Support NeoGAF

[Prospero]

Bush's best performance of the three debates; Kerry's worst performance of the three. If you were intently listening to every single word that both candidates said, then Kerry won; if you had the debate on in the background while you were eating a late dinner and talking with your family (which is more likely), then Bush won.

 

[DarienA]

Bush's best performance of the three debates; Kerry's worst performance of the three. If you were intently listening to every single word that both candidates said, then Kerry won; if you had the debate on in the background while you were eating a late dinner and talking with your family (which is more likely), then Bush won.

Damn I'd be starving by 9:00pm EST... isn't that what time the debate came on?

 

[DaCocoBrova]

9pm is dinner time in the inner city.

I don't see how anyone can say Bush 'won' any of the three. His words have little to no substance regardles of topic.

 

[Cool]

Funniest part of the debate?

KERRY HUNTIN'

 

[DarienA]

9pm is dinner time in the inner city.

Wha? Damn.... I'm so hood-deprived....

 

[Maxwell House]

I am watching the debate now (TIVOed) and I have to say, Bush got handily beat. The faces Bush made during this debate were almost as priceless as the ones he made during the first debate. He acts like a little kid, I swear.

 

[xsarien]

Kerry destroyed Bush again, but at this point, it's getting predictable.

I'm very surprised that Kerry didn't point out more often that Bush was usually avoiding the question, or answering with stuff that didn't make ANY sense. I mean, would he tell a software engineer who had just lost his job to outsourcing that he should go to COMMUNITY COLLEGE? And is that voice in his head telling him to overturn Roe vs. Wade and invade other countries REALLY God, or just an echo?

Yeah. Him answering every question about unemployment with education issues was borderline insulting.

And I think the joke of the 3rd debate, to join "You forgot Poland!" and "Need some wood?" is "Armies of Compassion," because I know it had me laughing everytime he mentioned it.

 

[MIMIC]

9pm is dinner time in the inner city.

:lol The only time we ever eat early is on Thanksgiving.

 

[DarienA]

You know people accused Kerry of being a flip-flopper, and let's be point blank about something Bush did:

Bush flip-flopped on the importance of finding Osama Bin Laden as part of the fight against terrorism.

Warblogging.com charts it better than I am too lazy to do:
http://www.warblogging.com/archives/000934.php#000934

As warblogging.com says...

"I've got a very nice pair of flip-flops here for Mr. Bush if he'd like to come and pick them up."

 

[SFA_AOK]

I like to think they flip flopped when they went from the "WMD" excuse to the "Freeing the Iraqi people" back-up plan...

 

[ge-man]

That answer Bush had to outsourcing was unbelievable. What kind of education are you going to get at a community college that will exceeded what you already recieved in a top rated state or private college?

Anyway, I definately believe that Kerry dominated in spite of some vauge answers. My one worry is that the performances in the debates will have less of impact on actually voting when compared to more shallow factors like "being likeable" or "looking presidential"

 

[Pimpwerx]

I don't know how Bush comes off as more "likeable". What's there to like about a moron who's leading us all to fiancial ruin? Not that's Kerry's exactly a magnet for admiration, but at least he hasn't totally failed his job in the last four years. I think undecided voters need to be relabled for what they are, clueless idiots. Anyone still on the fence at this point is a jackass. PEACE.

 

[Diablos]

Kerry destroyed Bush again, but at this point, it's getting predictable.

I'm very surprised that Kerry didn't point out more often that Bush was usually avoiding the question, or answering with stuff that didn't make ANY sense. I mean, would he tell a software engineer who had just lost his job to outsourcing that he should go to COMMUNITY COLLEGE? And is that voice in his head telling him to overturn Roe vs. Wade and invade other countries REALLY God, or just an echo?

I think what Kerry needed to do about the jobs question is accuse Bush of not thinking properly about it... at all.

