Anything Forums

Do you plan on watching the Pesidential debates, and if so, who do you think will win? I think Kerry will win at getting his point across, and Bush will win at connecting with the audience, and if that happens, Bush will benefit the most.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1076, old post ID:13017

I think the possibilities are great, but I imagine exactly what you said will most likely happen, and if so, Bush wins by easy margin. It's Bush's to lose at this point, I'm very interested to see his message face to face with Kerry and the VP debates.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1076, old post ID:13019

I was able to catch most of the first debate, and Kerry sure seemed more relaxed on stage then Bush did. Neither one of them really said anything unexpected.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1076, old post ID:13652

I watched it. It seemed to me like bush had a grand total of 2 things to say and just kept repeating them, or maybe I was just annoyed at at all the times bush kept repeating that wrong war, wrong place, wrong time bit. You could also see Bush getting tired as the debate wore on, if nothing by the shear length of the pauses he maybe while searching for the right words. Kerry never missed a beat though.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1076, old post ID:13655

I saw a just a small clip of the debate and looking at Kerry, that is not a man that I want to "lead the free world". He just doesnt look right as president.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1076, old post ID:13672

Kerry seemed to have more intelligent answers, while Bush was programmed to say two things: 1. Flip-Flop and 2.Wrong War, Wrong Time, Blah Blah Blah, Leaders won't respect you

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1076, old post ID:13673

Cicero wrote: I saw a just a small clip of the debate and looking at Kerry, that is not a man that I want to "lead the free world". He just doesnt look right as president.

Ahh, a well-informed voter at their absolute best. (Just a little side note, I don't know who it is, maybe Jefferson or Adams???, but look at a twenty dollar bill some time, I swear you give that guy shorter hair and he could be Kerry's twin )

Biased as I may be, I thought Kerry did a great job. He stuck to his guns and held his own with the President. Half the time the President looked very frustrated and annoyed on stage. Kerry actually had numbers and statistics and facts to back up most of the points he was making, while Bush for the most part just had his three or four empty phrases he kept repeating over and over. "It's hard work," "The world is a safer place," "America is safer because of it." It's all the same crap he's been saying ever since he realized he was wrong about Saddam and his WMD's and his ties to Al Qaida. Sure it might have been a "good" thing to do, but that doesn't mean the way he went about doing it was right.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1076, old post ID:13684

shenbaw wrote:

Cicero wrote: I saw a just a small clip of the debate and looking at Kerry, that is not a man that I want to "lead the free world". He just doesnt look right as president.

Ahh, a well-informed voter at their absolute best.

Biased as I may be, I thought Kerry did a great job. He stuck to his guns and held his own with the President. Half the time the President looked very frustrated and annoyed on stage. Kerry actually had numbers and statistics and facts to back up most of the points he was making, while Bush for the most part just had his three or four empty phrases he kept repeating over and over. "It's hard work," "The world is a safer place," "America is safer because of it." It's all the same crap he's been saying ever since he realized he was wrong about Saddam and his WMD's and his ties to Al Qaida. Sure it might have been a "good" thing to do, but that doesn't mean the way he went about doing it was right.

A good post and you covered pretty much everything I was gonna say...
Bush is full of good sounding phrases. When we wasn't talking he did look put off and annoyed (even rolled his eyes a couple of times) that doesn't bode well for him. And of course today he's out saying that Kerry wants us to pass some sort of global test before we can defend ourselves. Once again a twisted and misconstrued comment. What Kerry meant (for those who didn't hear it) was that we have a responsibility to the world to tell the truth and to go about things in a more global fashion when it comes to Global politics.(end ex) Let's face it people Iraq was MORE of a threat to the Eropean nations than they were to us. Yet we attacked them ALMOST alone. hummmmm...

"Go get the universal remonster.. he knows how to do it"(german acent) -Oglethorp (Plutonian)


Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1076, old post ID:13685

shenbaw wrote: It's all the same crap he's been saying ever since he realized he was wrong about Saddam and his WMD's and his ties to Al Qaida. Sure it might have been a "good" thing to do, but that doesn't mean the way he went about doing it was right.

