Kerry's speech before the war that "Saddam was a threat.

Later Bush said Kerry was soft on Saddam.

Kerry shot back saying "Saddam was a real Threat"

I think the Republicans are going to be all over this like White on Rice in the morning.

When I heard Kerry say this I thought "Oh My God", he did not just say that.

He didn't just change in the middle of the debate?

Maybe the main stream press will not say anything, but the talk shows will.

That's My Two Cents
Reply #38 from JoeUser Forums Top
I don't quite get the consistency between getting a coalition for Iraq vs going it alone with North Korea.


I had the same question.
Reply #39 from JoeUser Forums Top

Reply #34 By: WiseFawn - 10/1/2004 11:05:14 AM
I'm with Deference on this one!!! And I hope you all will be good losers when the time comes!


Same back at ya!
Reply #40 from PolMach Forums Top
Deference, I think you're borderline delusional. Edging Bush in the debate will help but not to the extent you're imagining

Draginol, I'm surprised at you, whipping out the ad hominen attack so desperately. I'm not nearly as close to delusional as I am actually vindicated. Kerry pounding on Bush in an effective manner shows strength in his position and the lack of it in Mr. Bush's. Once this really sinks in with the public, the polls and the votes will reflect Kerry as the strong and competent leader effectively stealing what Bush tried to claim as his main selling point. I believe the best parallel for the debates today are the Reagan - Carter debates in 1980. The more Kerry is able to remind voters of the failures of the Bush admin., Bush is kept on the defensive, considering what a weak defense has been given, it should be hard for even optimistic conservatives to think that Bush will win this election.
Reply #41 from JoeUser Forums Top

Reply #41 By: Deference - 10/1/2004 12:25:46 PM
Kerry pounding on Bush in an effective manner shows strength in his position and the lack of it in Mr. Bush's.


Pounding on Bush???? What debate were you watching? Kerry is the one who did the flip-flop in the *middle* of the debate. Not GW.
Reply #42 from JoeUser Forums Top
I wasn't able to tape the affair. I usually record debates, then recheck the numbers on factcheck.org
I review then allot points. From what I saw Bush adhered more the points, but articulation was clearly towards Kerry.
Reply #43 from JoeUser Forums Top
I believe Kerry was more forceful which appeared to give him an edge. But it must remembered, he has all the advantage of hindsight and coached by Clinton and others to refine his answers. If Kerry were given a first time event were he to become president, I wonder how he would do? That is the question.
Reply #44 from PolMach Forums Top
Pounding on Bush???? What debate were you watching? Kerry is the one who did the flip-flop in the *middle* of the debate. Not GW.

Yeah, I saw that. I also saw how Bush failed to answer the first few questions, bungled his way through the entire debate, and had nothing new or of substance to offer. Perhaps you didn't pick up on some of the more subtle gains in the debate Kerry made, maybe I should get a transcript and make a list for you...
Reply #45 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply #45 By: Deference - 10/1/2004 12:41:07 PM
Pounding on Bush???? What debate were you watching? Kerry is the one who did the flip-flop in the *middle* of the debate. Not GW.

Yeah, I saw that. I also saw how Bush failed to answer the first few questions, bungled his way through the entire debate, and had nothing new or of substance to offer. Perhaps you didn't pick up on some of the more subtle gains in the debate Kerry made, maybe I should get a transcript and make a list for you...


You don't think that the media isn't going to catch the flip-flop and start hammering on it?
Reply #46 from PolMach Forums Top
You don't think that the media isn't going to catch the flip-flop and start hammering on it?

The best part about that specific bit was that it would, at best, provide a weak attack for the Bush campaign. During the debates, I noticed something, the old "flip flop" and declaring one a "denigrater of coalition allies" attacks aren't going to work anymore, 'cause Kerry is actually there defending himself strongly while making Bush flounder. Kerry accomplished more in that debate then he has in the last year.
Reply #47 from JoeUser Forums Top
Kerry accomplished more in that debate then he has in the last year.

Heck, why stop there...why not go for the last twenty years.
Reply #48 from JoeUser Forums Top

"you can be certain but still be wrong".
I agree.


Draginol, spoken like a true eclectic!

Reply #49 from PolMach Forums Top
Deference

I think you’re in for a big let down.

Yes, I think Kerry did a good job at being force full and confident, what would you expect from the Yale debate team President.

But as I gave an example (that GX thankfully transferred to this post), Kerry is going to be torn apart for the words he said, and not the way he said it.

I don't have a complete list yet, but even this early in the day it is becoming very long. Kerry said multiple things that sounds forceful last night, but is going to bring him down. Good examples are some of the following:

1. The US needs to pass a "World Test" for us to use force.

2. Saddam was not a Threat, and then says again Saddam was a Threat.

3. I will send Nuclear Fuel to Iran and test them for them. (Didn't we try that with N. Korea and the they still built their nukes?)

4. Lets go into Sudan unilaterally while going into Iraq with the world.

5. We needed to use our Allies to talk to Saddam for him to disarm, but lets not use our Allies (and North Korea’s) to get North Korea to get them to hand over their WMD.

6. I will secure all to Russia's nuclear material in four years. (I think Russia will have something to say about that).

7. Claiming that he never called Bush a liar, but have multiple time.http://www.rnc.org/RNCResearch/Read.aspx?ID=4772

Kerry and the DNC are releasing an ad attacking Bush's Ummms, and delays on answering questions. But Bush and RNC are going to release Kerry's own "forceful" statements against him.

That's My Two Cents

PS: That’s only the things I seen myself last night. I know the pros are going to find more.
Reply #50 from JoeUser Forums Top

Reply #47 By: Deference - 10/1/2004 12:55:29 PM
You don't think that the media isn't going to catch the flip-flop and start hammering on it?

The best part about that specific bit was that it would, at best, provide a weak attack for the Bush campaign. During the debates, I noticed something, the old "flip flop" and declaring one a "denigrater of coalition allies" attacks aren't going to work anymore, 'cause Kerry is actually there defending himself strongly while making Bush flounder. Kerry accomplished more in that debate then he has in the last year.


Just *maybe* you should go read this link. Seems not everyone is as optimistic as you seem to be.
Link