Yeah, it's all fine and dandy that Bush wants kids to get a good education so they can meet the requirements for demanding jobs of the world. But the question asked was what you would do for a worker that lost his job. This worker could be in his 40's or 50's for all we know. It's safe to say that MOST people that age do not have the time OR money to go back to school to further their education; they're already getting much older at that point. Bush was being very, how should I say it, pretentious in how he answered that question. Educating KIDS and YOUNGER ADULTS could be important when it comes to getting a better job, but if you're a lot older than that? Forget it, Bush. These people need to work. Not go back to school, they're not teenagers or in their 20's.

Bush simply stating that "oh he can just go to community college" (like that's REALLY gonna help anyone) is just sickening. It shows that he really doesn't have an answer for people that are older that may be without a job someday. He didn't know. Bush, quite simply, beat around the Bush on that one.

 

[Pimpwerx]

That reminds me. How does the RNC continue to push No Child Left Behind as their educations platform when it's easily the most despised, poorly-conceived program since...well....a long time. It's caused almost as much headaches for admins and teachers asthe Points of Light program Bush Sr. tried to implement. That was a social problem, but NCLB is a problem with educational standards and the all-important FUNDING. The way the program works right now is totally flawed and has just lead to a lot of compromises in education. Watch for most of the kids in the next 10 years to emerge from schools knowing next to nothing b/c the admins are putting pressure on the teachers to just pass everyone regardless of merit. Even private schools like mine are feeling the burden b/c why spend lots of money sending your kid to a tough private school where he'll fail, when you can send them to public school for free and know with a lot of certainty that they'll pass?

No Child Left Behind...the very name shows the flaw. Hate to say it, but there are a number of kids who deserve to be left behind, repeatedly so until they pass. If they can't pass, they should dropout and get a GED. Either create more special needs schools, or get realistic. We're compromising the educations of the standards kids to keep the flunkies in school. What a fucking waste. PEACE.

 

[ge-man]

Good point. No Child Left Behind puts so much burden on the teachers that children are being passed for the sake of keeping jobs. I know this all to well because I have baby brother who has just gone on to middle school, and over the last few years it has been apparent that the students in his class who were doing very poorly are still being moved up the system.

That saves jobs and looks good for graduation records, but years from now there will be a rude awakening when it becomes apparent that few students are graduating high school with the competence for college work. We are putting our professional fields in more danger than they are now with the boom of outsourcing.

 

[shoplifter]

It's too fucking true, though I hope that people will start to see through the bullshit.

Thank you.

In this now-concluded series of three presidential debates, you showed the small portion of Americans still willing and able to see the way a true gentleman and public servant behaves that you are worthy of their respect.

In a series of debates where so many gimmicks were included in the hopes of humiliating you, including time limits, flashing lights, and buzzers, you deliberately chose to follow the rules. You never exceeded the time allotted. You waited to be acknowledged by the moderator before proceeding with a 30-second continuation. You never interrupted the moderator's questions.

You never shouted out or fought for an extension, preferring to sacrifice part of the time allotted for the next question to answer the balance of the previous question.

In a political environment where voters and pundits on both sides have consistently spewed hateful personal attacks against their opponents, you managed to take the high road. On your own side of the political spectrum, Democratic voters came into this election season with outright hatred for President Bush; he's been labeled as everything from a retarded monkey, to a nazi fascist, to a conservative, bible-beating whackjob.

Despite this charged political climate, you never labeled the president even as a "conservative", and never in my recollection attacked him personally for any of his failings, labeling them as impersonally as possible, as the "failings of this administration" or of "this president".

Moreover, when you introduced your problems with the existing administration, you would tell the American people that, "I regret to inform you that this administration has failed," or that "Unfortunately, this president has not lived up to his promises," in the hopes of showing that you are not out for blood, not in this simply to attack and be negative.

In this year's series of three debates, you made an honest effort to focus on issues, to bring facts to the table, and to use data to substantiate your arguments. I won't go into the veracity of your data; suffice it to say that I appreciate the effort to create a substantial, fact-based debate.

