View Full Version : So, who won the Debate?
Shacopate
09-30-2004, 03:16 AM
Yeah, I know, it's on thursday night. Any predictions?
Shacopate
10-01-2004, 01:59 AM
So far,
ABC News sampled 531 registered voters on who won the debate: Kerry 45% Bush 36%. Independents had Kerry the winner by 20%. ABC bottom line: Kerry wins debate, but not new support.
CBS (I could find no poll) But the website says that "experts" rate the debate a draw.
NBC poll (650,000 responses so far) Kerry won 69%, Bush won 31%.
does this look like a winner to you?
http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20041001/i/r3502183990.jpg
superfecta
10-01-2004, 02:43 AM
I thought the prez won IF you listened to what was said,not how it was said.Kerry actually agreed on the WMDs in Iraq,which I don't think he realized when he said it.I think its shaping up to be a major victory for Bush if he doesn't F it up,which runs in the family.
Shacopate
10-01-2004, 02:56 AM
Found some more,
CNN: Kerry won 46%, Bush won 37%
CBS: Kerry won 44%, Bush won 26%
Equineer
10-01-2004, 03:51 AM
I was quite surprised that Bush was not nearly as appealing and effective as he was four years ago versus Gore. Substance rarely prevails over style, but Bush faltered on both counts tonight... and the network polls after the debate, declaring Kerry the winner will be the focus of tomorrow's media circus.
Shacopate
10-01-2004, 04:05 AM
As an undecided voter, I found this debate quite interesting. I should also note that 4 votes for "Bush clearly won" happened before the actual debate. That's my fault. I should not have put the poll up so early.
Ljb,
Something bit him in the ole' arse
http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20041001/i/r3502183990.jpg
Kerry the clear winner. Bush actually did better than I expected, but could not make his case other than " I am the sitting president, and I know what's good for the nation."
Kerry looked and sounded as presidentail as bush. Gonna be close come November.
This will not play well in middle america. Another shot of the preznit looking preznitdential....
http://americablog.blogspot.com/bush%20smirk.jpg
Latin Qtr
10-01-2004, 08:34 AM
That debate was great. It was 50-50 until Pres. Bush said I went
into Iraq after "they attacked us on 9/11" and then Kerry said
that Osama attacked us not Husseim. Then I think Sen. Kerry
won me over.
sq764
10-01-2004, 09:51 AM
I voted that Kerry won in a photo.. I am obviously a Bush supporter and I don't think neutrally speaking, Kerry won anything.. I think it was a morale victory that he wasn't disastrous on the podium.. I think he just delayed the inevitable last night..
If he would have bombed I think that would have been the coffin closing.. He's got a slight ray of light going now.
BetHorses!
10-01-2004, 10:00 AM
I am voting for Bush but Kerry won last night. Kerry proved he knew all the issues and Bush looked uncomfortable and was defensive most of the night.
We all like past performances and Kerry's show that he's a closer. He's always been behind in polls and comes on strong at the end. So this election is not over even though the polls indicate Bush has a big lead. You have Bush haters and Kerry haters who will not change but Undecided voters will determine this and I think Kerry won more than Bush last night.
sq764
10-01-2004, 10:21 AM
Anyone catch the comment made by Kerry when he said "When we attacked Iraq, there was only one building we protected, which was the oil building. All the while they could have been searching other building for possible Weapons of Mass Destruction information"
Um, he says there were no WMD in Iraq, yet we should have been searching for possible WMD information?? Um, uh, huh??
GameTheory
10-01-2004, 10:32 AM
He was also implying we were just there to steal the oil, when of course we guarded the oil so Saddam wouldn't light all the tanks on fire like he did last time.
sq764
10-01-2004, 10:37 AM
Oh, and that's fine.. But if there were no WMD, why would there be any need to go search for WMD information?
Maybe he should be looking for information on where bin laden actually is.. That was a bit of a goof, but I can see how you can mix up Pakistan and Afghanistan.. you know, the 'stan' parts match..
Ljb, Hcap......see, this is why YOU guys are so pathertic. YOU are influnced by things like this. I could find a photo of picking his nose if I looked hard enough. It would be easier to find than a shred of truth in Kerry's answers, though.
