[GALVATRON]

Oh, poor George... a deer in the headlights, if not already impacting the front grill. :laugh:
It was embarassing to watch him speak so brokenly: the stuttering desperation, the awkward(...um...uh...) silent pauses, the slouching posture, standing on one leg with ankles crossed, elbows resting on the podium, breaking in (despite the rules) for unscheduled rebuttals only to flounder with uninspired filler, frustrated sighs, and clumsy endings.

"Iraq.... It's hard work!", George reminded us. "I know that... You think I don't know that? .....I know that."

"... It dinut. My opponent says it was a mistake? It wudn't a mistake." [sic]
"... in the long worm -- uh, long term work..."

Bush kept boasting that Iraq's army is now numbered at 100,000.
The actual number of trained Iraqis is closer to 25,000, with another 25,000 of questionable quality.

He went on to compliment the efforts of "the brave leader of Iraq." --That's high praise coming from the puppetmaster.

And closing his staggering embarassment with some metaphor baiting for the evangelist vote:
"[Yea, though] We climbed the mountain, and walk through the valley... [we shall overcome, halleluleah!]" :???:


For his part, Kerry repeated once too often his plan about securing Russia's nuclear material "in 4 years versus 13 years at this President's current pace" and a few other policy items. -- Feel free to make your point by repetition, but at least acknowledge it with "as I said earlier", otherwise it bores the audience.


Equal footing:
Q: "How would you deal with teh terrorists?"

Kerry: "Hunt them down and kill 'em all!"
Bush: "Kill 'em all !"
Kerry: "Kill 'em all !!"
Bush: "Kill 'em all !!!" >:]


Kerry easily outperformed the jittery incumbent and spoke with resolute straightforwardness, projecting the strongly voiced confidence of a natural leader. His references to JFK and Reagan were stellar.
Between criticizing Bush's misguided terror focus and directly attacking the pigheaded "certainty" that Bush is so proud of tooting, I think the best mindscrew was when Kerry quoted Bush Sr.'s reasoning for not invading Iraq after Desert Storm, "because it had no exit strategy, as Bush Sr. wrote in his book", whereupon Bush Jr. visibly wilted with the shamefully averted gaze of a disappointing son...
Poor George. :lol:

Regime Change starts at home. :thumb:​

 

[N1ghtw0lf]

Only things i saw on it were on the daily show which just made fun of it. I could really care less who wins because i hate both of them with a passion.

/me goes and votes for Nader.

Still got a kick out of this though.
http://www.johnkerryisadouchebagbutimvotingforhimanyway.com/ (bad language not for little kids )

 

[Mr.Smith]

I thought this debate was hilarious.

I especially loved the fib when George W. Bush responded to John Kerry about losing focus on Osama bin Laden. It went something like (it's not an exact quote since I can't remenber it) "We have to take care of Iraq...I mean Saddam...I mean Osama bin Laden." My mom burst out laughing then.

 

[hellmasterx]

Whoever Wins, We Lose.
Bush
vs
Kerry

 

[Keith]

about time someone posted about it .. was going to do it earlier but didn't have anything good to open it with ..

As for the debate it was very one sided in my opinion and Kerry seemed very prepared and focused. He also addressed many of the things that many Americans are wondering and confronted Bush on some very good points. You could see Bush was totaly on the defensive the whole night and was getting visibly upset. Also what was total times he said "hard work" .. he just kept repeating the same old stuff and didn't have the balls to admit any mistakes. I enjoyed the debate and I think it shined a lot of light on this election and brought a lot of interest from people that were not sure before.

The next two debates are going to be very good and I can't wait until the last one which deals with domestic issues where I feel Bush has failed completely.

 

[dpence]

hmmm, funny that the very liberal washington post had an article giving the degbate to Bush. Kerry, for all his talking never really said ANYTHING. And that Pass the "Global Test" comment will surely come back to haunt him. Even his own adviser Lockheart called it a Dead tie, so....
I personally thought Bush came across as very Human, while Kerry looked like a robot, fake smiles and all.