In a nation where bull-headed aggression and single-minded, unthinking tunnel-vision have become virtues, you took the hard road of personal scrutiny. Despite its massive unpopularity, you chose to examine the nuances of issues and overrule the broad case because of the unjust exception it contained. You showed that you were willing to consider the opinions of others and truly contemplate your decisions when such behavior was seen as the worst kind of weakness.

You showed a cool, calm composure; what might even be called a sense of gravitas. In the town hall debate, you remembered the names of your fellow citizens throughout the debate, and spoke to them directly. When your opponent reeled, you did not beat him into submission, preferring instead to let your statements ride on their own merit. You were gracious throughout. You spoke clearly, and did not repeat meaningless phrases out of context.

Thank you, Mr. Kerry. You took us back to an older time, when politicians saw themselves as civil servants, and felt a humble duty to their constituency, a respect for the intellect of the people who granted them the privilege to serve, and a conviction that the issues in an election are vitally important, and must be addressed.

Of course, this makes it doubly sad that your anachronistic performance is what will ultimately lose you this election. Today's America does not care for politeness or civility in its leaders. It does not want intellectuals that scrutinize issues. It does not want those who fail to finish a bleeding opponent. They want your antithesis, but that is no judgment of your quality.

Perhaps in a later time, people will look back on your performance in these debates as a swan-song of politeness, a last gasp of civility in the face of muckraking. I fear that in the future, your colleagues will realize that the only way to fight an unscrupulous, aggressive, name-calling, bullying opponent is with more of the same, and that we'll never see a performance like yours again.

It says something even deeper to me about your values that you chose gentlemanly conduct over the kind of verbal brutality that would have won you this election; it says that you have deep convictions that nothing can touch, and I respect that deeply.

Again, thank you.

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

In response to a deaf lip reader's post at the johnkerry.com blog, there was some discussion at Daily Kos about what they said to each other after the debate. I've been curious about this sort of thing myself, but this is the first time throughout it that I've actually seen it.

Here's what I just saw: (none / 1)

...

Bush: Can I talk to you (later tonight)?
Kerry: ???
Bush: Where you gonna be?
Kerry: ???
Bush: ... We'll find each other.

Kerry had his back to the camera for this.

Not that I have any clue what this means.

by kfractal on Thu Oct 14th, 2004 at 08:58:46 GMT

 

[mrmyth]

In response to a deaf lip reader's post at the johnkerry.com blog, there was some discussion at Daily Kos about what they said to each other after the debate. I've been curious about this sort of thing myself, but this is the first time throughout it that I've actually seen it.

WELL THAT ABOUT WRAPS IT UP FOR KERRY.


I expect his body will be found with Osama's head sown onto the side of his neck.

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

The entire lobby was absolutely appauled when Kerry made the Cheney-Lesbian remark.

I think it was a great point. Bush said he didn't know if homosexuality was a choice. Kerry pointed out a high profile example where someone would certainly not be expected to CHOOSE such a path, but was on it anyway.

 

[Tommie Hu$tle]

I think it was a great point. Bush said he didn't know if homosexuality was a choice. Kerry pointed out a high profile example where someone would certainly not be expected to CHOOSE such a path, but was on it anyway.

I think it was a horrible point. Kerry could have made the exact same point without using her name it was sniping and it showed poor taste.

 

[Dilbert]

I think it was a horrible point. Kerry could have made the exact same point without using her name it was sniping and it showed poor taste.

I think it was a great point, and a clumsy way of expressing his answer. Name-dropping Cheney's daughter was going to SOUND political, no matter what, and he would have been better off leaving it anonymous. On the other hand, he clearly wanted to put SOMEONE specific into his response, because coming to grips with your own sexuality is a highly personal issue.