"global test" is the bottom line for Kerry. Those words are the Kerry Doctrine. He will destroy this nation is we allow him to win the election.
I have faith that more Americans are smarter than you two and will vote based on issue srather than photos.
But then you two live in a cortoon world.
Your national anthem must be.....
http://www.barbneal.com/looney.asp
I see you have yourselves and two other posters on your flag as well.
ceejay
10-01-2004, 11:40 AM
Originally posted by Shacopate
As an undecided voter, I found this debate quite interesting.
Wow, you're one of those 8 undecided voters!:D
Lefty
10-01-2004, 11:57 AM
Kerry won on style Bush won on passion, conviction and substance. Of course he was on the defensive, it's his policies that Kerry is attacking. Since Kerry has so many positions it's harder to pin him dn. Kerry has one thing on his mind, casmpaigning. Bush has the wght of the world on his mind. Of course he looked tired! On one hand Kerry talked about the money spent on Iraq could have been spent here at home. A few minutes later he's accusing Bush of not spending enough.
He has no substance.
Equineer
10-01-2004, 12:42 PM
Originally posted by sq764
Oh, and that's fine.. But if there were no WMD, why would there be any need to go search for WMD information?
Maybe he should be looking for information on where bin laden actually is.. That was a bit of a goof, but I can see how you can mix up Pakistan and Afghanistan.. you know, the 'stan' parts match.. Your first issue is a reference to Kerry's statement about our choice to protect the Iraqi Oil Ministry Building while other Iraqi ministry buildings, national banks, and museums were being looted. In other words, we protected oil records while repositories for military intelligence data and other Iraqi assets were not protected.
With respect to chasing bin Laden, Kerry referenced the specific Afghan/Pakistani border region where our intelligence led us to believe bin Laden was hiding and should have been pursued... since our troops have never had authority to enter Pakistan as part of a combat engagement, the idea was to catch bin Laden in the Tora Bora mountains before he reached Pakistan... however, we delegated this task to a couple of questionable Afghan warlords.
All this was reported when it happened... you may have been on vacation and missed it.
sq764
10-01-2004, 12:49 PM
you're fat
chickenhead
10-01-2004, 12:50 PM
maybe i am being too generous with Kerry, but his comment about guarding the oil ministry did not hit me as an insinuation that we went to Iraq to steal oil....it struck me as a comment about how it must have looked to a lot of Iraqis...that the best way to alay the fear of Iraqis that we'd come to steal their oil was not to guard ONLY the Oil Ministry.
sq764
10-01-2004, 12:58 PM
Trying to regain trust and alliances, as he says, is the main goal..
How can you regain alliances when you call our biggest ally a puppet, our next 2 biggest allies 'bribed and coerced', and basically calling Poland and other smaller contributers worthless??
What section of the debate team book is that in??
from sq764
Maybe he should be looking for information on where bin laden actually is.. That was a bit of a goof, but I can see how you can mix up Pakistan and Afghanistan.. you know, the 'stan' parts match..
And what parts did Bush confuse? There is no 'stan' in Iraq!
Lefty
10-01-2004, 01:05 PM
Kerry lost this debate on substance before it even started. There's no way to square voting for the war and supporting the war when campaigning against Dean and the others and then when Dean gets traction as the anti-war candidate then Kerry becomes anti-war too. He voted for the war and if people actually use their heads, he can't win just on that alone.
sq764
10-01-2004, 01:09 PM
LJB, so you are saying that Bush went into Iraq to hunt for bin laden?
You know this is absolutely a stupid insinuation.. Try again.
Equineer
10-01-2004, 01:09 PM
Originally posted by sq764
you're fat LOL - Actually, not... well, maybe a few pounds overweight. Mainly, that old "fat" exchange was a convenient bridge to the Hitler look-alike hairdo favored by a Final Solution fanatic.
IMHO, your fat predjudice shouldn't bother anyone to the point of distraction from larger issues. :)
sq764
10-01-2004, 01:15 PM
I don't have a fat prejudice, it was a joke..
I have a prejudice against scum, which is why you and I don't seem to get along.
Secretariat
10-01-2004, 01:17 PM
Using one of Mr. Bush's words...It was a "vociferous" annihilation.
