boredJonathan
Member
Makura said:
Thanks for reminding me!
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Cheney/Edwards Debate Tonight...
- Thread starter Cool
- Start date
- Status
Thanks for reminding me!
Do you really think invesment income is inherently worthy of lower rates than wages?Fatghost28 said:
I think it's pretty clear that putting a higher burden on production activies is the less optimal for market economies....
Anyways, I thought it was generally annoying how quickly they jumped to whatever item they felt like. This was just hard core talking points. The structure sucks. Debaters should have electrodes hooked up for situations where they blantantly ignore the points at hand.
Well, in assessing this debate, I think it wasn't nearly as lopsided as the first Presidential debate.
I think Cheney dominated the Iraq/foreign policy half of the debate, and I likewise thought Edwards fairly decisively won the domestic side. Ultimately, I think it comes out as a wash, and basically it comes down to what issues you value more as to who you perceive as the winner of this debate.
This debate was much more spirited, much fiercer, and a lot deeper in content than the Presidential debate.
EDIT: And the moderator DID suck.
I think Cheney dominated the Iraq/foreign policy half of the debate, and I likewise thought Edwards fairly decisively won the domestic side. Ultimately, I think it comes out as a wash, and basically it comes down to what issues you value more as to who you perceive as the winner of this debate.
This debate was much more spirited, much fiercer, and a lot deeper in content than the Presidential debate.
EDIT: And the moderator DID suck.
Phoenix
Member
hiryu said:
Yes, but they are definitely a lot smarter than the democratic campaign people. What they have done is made the campaign entirely about foreign policy and the war on terror because that is the big thing in the polls. What they are doing now if pushing the message that THEY are the ones to win the war on terror, an issue that resonates well with the fear that people already had. Kerry/Edwards are at a distinct disadvantage there, yet they have failed to flip the script - they have allowed Bush/Cheney to control the pace of the campaign and set the key issues that are diametrically opposed to their strengths.
I think Cheney had the upper hand, but it wasn't like the Kerry/Bush debate where Kerry had the upper hand and Bush had close to nothing. Edwards still held his own and did a damn good job at doing it; but Cheney came off as being more experienced and was more hard-hitting with his counterattacks to whatever it was that Edwards said against him. I don't like that, but it's the truth. If history stays true, VP debates usually have little influence on the Presidential candidates themselves...
Tommie Hu$tle
Member
Phoenix said:
Yeah at the end I see Cheney as the winner of the debate.
Catchpenny
Member
Makura said:
I believe this is called freeping. Hmmm, almost sounds like that word originated from a certain right-wing site!
Chesapeake Silt
Member
I'm still laughing about Edwards' rendition of Cheney's record in the house. He made him sounds like what would happen if Hannibal Lecter got elected to congress. HE VOTED AGAINST NELSON MANDELA! OMG!
This debate was pretty fun. Lots of bile and hate getting tossed back and forth. Very entertaining.
This debate was pretty fun. Lots of bile and hate getting tossed back and forth. Very entertaining.
Catchpenny
Member
Overall I think this will end up being seen as a tie. I personally thought Edwards won, but can see conservatives feel better about this debate than they did the last one. It was funny to see Cheney being a little less aggressive in attacking Kerry's record after Edwards brought up Cheney's extremist history in the House. Each side will of course claim victory, but unlike the last debate, the Republicans won't look suicidal while doing it.
Despite the media hype that this was more important than typical VP debates, I doubt many undecided/soft leaning voters tuned in. For those who did, it's hard to say whether they will be more impressed by Edwards' personal charm and skill with domestic issues, or Cheney's gravitas and foreign policy experience.
Despite the media hype that this was more important than typical VP debates, I doubt many undecided/soft leaning voters tuned in. For those who did, it's hard to say whether they will be more impressed by Edwards' personal charm and skill with domestic issues, or Cheney's gravitas and foreign policy experience.
Catchpenny
Member
Hey Ripclawe, the gang of idiots on Hardball had Bush winning the first debate too.
I think Edwards barely edged the debate. Edwards definitely won on domestic issues, but both Cheney and Edwards had their strengths and weaknesses when it came to the War on Terrorism. As a Democrat, to Cheney's respect, he was very intelligent and had no long pauses or lapses like Bush. I'm surprised it isn't Cheney whose running for President, because I'd actually consider him over Bush any day of the week.
A minimal +1 for Edwards
A minimal +1 for Edwards
I would probably score it with a similar margin. Cheney was FAR stronger than Bush was and truly dominated the Iraq segment. At the same time, Edwards did a fine job in his own right and hung in with him. I would probably tip the debate to Cheney slightly, primarily based on the force with which he commanded the Iraq debate.MIMIC said:
But when it's all said and done, that's still pretty even, and I think it's going to set up both presidential candidates with strong positions going into Friday's debate. In the end, both men did their jobs, and I think that's about all either campaign could have asked for.