Incidentally, another thing I hate about the guy is neither he or any of his cronies have the ability to admit fallability. The Pres. has yet to admit one mistake he has ever made and directly following the debates, even his head strategist when asked

"How well do you think the President responded to Kerry's accusations that he's made several critical mistakes in Iraq?" (not exact wording, but something to that effect)

The guy responded with "I think he responded very well. You know the President has always acknowledged that he's made... that mistakes could be made when we're faced with difficult decisions as he has been." (again not exact wording, but pretty close)

He stopped mid-sentence to avoid saying the President has made mistakes. Everything is a play on words with these people. Very carefully tip-toeing through the sludge in order not to all-out lie to the American public, but at the same time not being very honest or candid either.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1076, old post ID:13687

shenbaw wrote:

shenbaw wrote: It's all the same crap he's been saying ever since he realized he was wrong about Saddam and his WMD's and his ties to Al Qaida. Sure it might have been a "good" thing to do, but that doesn't mean the way he went about doing it was right.

Incidentally, another thing I hate about the guy is neither he or any of his cronies have the ability to admit fallability. The Pres. has yet to admit one mistake he has ever made...

Everything is a play on words with these people. Very carefully tip-toeing through the sludge in order not to all-out lie to the American public, but at the same time not being very honest or candid either.

I missed the last 30 minutes (but I taped it), but by the end of the first hour, it was hard to sit still and watch them. Kerry missed some opportunities to defend himself against some of the attacks, only because he concentrated to other point, I think that may cost him a little, but other than that, Bush seemed to have very little to say. I have to wonder where this nation is headed, we we're so much better off 4 years ago, if this is better, maybe I should move I obviously favor Kerry, and I think personally that he did a much better job, but I don't think this helped either of them with the masses too much, nothing spectacular happened. (Unless there was something in that last half hour! )

I saw a just a small clip of the debate and looking at Kerry, that is not a man that I want to "lead the free world". He just doesnt look right as president.

Ahh, a well-informed voter at their absolute best. (Just a little side note, I don't know who it is, maybe Jefferson or Adams???, but look at a twenty dollar bill some time, I swear you give that guy shorter hair and he could be Kerry's twin )

Yeah, Kerry looks like all of the great, hard working presidents of our past. That sounds like an opinion, no offense Cicero, of someone who knows-not what they speak of.

The guy responded with "I think he responded very well. You know the President has always acknowledged that he's made... that mistakes could be made when we're faced with difficult decisions as he has been." (again not exact wording, but pretty close)

To that I would say, you have control of most of your choices by the situations you put yourself into, it's no excuse to say that the decisions were hard, and the bar should be lowered because of that. My Cal II test were hard, but if I failed them I don't pass. If I didn't study till the night before, still my fault, I should have been better prepared. Sure, the Prez has had some decisions that don't fall into this catagory, but a large majority do, and if he had worked harder beforehand, the choices later would have been better for everyone, esp. the American people.



Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1076, old post ID:13689

Kerry won this one, he looked like he knew what he was doing and focused on doing it. Bush IMO looked tired and pissed off. Does this change anything probably not.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1076, old post ID:13738

I didn't watch it but saw a quick preview on Global news. They were saying there were just as much Canadians watching the debate as there was watching our elections. Sad, really.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1076, old post ID:13745

Cicero wrote: I saw a just a small clip of the debate and looking at Kerry, that is not a man that I want to "lead the free world". He just doesnt look right as president.

I was actually thinking earlier today that the debate was the first time I actually thought Kerry looked presidential. Not that I want him to win, but I hate to think of what the debate would have been like if Dean had been up there.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1076, old post ID:13753

Bookworm wrote: I hate to think of what the debate would have been like if Dean had been up there.

Oh man, now imagine another reality where McCain won, and is facing Dean right now! YYEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWWW!!!!!!!!!