I must I was surpised..not so much by Kerry's performance because that's what I'm used to seeing, but Bush's performance was horrible.
Posturing, slogans, faces, pauses, without substance, inaccuracies, hesitance, very ill prepared and I hate to say it, he just did not appear too bright. I actually felt a little sorry for the guy. He seemed like the local political pundit from the bar who was in the ring with a champ.
It seemed he said three things over and over...we're working hard...it's tough..we're making progress...
kenwoodallpromos
10-01-2004, 01:27 PM
Kerry won by a nose.
The resonses to this thread from Bush supporters show realism; the responses from the libs here show why I used to be Democrat; am mostly 3rd party; do not like the liberalists' style anymore; and agree more with Bush supporters on Bush Vs. Kerry.
The difference between Bush's America First and Kerry's Global Acceptance was pretty clear and Demos still looked a little skiddish to do much without the OK from the U.N. and other countries.
I think Bush will keep his lead overall and maybe expand it in central and some southern states. Ca is safe for Kerry.
The post-debate was won by the twins as usual. Lol.
sq764
10-01-2004, 03:00 PM
Sec, how sorry will you feel for the poor schmuck who loses to this ill-prepared, hesitant moron??
Secretariat
10-01-2004, 03:31 PM
SQ,
Well, I have no idea who is going to win. But if Bush wins, I will be sorry for America, particularly for our soliders and familes who will suffer the lion share of the consequences of blind stubborness.
My brother-in-law reminds me of Bush. He's always right no matter what, AND he speaks on a sixth grade level as the Princeton Review said in their critique of Bush's debate performance.
sq764
10-01-2004, 03:34 PM
I guess Ivy League schools need to re-evaluate their curriculum then..
Originally posted by Secretariat
SQ,
Well, I have no idea who is going to win. But if Bush wins, I will be sorry for America, particularly for our soliders and familes who will suffer the lion share of the consequences of blind stubborness.
Why is it the libs seems so concerned and feel sorry for the military, but you don't hear the military people complain? Hmmmmmmm.....
delayjf
10-01-2004, 05:15 PM
Does anyone think Jane Fonda or Michael Moore gives a damn if ANY American service man/woman dies over there. They pretend to care only for political reasons.
Buckeye
10-01-2004, 05:28 PM
The soldiers themselves are in a sense not important, whereas the strategic interests of this country are. Noble and worthy were the words Bush used to decribe the death of a U.S. soldier for the cause of defending us, and yes, "worth it"
Not only is the President sincere, he is correct.
Buckeye
10-01-2004, 05:35 PM
I found it very interesting to listen to a post debate call-in discussion about who won the debate. It seems the majority of the callers had absolutely no idea what had actually been said! They heard and saw what they wanted. So I seriously question the effect this debate or the ones to follow will have on this election.
sq764
10-01-2004, 05:48 PM
And the sad part is there really wasn't anything new said during the debate by either one of them, just reiteration..
So if you don't know what was said now, you really don't know what was being said for months now..
Lefty
10-01-2004, 10:34 PM
sec, you still support a guy who said out loud for over 60 million viewers to hear that America must pass a Global test? To me it's incredible how you guys want to put the world first and America 2nd.
GameTheory
10-01-2004, 11:36 PM
That debate won't change any minds of people who actually know about the foreign policy issues in any detail. But most people in this country probably have no idea. For instance, I'm quite sure the vast majority of people do not have a strong conviction about whether we should have bipartisan talks with N. Korea or not. I'm sure many people were asking themselves, "What is the Sudan?" So much of the argument will have been won on those issues by who people thought sounded better, even if they didn't know what they were really saying.
I'm wondering about all these so-called "undecided voters". If you are realy undecided at this point, isn't the most likely result that you won't bother to go vote at all? Are undecided voters all people who promise to vote for someone, but just don't know who? It could be that the undecideds are actually irrelevant (to the outcome) because they aren't going to show up anyway...
Secretariat
10-02-2004, 12:20 AM
Originally posted by Lefty
sec, you still support a guy who said out loud for over 60 million viewers to hear that America must pass a Global test? To me it's incredible how you guys want to put the world first and America 2nd.