Catchpenny
Member
Did anyone notice that Cheney didn't thank Edwards? Typical.
Idle Will Kill
Banned
Cheney actually knows what he's talking about, Bush just comes off as very unintelligent. I also think Edwards came off quite better than Kerry did.
RiZ III said:
I thought was even too, but could easily have been a slam dunk for Cheney. Edward was just repeating the exact same charges Kerry lay out in the previous debate. Surpisingly, Cheney did not prepared well comebacks for them. Really have to question Bush/Cheney's method of preparation. Bush better get much better debate advisors otherwise Kerry's going to win 2nd and 3rd debate.
videogamer
Banned
Nothing new. Democrats just did it better last time.
http://newsobserver.com/24hour/politics/story/1712606p-9518244c.html
I caught the debate starting at maybe 9:25, not sure exactly when, they were still in the foreign policy part of the debate though, I was listening on the radio as I sat in my car waiting for a ferry, so no subtle body langue cues for me.
Cheney was very commanding in the foreign policy section and forceful. I'm not sure he actually put forth any argument that was inherently stronger than Edwards, but his presence in the debate at that point was very large. Cheney's energy and presence seriously diminished once the debate moved away from foreign policy however, and Edwards' ability to relate and communicate in that realm served him far better.
I'd give the debate a draw, with maybe a slight lead to Edwards simply because I felt he was better on the domestic policy area and it was nice to hear some of that rather than more Iraq, Iraq, Iraq, Iraq.
I also felt Edwards had a better closing statement. Cheney was just hammering the fear idea far too hard in his closing statement. I could fully imagine him slipping in the following sentence into his closing statement, "Do you want to die in the next four years?", and it wouldn't have sounded out of place.
In any case, Cheney seriously showed up Bush, which is honestly not hard at this point, but the Republicans run the serious risk of Cheney's performance hurting the campaign if Bush turns in another horrid performance on Friday and people start thinking "Why is Cheney vice-president while Bush can't even perform competently in a debate?" and essentially confirming every stereotype of Cheney actually being president.
Then again, Bush has a knack for being personable to people on a one-to-one basis, so I actually think he has an advantage in the "town hall" style debate on Friday - which is weird considering I believe that was the one the Republicans were really against holding.
Cheney was very commanding in the foreign policy section and forceful. I'm not sure he actually put forth any argument that was inherently stronger than Edwards, but his presence in the debate at that point was very large. Cheney's energy and presence seriously diminished once the debate moved away from foreign policy however, and Edwards' ability to relate and communicate in that realm served him far better.
I'd give the debate a draw, with maybe a slight lead to Edwards simply because I felt he was better on the domestic policy area and it was nice to hear some of that rather than more Iraq, Iraq, Iraq, Iraq.
I also felt Edwards had a better closing statement. Cheney was just hammering the fear idea far too hard in his closing statement. I could fully imagine him slipping in the following sentence into his closing statement, "Do you want to die in the next four years?", and it wouldn't have sounded out of place.
In any case, Cheney seriously showed up Bush, which is honestly not hard at this point, but the Republicans run the serious risk of Cheney's performance hurting the campaign if Bush turns in another horrid performance on Friday and people start thinking "Why is Cheney vice-president while Bush can't even perform competently in a debate?" and essentially confirming every stereotype of Cheney actually being president.
Then again, Bush has a knack for being personable to people on a one-to-one basis, so I actually think he has an advantage in the "town hall" style debate on Friday - which is weird considering I believe that was the one the Republicans were really against holding.
Alcibiades
Member
uh, I think this was one of Gore's/Democrat's main attacks back in 2000. Came up all the time. Cheney responded to the Mandela vote quite a few times.chimpychi said:
Old issue, didn't see the debate, but I'm surprised it was brought up considering it was not only recycled, but I don't think it would affect anyone's vote.
I didn't see the debate, but I pretty much expected a relentless attack on Halliburton cause of the Iraq deal...
Catchpenny
Member
:lol I will vote for Bush/Cheney if Cheney wears the Darth Vader outfit just once.
Andrew Sullivan looks like he's turned fully on the Republicans:
Andrew Sullivan looks like he's turned fully on the Republicans:
First of all -- stop posting polls, people. You've been warned repeatedly.
It was a very interesting debate, although VP debates usually end up not mattering too much in the grand scheme of things. Each candidate had moments where he scored some solid points, and each had moments where he took it squarely on the chin. It was refreshing to see that more facts were brought up, although as always, it's worthwhile to do your own fact checking to confirm what was said.
I'd give a slight edge in the debate to Cheney for overall gravitas, although his body language said "defensive" rather than "confident" much of the time. (And, oh yeah...that's a MICROPHONE you're wearing. Stop covering it up, genius.) He came across as the consumate political lifer, and I suspect that voters will be more swayed by Cheney for that reason...though age and experience NEVER necessarily equal wisdom.
