« Debate Preview | Home | Bush on Valium »
Bush Blew It
OK, obviously a first(ish) impression.
Kerry cruised. His answers were generally tight. I don’t know who decided on the two minute, 90 second format but it clearly favored Kerry who sounded concise while filling his time and Bush sounded lost at sea trying to fill the void.
Bush blew at least three rebuttal responses where he could have made much better points than he did but stuck to his script instead. Sure, I heard portions of the Kerry stump speech in there, but his rhetoric was simply better.
This debate keeps Kerry in it so strong Bush is now on very dangerous ground. It’s his election to lose and lose it he will.
Kerry kept his tone calm and focused; Bush sounded like the whiny defensive 80 lb. intellectual weakling he truly is.
About half an hour into the debate Bush nearly lost it. He began to sound very defensive, leaned over the podium too much and pounded his fist repeatedly, while also losing his train of thought over and over.
This is not one of those “Ha, Bush is dumb!” arguments. This is the heart of what a polticial debate is supposed to show us. It shows us a leader who dislikes being questioned. A man who cannot react to pressure in a logical or concise manner. A man who, frankly, is completely unfit to lead.
Kerry kept it together, kept it tight, and wiped the floor with Bush.
Way to go! Now we have ourselves an election.
Comments on “Bush Blew It”
Bob Thelen:
Wow, you watch that debate through rose colored glasses. Kerry just spouted the same "I disagree with you but will do the same thing if President" rhetoric he has done for weeks. Bush did a great job in stopping the spin and represented himself well.
October 1, 2004 01:35 AM
Bob Thelen:
"This is the heart of what a polticial debate is supposed to show us. It shows us a leader who dislikes being questioned. A man who cannot react to pressure in a logical or concise manner. A man who, frankly, is completely unfit to lead." Wow, where to start here. I really don’t know what debate you were watching but I am guessing you biases and hatred towards the President clouded your vision. In the previous paragraph you call the president an intellectual lightweight, then you come and say that you are not calling him stupid? Your flip-flops are almost worse than Kerry’s. Yes, Kerry is a polished debater. But he has to be to survive all that he has done in his career. He has appeased so many people while in the senate he has had to explain why he voted for something, then against it, then a couple years vote for it again. Bush is used to just telling it how it is. He doesn’t have to use all 90 seconds to tell his side of the story, but when he did, he sure didn’t fill it with fluff. Did John Kerry persuade even one-percent of Bush supporter to switch sides? I really doubt it. John Kerry has the burden of proof and he just doesn’t have the personality, the resources, or the voting record to prove to the American people that he will do better in Iraq or the War on Terror than the President.
Final small note: Kerry mentioned the necessity to separate the War from the Warrior, then why did he vote against the 78 million for body armor and Vehicle Armor? Seems like he voted against the Warrior in that sense. Lets not forget his vote on the B-2, B-1B, Bradley Fighting Vehicle, and Patriot Missile System.
October 1, 2004 01:53 AM
Rob Deters:
If one more sideways talker wants to point out that Kerry voted against weapon systems, I'm going to puke. Have you no clue how the legislative process works? Have you any idea how many of those systems were elected to be cut by CHENEY when he was in charge of the Department of Defense? You don't say "He didn't vote for something because he hates the troops," and get away with it. Well, you do because no one bothers to lay out how the underlying truth is far more complicated.
But then again, nuance and subtelty are not cherished part of the political process.
By the way, I'm not a Bush hater! I just think he's the worst president of all time. To hate him, I'd have to know him personally, I don't, I just think he's completely inept. That doesn't mean I hate him. It just means I think he's wrong.
On nearly everything.
October 1, 2004 11:41 AM
Bob Thelen:
"But then again, nuance and subtelty are not cherished part of the political process." Well, guess what, the soldiers in the field don’t have time for nuances and subtlety when they need body armor and vehicle improvements. Any waver on the issue is detrimental to the moral of the troops and Kerry’s flip-flop attitude is dangerous to our soldiers and the war on terror. Why don’t you check out www.kerryoniraq.com and see what John Kerry has said about the war in Iraq previous to the “Dean effect” in the primaries.
"By the way, I'm not a Bush hater! I just think he's the worst president of all time." Wow, that is a strong statement. The worst of all time? You are a voice that will be lost in history. Republicans thought FDR was a horrible president at the time. Democrats thought Reagan was the worst President of all time and lets not even think what the Democrats thought of Lincoln. It is not the job of the President to appease everyone. Bill Clinton tried to do this and where did it get us? Terrorists festered and grew under Clinton because he looked at polls instead of the issues. You can have your unfounded opinion now; just understand that in 30 years, the history books will speak of George W. Bush as a fearless president who started the war on terror and did not waiver, even when some lost there stomachs for it.
"...I'm going to puke.": Lets not forget Kerry voted to cut intelligence funding after the first world trade center bombing and was one of only a dozen senators to do so. Where is the nuance there?
October 1, 2004 02:21 PM