Of course I want a man who is only going to enter a pre-emptive war when the threat is "imminent" and all other options have been exhausted. GW failed to do that. He selected to go to war with Iraq. He made that call. His own CIA director Tenet told him that Iraq was not an imminent threat. Bush admitted later to Congress he never said the word imminent. How much clearer does it need to be?
GameTheory
10-02-2004, 12:42 AM
Originally posted by Secretariat
Of course I want a man who is only going to enter a pre-emptive war when the threat is "imminent" and all other options have been exhausted. GW failed to do that. He selected to go to war with Iraq. He made that call. His own CIA director Tenet told him that Iraq was not an imminent threat. Bush admitted later to Congress he never said the word imminent. How much clearer does it need to be? What does that have to do with the question? You get the feeling from Kerry that even if everyone (in the U.S.) agreed there was an imminent threat, he wouldn't act unless France and Germany approved. That is what people are worried about.
What is the difference between an imminent threat and a growing threat?
December 6, 1940 - Japan was a growing threat.
December 7, 1940 - Japan was an imminent threat.
Bush never said Iraq was an imminnet threat before the war. He said he wanted to act before it became an imminent threat, so his "admitting" he never said it is, of course, a no brainer. Did congress THINK he said imminent?
When you live history as it happens, not as you rewrite it, theses things are so clear.:D
I find it interesting that all day long, I have heard about Bush's posturem his expressions, his body language, his smaller looking image in the split screen, Kerry's presidential look, Bush's lack of ease at public speaking....everything in the world except WHAT THE HELL WAS SAID!
Kerry said the two key words - "Global Test!" This translates into "America Second!"
This man is dangerous. We cannot allow this slimeball anywhere near the White House.
JustRalph
10-02-2004, 01:44 AM
right on Tom.
I am taking a little vacation........the wife and I are getting on the Motorcycle and riding until we get tired, for a couple of days.....depending on the weather...........
Keep em on their toes in here!
From cj
Why is it the libs seems so concerned and feel sorry for the military, but you don't hear the military people complain? Hmmmmmmm.....
Last week on CNN a reporter in Iraq said. "The soldiers on the ground wont talk to us on camera. Off camera they say they would get in big trouble if they said what they really think."
And I have heard complaints from military people first hand.
PaceAdvantage
10-02-2004, 05:42 AM
Originally posted by Secretariat
Using one of Mr. Bush's words...It was a "vociferous" annihilation.
I must I was surpised..not so much by Kerry's performance because that's what I'm used to seeing, but Bush's performance was horrible.
Posturing, slogans, faces, pauses, without substance, inaccuracies, hesitance, very ill prepared and I hate to say it, he just did not appear too bright. I actually felt a little sorry for the guy. He seemed like the local political pundit from the bar who was in the ring with a champ.
It seemed he said three things over and over...we're working hard...it's tough..we're making progress...
Ahh, the DNC talking points, complete with photos....
You guys are too predictable these days.
PaceAdvantage
10-02-2004, 05:45 AM
Originally posted by ljb
And I have heard complaints from military people first hand.
And we've heard first hand right here on this forum from lsbets. Do we simply discount these comments in favor of your first hand info? Who's right and who's "factually incorrect?"
From Tom,
Kerry said the two key words - "Global Test!" This translates into "America Second!"
And Bush's reliance on China controlling N. Korea is not a problem?
Do you want China deciding American foriegn policy?
From PA,
And we've heard first hand right here on this forum from lsbets. Do we simply discount these comments in favor of your first hand info? Who's right and who's "factually incorrect?"
You do whatever you want but I was face to face with the soldier I was talking to. It is the one who has been to both Iraq (two times) and Afghanistan.
PaceAdvantage
10-02-2004, 05:57 AM
Originally posted by ljb
You do whatever you want but I was face to face with the soldier I was talking to. It is the one who has been to both Iraq (two times) and Afghanistan.
Are you trying to imply that Lsbets is not what/who he says he is?
Interesting spin....