Also I wish that Prsident Bush had brought up one of Kerrys flops that he gave DURING the debate. The one in which in one bredth he said the Military is over stretched and in the next that he will add 100,000 to it. Just where , pray tell, is he going to get those 100,000????? If you actually listen to what Kerry said, he had several positions DURING the debate. Thats a real leader for you, one that will lead you right into the ground.

 

[ceramiclion]

hmmm, funny that the very liberal washington post had an article giving the degbate to Bush. Kerry, for all his talking never really said ANYTHING. And that Pass the "Global Test" comment will surely come back to haunt him. Even his own adviser Lockheart called it a Dead tie, so....
I personally thought Bush came across as very Human, while Kerry looked like a robot, fake smiles and all.

Also I wish that Prsident Bush had brought up one of Kerrys flops that he gave DURING the debate. The one in which in one bredth he said the Military is over stretched and in the next that he will add 100,000 to it. Just where , pray tell, is he going to get those 100,000????? If you actually listen to what Kerry said, he had several positions DURING the debate. Thats a real leader for you, one that will lead you right into the ground.

I can't agree with that even if I was in favor or Bush. Debates are about bring ideas and letting the people's decide what's better for their interest and the interests of their country. Not about pointing out campaign faults their oponents may have. I honestly was glad that people got to see Bush speaking his mind, for as much as I saw (which was about half of it cuz before that I was too busy playing Lunar) I heard Bush saying "how can you trust a guy who is constantly switching sides" Kerry could've said "how can you trust a guy who can't admit he made a mistake". Quite frankly both candidates questionable, I think i trust Kerry a bit more now but still have my doubts but i think at this point for me its anything but Bush
Oh about Bush being human, grunting, sttutering, groaning is more animal then human and I think it shows that he was not ready to answer the questions and couldn't control his emotions. Whether Kerry's smiles were fake or not he was right on with the answers and showed his strategy. Oh and about the 10,000. Well Whoever said they will be american, his plan is to get other countries to join. How is that flip flopping? Oh and the Global test well I don;t see it as being so bad any person that wants to get another person to do something for them has to be able to offer that person something in return and that something has to be something the like. Its a test. Maybe he should've worded it differently, but eh, Kerry kicked his butt hands down.

 

[RZetlin]

I saw video clips of the debate.

Overall, nobody scored the knock out punch.

Though I don't like the format of the debate.

None of the candidates could engage each other. All of their answers were directed at the moderator.

Personally would like to see where the moderator asked the topic question and have Bush and Kerry square off one on one with each other.

The debate with Dick Cheney and John Edwards next Tuesday will be interesting.

 

[GALVATRON]

Kerry, for all his talking never really said ANYTHING.

He fired off great points about America's loss of international credibility under Bush's watch, and clearly outlined his 4-step plan to get the global community more involved behind the leadership of a new president. He said he wouldn't restrict construction contracts to American companies like Haliburton exploiting the spoils of war, and that the U.S. military shouldn't take the role of an occupying force as with its current construction of 14 bases in Iraq.
Kerry spoke admirably of his commitment to enforcing nuclear non-proliferation, whereas Bush wants to continue development of surgical bunker-buster nukes and an unworkable missile defense shield, both of which send a hypocritical message about non-proliferation to the rest of the world.
Unlike Bush, he said he wouldn't put tax cuts for the rich ahead of financing for homeland security.
Kerry also cited the importance of stem cell research and global warming, questioning Bush's ability to see a clear picture of the facts, just as with Iraq.
And all of it was delivered with steady, statesmanlike conviction, compared to Bush's woeful stammering.