 

[Incognito]

I think it was a horrible point. Kerry could have made the exact same point without using her name it was sniping and it showed poor taste.

meh...i think it was useful. i'll just quote andrew sullivan:

Victimize? All Kerry did was invoke the veep's daughter to point out that obviously homosexuality isn't a choice, in any meaningful sense. The only way you can believe that citing Mary Cheney amounts to "victimization" is if you believe someone's sexual orientation is something shameful. Well, it isn't. What's revealing is that this truly does expose the homophobia of so many - even in the mildest "we'll-tolerate-you-but-shut-up-and-don't-complain" form. Mickey Kaus, for his part, cannot see any reason for Kerry to mention Mary except as some Machiavellian scheme to pander to bigots. Again: huh? Couldn't it just be that Kerry thinks of gay people as human beings like straight people - and mentioning their lives is not something we should shrink from? Isn't that the simplest interpretation? In many speeches on marriage rights, I cite Mary Cheney. Why? Because it exposes the rank hypocrisy of people like president Bush and Dick and Lynne Cheney who don't believe gays are anti-family demons but want to win the votes of people who do. I'm not outing any gay person. I'm outing the double standards of straight ones. They've had it every which way for decades, when gay people were invisible. Now they have to choose.

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

I think it was a horrible point. Kerry could have made the exact same point without using her name it was sniping and it showed poor taste.

Who would've been a better and more recognizeable example of how homosexuality isn't a choice? And what was in such poor taste? It's not like it's a lie or little-known. It's not even the first time it came up in the debates.

 

[Cloudy]

If the roles were reversed, the repubs would do the same thing. No crying in politics!

 

[xsarien]

I think it was a great point, and a clumsy way of expressing his answer. Name-dropping Cheney's daughter was going to SOUND political, no matter what, and he would have been better off leaving it anonymous. On the other hand, he clearly wanted to put SOMEONE specific into his response, because coming to grips with your own sexuality is a highly personal issue.

I have a feeling - the "in my gut" variety - that Kerry also wanted to put a certain President in his place and decided it was worth the cost of making an admittedly below-the-belt remark.

 

[Mega Man's Electric Sheep]

It was not a low blow or poor taste. She IS a lesbian, we all know it, it's not like he was outing her. Lesbian is not an insult, despite Kerry seeming to have an aneurism trying to say the word. It is certainly relevant that an administration that is vocally campaigning against gay rights has a Vice President who has a lesbian daughter. Granted, Kerry is against gay marriage as well, but civil unions are not as likely to be endorsed by Bush as by Kerry.

That being said, this is the issue I think Kerry is pandering to everyone on. "We are all God's children, it's not a choice, but they can't get married, sanctity blah blah, but property rights, hospital visits......." I also find whenever he drops the name of the big G, it seems a little scripted. Can't there be a president who isn't very religious? Not an atheist, just not blabbing on about God's children and praying and such. I suspect such a man wouldn't have a chance of being president. Which is why, I suspect, Kerry drops the G bomb so often. But what do I know, I'm Canadian, and could care less about the religious beliefs of our politicians, since they don't talk about them really.

 

[Mumbles]

Can't there be a president who isn't very religious? Not an atheist, just not blabbing on about God's children and praying and such. I suspect such a man wouldn't have a chance of being president.

Bingo. The latest poll I saw showed that half of americans would refuse to vote for an atheist, even if they agreed with all of his political viewpoints. So basically, not talking up religion is tantamount to giving up the election for a presidential candidate.

 

[dem]

When I heard them talking about religion last night it gave me douche chills.

No offense to anyone (though I'm sure it will offend pretty much everyone) but...
hearing people talk about a "higher power" like they actually believe it makes me think they're absolutely retarded.

 

[Socreges]

When I heard them talking about religion last night it gave me douche chills.

No offense to anyone (though I'm sure it will offend pretty much everyone) but...
hearing people talk about a "higher power" like they actually believe it makes me think they're absolutely retarded.

It's one of the larger distinctions between Canada and America that people rarely acknowledge. There are many religious people in Canada. Maybe a majority. Even more that believe in a spiritual, sovereign being, but don't assign themselves to a particular religion or teachings. Still, church and state are never forged. Chretien never mentioned his beliefs, or lack there of, and Martin describes himself as "religious", but certainly doesn't tie that into his decisions - ever. Has any ever heard something to the effect of "God Bless Canada" in the political sphere? Or is it just that America has copyrights?