IN 2000, BUSH CAMPAIGN ON SIGHS AT THE DEBATE: "(Gore) brought in a debate coach who is apparently working on trying to correct the sighs and the eye-rolling and the condescending tone," said Bush spokeswoman Karen Hughes. "But I expect that over the course of 90 minutes in a high-pressure situation, the real person tends to come out." [Boston Herald, 10/11/00]
LAST NIGHT, BUSH CAMPAIGN ON PRESIDENT BUSH’S SCOWLS: “On his face, you could see his irritation at the senator’s misrepresentations…He was answering the senator with his face,” said Bush confidante Karen Hughes. [Washington Post, 10/1.2004]
sq764
10-02-2004, 09:45 AM
LJB,
"Kerry said the two key words - "Global Test!" This translates into "America Second!"
And Bush's reliance on China controlling N. Korea is not a problem?
Do you want China deciding American foriegn policy?"
Your diversion skills are not very good. If you are trying to avoid a question, answering it immediately with a jab at the other side is not the way to do it. It's implied that you acknowledge the first point is true.. But at least you are watching..
Originally posted by ljb
From cj
Why is it the libs seems so concerned and feel sorry for the military, but you don't hear the military people complain? Hmmmmmmm.....
Last week on CNN a reporter in Iraq said. "The soldiers on the ground wont talk to us on camera. Off camera they say they would get in big trouble if they said what they really think."
And I have heard complaints from military people first hand.
As I've said before, you could always find some complainers in any unit in the military. That said, the vast majority of those who have been to Iraq or Afghanistan are very supportive of the war, and most want to go back if given the oppurtunity.
I would be shocked if the military vote isn't overwhelmingly for President Bush. What further proof would you need?
sq764
10-02-2004, 10:38 AM
That would be very interesting to see if you could isolate the military vote and see who they went with.
From PA
quote:Originally posted by ljb
You do whatever you want but I was face to face with the soldier I was talking to. It is the one who has been to both Iraq (two times) and Afghanistan.
Are you trying to imply that Lsbets is not what/who he says he is?
This sounds like a question from a troll. Are you trying to bait me?
I have no idea what lsbets is or is not. I assume he has some rank in the military and is in Iraq. If I am wrong, I will accept correction.
sq764
You are getting closer. My response to Tom was intended to inquire as to why he fears Kerry seeking assistance from our world allies yet overlooks Bush's seeking assistance from China.
To me it appears both are taking similiar actions. Just one is wheeling and dealing with the largest communist country in the world. Politics makes strange bedfellows don't you think?
On the Ljb topic:
1. China is not dictating policy - they are assisting in negotiations with a country close to their borders, so I would assume they have a wee bit on an interest in the outcome. L, you gotta look deeper into the real world...it is not always A or B Kerry's global test is what you are talking about - seeking permission to hit back.
2. I would be very suspicious of what any person who knows Ljb in real life has to say about any topic. Like CJ says, you can find mal contents in any organiztion. But if Ljb thinks soldiers are unhappy now, just what do you think they will be like taking ordres from a smelly french captain????
3. Don't you have people to annoy ont he phone?
sq764
10-02-2004, 10:53 AM
I loved Kerry's comment during hte debate "I recently ran into 2 soldiers who said "we need you""
What about the other 74 soldiers that said "We would like to kick the living shit out of you, you tree hugging Fonda loving coward"
Originally posted by sq764
That would be very interesting to see if you could isolate the military vote and see who they went with.
Trust me, I'm quite sure I've talked to a couple more military people than ljb, from the newest Airman up threw high ranking officers, and its at least 80-20% for the President. This includes a high number of people from my former unit that spend at least 6 months of every year since 9-11 in Afghanistan, Jordan, or Iraq.
cj,
you have just contradicted yourself. First you said " Why is it the libs seems so concerned and feel sorry for the military, but you don't hear the military people complain? Hmmmmmmm..... "
And then you said " As I've said before, you could always find some complainers in any unit in the military. "
Now then which is it?
Secondly, I have heard the rank and file of the military are split close to the same as the civilians about 50-50.
Tom,
You have an over active imagination. Are you taking any medications for that? Or maybe you have just watched to much faux news and can now be classified as you know what. ;)
Originally posted by ljb
cj,
you have just contradicted yourself. First you said " Why is it the libs seems so concerned and feel sorry for the military, but you don't hear the military people complain? Hmmmmmmm..... "
And then you said " As I've said before, you could always find some complainers in any unit in the military. "
Now then which is it?