What great plan did Bush unveil?
"A leader can't waver." Might makes right.
Stay the course, even when it's shown not to be working. -- Just more of the same.
If there was anything else imparted by Bush, I must have missed it between all of his tired huffing. He was put nervously on the defensive throughout all of the debate and never provided any solutions to the problems his own recklessness created. He often didn't even bother using up his alotted speaking time, giving the impression that he didn't have much of worth to say.
-- And national security was supposed to be his strongest selling point, so we can only imagine how badly he'll bungle the next two debates!
Honestly, he gave such a lousy performance that I felt sorry for him. He's the William Hung of debating skillz, having mastered English just as fluently. :lol:

And that Pass the "Global Test" comment will surely come back to haunt him.

The global test he was speaking of is called the U.N. body, whose negative vote on invading Iraq, as we know, Bush arrogantly chose to ignore at much expense to America. When you go the road alone, the failure is all yours.

The one in which in one bredth he said the Military is over stretched and in the next that he will add 100,000 to it. Just where , pray tell, is he going to get those 100,000?????

By relocating military resources from Iraq and putting the squeeze back on Bin Laden where it rightly belongs.

If you actually listen to what Kerry said, he had several positions DURING the debate.

yep, Bush only had one position: the wrong one. At least he was consistent. :lol:

"She bangs, she bangs, oooo bayybee yeah she moves, she moves..." :guitar:

 

[RZetlin]

George Bush kept repeating the same lines and themes over and over again. (Eg. It's tough, you have to unwavering to be President).

This makes him look like a mechanical monkey that you would push to get the same actions over again.

I hope Americans won't confuse the difference of having of steadfast resolve with just being arrogant and stubborn.

Kerry was more dynamic, that he actually tired to answered some of the questions presented. What caught my attention is that Kerry for himself admit it was a mistake to support the military actions for Iraqi.

Personally I prefer a leader that learn from mistakes and change, than a leader that denies there is a problem and not change.

 

[bahamut_2006]

Something that got me when I was watching the debate was Kerry's statement that he would hold a summit to rebuild world alliances. What he wants is for more countries to be involved in Iraq. And a change in administration will not give nonparticipating countries a reason to participate in something they have no reason to and their citizens have strong opposition to. Something else I dislike about Kerry is he says he has solutions, but what are they? That question was not answered in that debate, leading me to think in reality he doesn't have any solutions; he just wants Bush out of the White House. Bush, on the other hand, was disappointing. He stumbled and stuttered consistently and as many have said, seemed agitated by the end of the debate. This shows me that he can crack under pressure when many said he never would. Kerry, on the other hand, seemed to be on the offensive and had no problem saying what he said.

 

[Mr.Smith]

Something that got me when I was watching the debate was Kerry's statement that he would hold a summit to rebuild world alliances. What he wants is for more countries to be involved in Iraq. And a change in administration will not give nonparticipating countries a reason to participate in something they have no reason to and their citizens have strong opposition to. Something else I dislike about Kerry is he says he has solutions, but what are they? That question was not answered in that debate, leading me to think in reality he doesn't have any solutions; he just wants Bush out of the White House. Bush, on the other hand, was disappointing. He stumbled and stuttered consistently and as many have said, seemed agitated by the end of the debate. This shows me that he can crack under pressure when many said he never would. Kerry, on the other hand, seemed to be on the offensive and had no problem saying what he said.

No candidate is going to give real solutions in a campaign because it will be picked apart by everyone. It's the sad truth.

 

[Strider]

kind of a total 180 of the 2000 election where bush was supposedly the headstrong confident one, he didnt seem to know what to say this time around i guess

btw, anyone see the new anti-kerry vietnam commercial? even if those events were relevant and even if what they said were true i'd still say that kerry had a more honourable military career than the present ruling body who was dishonourably discharged before facing any real combat

personally, i dont like kerry that much because i still consider him war-mongering, but atleast he seems to care about the people which is what a president should do

 

[zen_master]

I dont watch the depades I let other people deside my future :agree: :hdbash:

 

[bahamut_2006]

No candidate is going to give real solutions in a campaign because it will be picked apart by everyone. It's the sad truth.