As for people with faith, read "The Grand Inquisitor" by Fyodor Dostoevsky.

 

[Tommie Hu$tle]

I have a feeling - the "in my gut" variety - that Kerry also wanted to put a certain President in his place and decided it was worth the cost of making an admittedly below-the-belt remark.

That's what I think.


19 more days for Bush!

 

[MIMIC]

When I heard them talking about religion last night it gave me douche chills.

No offense to anyone (though I'm sure it will offend pretty much everyone) but...
hearing people talk about a "higher power" like they actually believe it makes me think they're absolutely retarded.

*still looking for the inoffensive part*

 

[Mrbob]

These debates were very good. I would like to watch them again. Are there video broadcasts online I could download them?

I'm going to make this short as I don't want to get into a huge post. I've been in the middle before these debates started, and leaning towards voting to re-relect Bush. However, after these debates, I'm just not so sure anymore. Before these debates, there was much talk about Kerry being two faced. And many of those comments well deserving I would say. However, at these debates, I thought Kerry was very articulate and did a good job in general of stating his goals. He also did a good job of defending his stances on a number of issues that Bush attacked. I'm not sure which way I'm going to vote yet, but I'm seriously considering placing my vote for Kerry and never would have considered voting for him before these debates started.

 

[Socreges]

These debates were very good. I would like to watch them again. Are there video broadcasts online I could download them?

I'm going to make this short as I don't want to get into a huge post. I've been in the middle before these debates started, and leaning towards voting to re-relect Bush. However, after these debates, I'm just not so sure anymore. Before these debates, there was much talk about Kerry being two faced. And many of those comments well deserving I would say. However, at these debates, I thought Kerry was very articulate and did a good job in general of stating his goals. He also did a good job of defending his stances on a number of issues that Bush attacked. I'm not sure which way I'm going to vote yet, but I'm seriously considering placing my vote for Kerry and never would have considered voting for him before these debates started.

You have to consider two things.

1) What are the consequences from someone who determines their position on public perception? That can be a problem.

But most importantly,

2) Is it that simple? Is he as two-faced as the Bush administration projects? In what respects, and was he within reason?

For instance, For the war in Iraq vs Against the war in Iraq. Sure, but he made a public statement before the war that America needs to build a strong coalition and have the support of the UN. They did not to that. So he's opposed. That seems perfectly reasonable to me, yet it remains one of the principle, frustrating reasons why people will not get behind Kerry. The American public doesn't seem to understand that Kerry was consistent throughout.

 

[Pimpwerx]

When I heard them talking about religion last night it gave me douche chills.

No offense to anyone (though I'm sure it will offend pretty much everyone) but...
hearing people talk about a "higher power" like they actually believe it makes me think they're absolutely retarded.

I would say I agree with that last sentence, but that would make me look like a dick too, so I'll just subtly imply it. I was really religious at one point. I was raised that way and you believe a lot of stuff when you're young. PEACE.

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

I'm going to make this short as I don't want to get into a huge post. I've been in the middle before these debates started, and leaning towards voting to re-relect Bush. However, after these debates, I'm just not so sure anymore. Before these debates, there was much talk about Kerry being two faced. And many of those comments well deserving I would say. However, at these debates, I thought Kerry was very articulate and did a good job in general of stating his goals. He also did a good job of defending his stances on a number of issues that Bush attacked. I'm not sure which way I'm going to vote yet, but I'm seriously considering placing my vote for Kerry and never would have considered voting for him before these debates started.

This I think was the great thing about the debates. Many people had views of both major candidates largely built from the negative ads directed towards them. The debates gave people several good hours to determine for themselves how accurate these attacks were.

 

[Loki]

I would say I agree with that last sentence, but that would make me look like a dick too, so I'll just subtly imply it. I was really religious at one point. I was raised that way and you believe a lot of stuff when you're young. PEACE.

Guess I never grew up then.


Which is fine, because "growing up is awfuller than all the other things that ever were-- I won't grow up, never grow up, never grow up...not me."