View Posts by Tag
View Posts by Month
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||
| 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |
| 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |
| 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 |
Powered By
« Pedestrian Perils | Main | The Vice-Presidential Debate »
Debate One: Immediate Reaction
Thu., September 30, 2004
I made sure I was drinking plenty of alcohol while watching the first presidential debate tonight to put myself in the mindset of those Americans who decide on who to vote for based on the debates. I also made a point to not pay too much attention to what was being said (or not said, as was more likely the case), since debates are about perception, not content. As such, I can offer the following observations, posted directly after the debate at 10:33 p.m., before the reaction and spin:
- Maybe it was just our nasty television or C-SPAN’s feed, but Kerry looked ashen/pasty while Bush appeared better lit and rosy. Hopefully it wasn’t as bad as the whole Nixon/Kennedy debate. Plus, it looked like Kerry had lightly rouged his cheeks. Bush still looks like a monkey.
- Bush seemed intent on breaking the rules of the debate with follow-up statements he wasn’t entitled to. Kerry should have started barging in like that instead of meekly raising his hand to Jim that one time like he was in second grade and had to use the lavatory.
- Kerry rarely looked directly into the camera when answering (except during his closing statement), as opposed to Bush, who did it constantly. You’re making eye contact with the American people, Kerry; learn it, use it, love it.
- Nice switcheroo with the whole language thing! The previously loquacious Kerry gets direct and concise (and less likely to be the sort of guy that uses words like “loquacious” and “concise”): “I’ll never take my eye off that ball,” “hunt and kill the terrorists,” etc. Meanwhile, Bush manages to sneak in “denigrate” and “vociferously” to his usual folksiness, and actually uses them correctly.
- Whose idea was this one? (I’m looking at you, Kerry’s handlers.) Kerry: “this president.” Bush: “my opponent.”
- Bush used the phrase “the American people” about 101 times. Unfortunately, so should have Kerry. Also: “I can make America safer.”
- Bush drank way too much water; too many nachos in the green room? And wasn’t it weird (or not, considering) how Bush’s water glass was shaped like a scotch glass, whereas Kerry’s was more like a stubby white wine glass. (Someone who knows glassware, help me out on this wording. I’m looking at you, Andrew.) Was this supposed to be symbolic of what type of man each candidate is? Is it a conspiracy? Do I need to go out and get some air?
- Kerry did a fairly good job at reining in that eerily toothy grin of his. But his closed mouth smile isn’t much better.
- Bush’s little anecdote about meeting the family of the killed soldier or whatever, where he dropped the name of the Mom, replete with requisite Enhanced Vocal Emotion and Head Semi-Lowered In Sadness. Please. Cut it out.
- Kerry should have had some more specific barbs directed at Bush, who certainly had plenty for Kerry, particularly the whole “The only thing consistent about my opponent’s position is that he’s inconsistent” and “mixed messages” thing. American voter: “I’m voting for Bush because Kerry is a flip-flopper.” American voter, you’re a fuckwit. All politicians sway the way the wind blows. Try picking up a newspaper and reading it. No, the front page, not Marmaduke.
- Jim Lehrer, you’re a weak little shill. Try upholding the debate’s rules next time. And try getting the guys to actually answer the questions.
Time for more alcohol.
Tags: Politics | Comments have been closed.
kerry looked ashen on the cspan tape but not on the reairing on nbc that i just caught a glimpse of. so, not to worry there. i thought kerry did a great job. he had many interesting points whereas bush just seemed to repeat the same thing over and over and over and over. his repititious bit about kerry saying that it is the wrong war and the wrong time just made him look like he had nothing else to say, which we all know is likely to be true. i'm sure his advisors told him to just go back to that if he got stumped. i like that after the final question kerry got the last word, restating that bush did not stay true to his promise to the american people about the need to take our troops to war in iraq. bush did not even have a comeback. i also like how kerry was able to emphasize that under bush's watch north korea has built up their program for weapons of mass destruction. that bush shifted his policy and essentially turned a blind eye to north korea's development nuclear weapons. bush had no rebuttle because what kerry said was absolutely true. bush screwed that one up in a big way. so, all in all i feel that kerry did a better job of explaining himself than he has thus far in his campaign and was probably (hopefully) able to put some doubt in the minds of the on the fence bush supporters. i am looking forward to hearing what my friends on "meet the press" have to say sunday morning! KERRY FOR PRESIDENT!!!
I’m not sure there was enough meat to the debate to swing voters, which is key to ejecting Bush. I agree with an article in today’s Miami Herald that “While both candidates hammered home familiar points in a closely contested debate, undecided voters may need to look to future encounters for defining moments.” A strategist quoted in the article points out:
“Kerry hit at Bush’s credibility, which was effective, but Bush never wavered from his themes,” Kendall said. She predicted that the debate will help each candidate energize his base, but may not make sharp inroads on undecided voters.
As for the war in Iraq, yeah, Bush fucked that up big-time, and the debate had plenty of finger-pointing. But so what? There’s a war going on; I want to know what the exit strategy is. Bush says he won’t bring the troops home until Iraq is stable enough to hold democratic elections. Kerry wants to fortify the ground effort with NATO forces and more soldiers. Neither solution is specific enough for me, and I’m not certain either would work or is such a great idea.
I agree something needs to be done about North Korea. That country and its unchecked nuke development scares the bejeezus out of me. But again, I’d have liked some specifics on how that will be dealt with.
I, too, felt Kerry was well-spoken and made good, succinct points, while Bush fumbled some of his words and seemed agitated. But that’s not going to be enough for all those people like the ones who called-in after the debate to say they were still voting Bush because Kerry’s a “flip-flopper,” as well as what I’m fairly certain are thousands of people exactly like this guy, quoted in an AP story today:
Henry Wenta, a distributor for a major beer company, was totally committed to Bush before the debate began and remained so after it was over. [...]
“ [....] Bush is friendly and speaking to us, not to [moderator Jim Lehrer]. Bush—I believe him, I believe everything he says. He still has my vote,” he said.