Secondly, I have heard the rank and file of the military are split close to the same as the civilians about 50-50.
Some complain, of course. But, you have to look very deep to find those few. I should have said "the majority of the military," I stand corrected.
On the second point, you have heard wrong, of that I am positive. I also work with many American civilians, and the split is even more in favor of the President.
Originally posted by ljb
Tom,
You have an over active imagination. Are you taking any medications for that? Or maybe you have just watched to much faux news and can now be classified as you know what. ;)
I am honored you are now stealing quotes from ME!
I mentioned the meds the other day and now you have adopted it.
Keep imitating me, L,,,,it will lead you to salvation.
Now, have a glass of Kool Aid...it will settle your stomache.:rolleyes:
Sorry Tom,
But I had mentioned meds to both you and Lefty way back when it was just amazin and me fighting the circle jerk of rightys here abouts.
I also used salvation a couple of days ago in a note to you.
I am going to use another one of my originals right now.
The other night when watching the debates I had a hard time understanding why Bush was stuttering and sputtering and hitting his hand on the podium. I just realised he was being "bit in the arse by the truth and it was stinging" :D :D :D
ljb,
Come on in the War Room, relieve some anxiety, play some horses. This is a horse racing board, in case you were wondering!
Originally posted by cj
ljb,
Come on in the War Room, relieve some anxiety, play some horses. This is a horse racing board, in case you were wondering!
All this time he thought it was a horse's arse board!:D
PaceAdvantage
10-02-2004, 11:49 PM
Originally posted by ljb
This sounds like a question from a troll. Are you trying to bait me?
Only difference here is that I am not a troll...this we know.
All I was asking was what you were trying to imply by your "face-to-face" comment. If you wish to avoid another direct question, that's fine.
Shacopate
10-03-2004, 03:08 AM
The next debate is town hall type, questions from the audience. Here are 2 questions I would like to be asked, one for each candidate.
1. Senator Kerry, you said that you voted against the 87 Billion $ supplement as a "protest vote". Are you saying that your politics are more important than giving the troops the protection they need to fight this war?
2. President Bush, your father, in his book said that he didn't go into Baghdad during the Gulf War because there was "no viable exit strategy, and that we would be seen as occupiers in bitterly hostile land." Was he right or wrong in his assessment?
Shacopate,
I like the questions you have suggested.
Lefty
10-03-2004, 11:50 AM
Sen Kerry, "if it's the wrong war at the wrong time," Why did you vote for it?
SenKerry, "By raising taxes on the so-called rich, don't you realize that means raising taxes on small business and will cause loss of jobs and therefore it becomes a tax raise on the middle class and the poor?"
sq764
10-03-2004, 12:14 PM
"Sen Kerry, does looking like Lerch enhance your chances or hurt them?"
Senator Kerry, if this is the wrong war at the wrong time, and it merely a diversion, why would other nations not already committed to helping us be willing to go into Iraq now?
Follow up question: What strategy will YOU use in Iraq that is different from what we are doing right now?
Senator Kerry, in the first debate, you ignored a direct question in favor of a cute sound byte the DNC could use in commercial. This time, please answer the question as asked and not avoid it: How do you explain voting for the $87 Billion dolloars and then voting against it? Did you cast two votes in the senate, in violation of the rules, or are you just unaware of what it was you used to do in the senate? (Hint: just days before the debate, you said in an interview that when you said that, you had been up for long hours and were tired that late at night, and probably mis-spoke. However, you made the statement close to noon, not late at night. So the follow up question would be, after 30 some years of not knowing what day it was in Cambodia, or Vitenam - you also did not what country you were in - are you still walking around not knowing what time of day it is?
And a follow up to THAT question, do you, today, know what country you are in?
Senator Kerry, you mentioned 30-35 nations more of a threat to the US in term of nuclear weapons...please name 10 of them. And reveal your information sources on each.
Follow up: Is this information available to the White House?
JustRalph
10-03-2004, 12:49 PM
Senator Kerry..........did you ever serve in the Military?
Originally posted by JustRalph
Senator Kerry..........did you ever serve in the Military?
Follow up: Which side?
vBulletin® v3.8.9, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.