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1076, old post ID:13778

do the debates really matter? seriously?

the questions and answers are scripted, and we all know that...even if the candidates don't know the questions beforehand as it was stated, the candidates know the questions.

very, very, very few people will change their minds from the debates, and i don't buy for a second that the debates are important in any manner or form.

once the other parties are invited to join in on the debates, then that will be a different story, but can anyone honestly say that after watching the debate that kerry or bush are really any different?

the debates are useless because of the childish amount of rules and cautiousness each party demands in the debates. they're no longer debates, but rather free opportunities to launch 2 minute and 90 second campaign ads.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1076, old post ID:13875

That's dumb that they are like that. Not like any debates I've been to here. no one knows the questions, and while there's some rules, it's not too restrictive. Most of the questions are asked by citizens. At least that goes for municipal debates, I've never been to federal which I assume is different.

I think Bush is going to make it though. I sort of have a mixed opinion about him. Sure he screwed up at some point, but anyone else would of too.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1076, old post ID:14044

No one told the candidates the questions, but EVERYBODY knew what the questions were going to be about (Iraq, terror, blah blah blah). I'm still surprised that Bush wasn't better prepared.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1076, old post ID:14048

sintekk wrote: No one told the candidates the questions, but EVERYBODY knew what the questions were going to be about (Iraq, terror, blah blah blah). I'm still surprised that Bush wasn't better prepared.

I think one of the reasons for the debates is to see how the candidates react to things. This reason would be better served without so many restrictions. Even with the restrictions and the foreknowledge of the topics, Bush did a poor job controlling his facial expressions. I expect he'll be coached extensively in that area.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1076, old post ID:14059

While fragged has a point, the reality is we live in a society where the debates do matter in their current form. If the public were better educated on the matters at hand, none of the things the candadates said at the debates would have mattered, it's all old news. However, a larger portion of society than I would like has no idea the details of many of these subjects, so these things do matter to them. Other than that, it's like the economy, a large portion is 'consumer confidence'.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1076, old post ID:14060

I didn't see it but I did hear bush did a bad job. Hopefully people won't base themselves soley on that though, but if they're smart they won't.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1076, old post ID:14084

As far as the war in Iraq goes, Bush said it's hard work (3 or 4 times) and we need to stay resolute, but is that a solution? Kerry said he would work on getting other countries to help us, but is that realistic? I just found out my brother-in-law is getting called back to Iraq, and I'm not sure either candidate can get the soldiers home soon.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1076, old post ID:14088

Bookworm wrote: Kerry said he would work on getting other countries to help us, but is that realistic?

It's much less realistic now than it was 2 years ago when we were planning the war, the effort wasn't made then to make it a global effort, it was our way or no way. That has consequences. We didn't make all the effort we could before sending our troops into battle, we made half-assed efforts coated with half-truths. So no, it's not all that realistic to say Kerry will get more nations, that chance is already blown, but with this track record, it can't be that hard to do better than Bush. 33 nations started in that coalition, 3 started in this one. Now I believe there are 30, but their contributions are extremely small overall, mostly training.



Did anyone watch the VP debates?
I though Cheney did a much better job with Edwards than Bush did with Kerry.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1076, old post ID:14275

Cheney did a good job of making himself look "less meniacle" that normal. He kept that "Crazy light" out of his eye.. though I saw it peek through from time to time. as we all well know from Jon Stewart.. he's a cyborg.

Edwards acted the way I expected him to. He repeated the points that were important and left the garbage for what it was. A trial lawyer to the end. but, a good man.

I wish I could have caught the end of the debate unfortunatly I missed it so if anything happened in the last 15-20 mins of the debate... eh



Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1076, old post ID:14284

FloodG8-9595 wrote: Cheney did a good job of making himself look "less meniacle" that normal. He kept that "Crazy light" out of his eye.. though I saw it peek through from time to time. as we all well know from Jon Stewart.. he's a cyborg.

This paragraph made me think of this:
http://www.onlisareinsradar.com/archives/002143.php



Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1076, old post ID:14387

I thought Edwards did a better job of responding to the specific statements made by Cheney. Cheny argued at times against the "Democratic position" but wasn't as quick on his feet to challenge what was said thirty seconds ago. All in all, I felt it was more similar to a weekend news forum than a spirited debate, but I was helping kids with homework at the same time, so I missed some parts.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1076, old post ID:14392