Edwards, though clearly on strong turf discussing health care issues, came across as more of an honor student running for senior class president rather than a VP, especially on national defense issues. I agree with the earlier poster who said that it was annoying how he couldn't seem to divorce himself from Kerry...hopefully his own personality will show through a bit more in the future. I think he'd be able to handle being president if necessary, but he doesn't have the same presence as Kerry at this point.
I definitely agree that it looks ridiculous to have a clearly better-informed, better composed candidate running as the VICE president. If anything, Bush looks even WORSE now that his own running mate has showed him up thoroughly. How can anyone take Bush seriously as a leader when it's clearly Cheney with his hand up his ass making his mouth move?
It was a very interesting debate, although VP debates usually end up not mattering too much in the grand scheme of things. Each candidate had moments where he scored some solid points, and each had moments where he took it squarely on the chin. It was refreshing to see that more facts were brought up, although as always, it's worthwhile to do your own fact checking to confirm what was said.
I'd give a slight edge in the debate to Cheney for overall gravitas, although his body language said "defensive" rather than "confident" much of the time. (And, oh yeah...that's a MICROPHONE you're wearing. Stop covering it up, genius.) He came across as the consumate political lifer, and I suspect that voters will be more swayed by Cheney for that reason...though age and experience NEVER necessarily equal wisdom.
Edwards, though clearly on strong turf discussing health care issues, came across as more of an honor student running for senior class president rather than a VP, especially on national defense issues. I agree with the earlier poster who said that it was annoying how he couldn't seem to divorce himself from Kerry...hopefully his own personality will show through a bit more in the future. I think he'd be able to handle being president if necessary, but he doesn't have the same presence as Kerry at this point.
I definitely agree that it looks ridiculous to have a clearly better-informed, better composed candidate running as the VICE president. If anything, Bush looks even WORSE now that his own running mate has showed him up thoroughly. How can anyone take Bush seriously as a leader when it's clearly Cheney with his hand up his ass making his mouth move?
JoshuaJSlone
Member
I typed this up right after the debate finished. Looks like I thought largely the same thing as a lot of you... except that I didn't think it was better than last Thursday.
So immediate post-VP debate thoughts. Significantly duller. Neither was as well-spoken as John Kerry or as flustered as George W. Bush last Thursday, and the messages were largely reruns. Edwards seemed to stumble over his words quite a bit, but was much more comfortable talking about domestic policy than Iraq. Really the Iraq half was so much rehash, with Cheney talking about the good things going on and complaining about Kerry's "global test", and Edwards complaining about the bad things going on and defending Kerry's "global test." More often than not they would both continue to talk about previous subjects before answering new questions, which didn't seem to help the moderator much, and a few times there was confusion about who was supposed to be talking next. Friday's presidential debate should be much more interesting and informative.
So immediate post-VP debate thoughts. Significantly duller. Neither was as well-spoken as John Kerry or as flustered as George W. Bush last Thursday, and the messages were largely reruns. Edwards seemed to stumble over his words quite a bit, but was much more comfortable talking about domestic policy than Iraq. Really the Iraq half was so much rehash, with Cheney talking about the good things going on and complaining about Kerry's "global test", and Edwards complaining about the bad things going on and defending Kerry's "global test." More often than not they would both continue to talk about previous subjects before answering new questions, which didn't seem to help the moderator much, and a few times there was confusion about who was supposed to be talking next. Friday's presidential debate should be much more interesting and informative.
Catchpenny
Member
CrimsonSkies
Member
Edge to Cheney. Hopefully Bush will drink some coffee before the next debate.
Manabanana
Member
So I walk away from this knowing that Edwards never shows up for class and Cheney hates black people.
Catchpenny
Member
Haha, dailykos gets Cheney in a rather amusing lie regarding having never met Edwards before the debate:
You may say that's not exactly meeting Edwards, but that's as much of a meeting as a debate where they hardly exchanged words, just speaking to the moderater and audience.
Edwards also walked Liddy Dole up to the podium where Cheney swore her in as a senator. It's not a huge deal, but why would Cheney make up such a bizarre claim just to get in a jab at Edwards' attendance record?
You may say that's not exactly meeting Edwards, but that's as much of a meeting as a debate where they hardly exchanged words, just speaking to the moderater and audience.
Edwards also walked Liddy Dole up to the podium where Cheney swore her in as a senator. It's not a huge deal, but why would Cheney make up such a bizarre claim just to get in a jab at Edwards' attendance record?
Screaming_Gremlin
My QB is a Dick and my coach is a Nutt
Catchpenny said:
I'm pretty sure he didn't mean that literally, but more as a humorous jab at his attendance record.
- Status