9/30/2004
The Debate.
First let me say I'm stunned. They actually talked about issues. It was amazing. Over a year of hot air, snide, crass, and smarmy remarks about crap that happened, or didn't thirty years ago.
For the record i describe myself as a moderate.
First the Pro's:
Bush, he made continued use of his campaigns label for Kerry of 'flip flop' without ever using the term. I do think he's closer to right on negotiating with North Korea on anti proliferation.
Kerry, was prepared, he stated decisively (as defined in politics) what his vision is for foreign policy. He clarified his positions. Was crisp, clear, and appeared confident.
The Con's:
Kerry: For the purpose of swaying the middle ground he probably should not have leaned so heavily on the UN walking stick.
Bush: Appeared defensive, his body language was very closed. He relied on the same several lines. Instead of answering several questions or rebutting the Jr Senator from Ma, he jumped back to "What kind of message", or one of the other canned Kerry Bashes.
Two more debates between these two, and one between the undercarders.
For the record i describe myself as a moderate.
First the Pro's:
Bush, he made continued use of his campaigns label for Kerry of 'flip flop' without ever using the term. I do think he's closer to right on negotiating with North Korea on anti proliferation.
Kerry, was prepared, he stated decisively (as defined in politics) what his vision is for foreign policy. He clarified his positions. Was crisp, clear, and appeared confident.
The Con's:
Kerry: For the purpose of swaying the middle ground he probably should not have leaned so heavily on the UN walking stick.
Bush: Appeared defensive, his body language was very closed. He relied on the same several lines. Instead of answering several questions or rebutting the Jr Senator from Ma, he jumped back to "What kind of message", or one of the other canned Kerry Bashes.
Two more debates between these two, and one between the undercarders.