Yes, but you see, if he wont say what the solution is, it leads me to either think that he doesnt have one, or has one he wants under wraps because he doubts how well it will work (and the summit he's wanting wouldnt do squat btw). The American people want to know what this plan is, in detail, and he aint telling. Ask anyone about Kerry and they'll say he hasnt said what he will do in much detail. All Kerry did last night is say Bush is simply wrong and that I would have been a better president. Now I aint going to debate whether what Bush did is right or not-this isnt the topic for it. But Kerry supports Bush's view that the world is better off without Saddam despite the fact that China is building up its military to possibly take Taiwan by force. If that happens, the US will be involved on Taiwan's side, and the US wont have enough ground troops without a draft. China may have an old, outdated military but their modernizing it and its roughly twice the size of that of the US. We also cant overlook Iran and North Korea. It is being suggested that North Korea now has 4-7 nukes and Bush hasnt done anything to stop it. Kerry barely mentioned it in the debate and he didnt say what he would do with North Korea besides one on one talks, which probably wouldnt accomplish much. We need to finish the job in Iraq quickly and get the hell out of there so we can be ready for the next conflict when it comes, but as their arent enough soldiers to provide adequate security, the US may be there for years, and thats something that doesnt need to happen.

 

[Ipswitch]

I think Kerry really carried this debate and is a clear winner. The only thing that Kerry said that I'm not entirely sure I agree with him was about initiating bilateral talks with North Korea as opposed to multilateral talks involving China, Russia, etc. Why he is opposed to using the peer pressure method I don't know. Maybe I don't know enough about the dynamics of the North Korean situation.

 

[Seta-San]

this has done nothing to my opinion of bush other than confirm to me that bush just isn't a great linguist. We've all known it. Why does it surprise you now?

 

[Ryos]

Well, I know that Kerry "won" because the morning after the debate, Fox News was doing damage control and trying to distort the victory into a clear indication that Kerry and the DNC are evil and will stoop to any level to defeat the president (mostly by the way they, or rather the DNC, used stills of the event). I don't find much meaning beyond that though in debates because it's all posturing anyway. Also, yay for setting rules that never get followed.

 

[ceramiclion]

Well, I know that Kerry "won" because the morning after the debate, Fox News was doing damage control and trying to distort the victory into a clear indication that Kerry and the DNC are evil and will stoop to any level to defeat the president (mostly by the way they, or rather the DNC, used stills of the event). I don't find much meaning beyond that though in debates because it's all posturing anyway. Also, yay for setting rules that never get followed.

Well I find that so hard to believe that now the news are so one sided. I heard the washington post had declared a tie...a TIE??? Well either way El presidente must be worried now cuz he got a tie in what people thought was the subject he was strong in... Wonder what he has to say about the economy... I am sure He will try to squeeze his leadership in the war in Iraq somewhere there.
Anyways, I found this article and although its also from a one sided source, I guess it explains something.
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/article.php?sid=18049&mode=nested&order=0

 

[mikeshoup]

Personally I feel the debate showed flaws in both candidate's campaign and ideals. I'm rather dissapointed with the democrats in that they couldn't have come up with a better candidate. I think Edwards would have been better for president than vice president.

Kerry may be a poor president, but on the other hand look at bush. You have someone who says he'll use military action as a last resort. As a first resort though, he uses it. Not the president I want. He even went a long with war without the worlds approval. He's the president that has pulled us completely out of UN's criminal court. I'm surprised the UN doesn't kick us out. Bush has taken this stance of screw the UN. Not something we need right now. He's also ignoring threats from other places outside of the middle east, and even within the middle east. Afghanastan has been put on the back burner.

Bush's handling of our economy sucks too. He's cut funding in many places where we need funding now more than ever. He's given tax cuts to the wealthiest of Americans. Trickle down economics is a myth that has never really worked.

Kerry may be a bad president, but Bush is horrible. We need a change in political ideas in the oval office.