| Who do you think won the first Presidential debate? |
| President George W. Bush |
|
17% |
[ 3 ] |
| Senator John Kerry |
|
64% |
[ 11 ] |
| They were evenly matched |
|
17% |
[ 3 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 17 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
 Thu Sep 30, 2004 9:52 pm Who won the first debate? |
|
Who do you think won the first debate, why?
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Thu Sep 30, 2004 9:54 pm |
|
I am watching it from www.foxnews.com, (they have free streaming video if you missed it) and at the moment, Senator Kerry looks like he is pounding Bush at the moment. About half way through, we'll see how the rest goes.
|
|
|
Founder
Dominion Leader
Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 12755
Location: Gamma Quadrant
|
| Thu Sep 30, 2004 9:55 pm |
|
Why do people keep asking this? Debates aren't something you win per se. Both of them did well and conveyed their points nicely. Kerry was sometimes incosistent but other than that he did good.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Thu Sep 30, 2004 9:55 pm |
|
Alright:
1. Conveying of points: Kerry
2. Points: Bush
Overall debate: Tie. However, it may actually hurt Bush a bit in the short run--not much, but a bit. :O
Last edited by Republican_Man on Thu Sep 30, 2004 10:01 pm; edited 1 time in total
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Founder
Dominion Leader
Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 12755
Location: Gamma Quadrant
|
| Thu Sep 30, 2004 9:56 pm |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | Alright:
1. Conveying of points: Kerry
2. Points: Bush
Overall debate: Tie. However, it may actually hurt Bush a bit in the long run--not much, but a bit. :O |
I disagree. The President did well. He told it point blank while Kerry tried to jab at each issue.
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Thu Sep 30, 2004 9:57 pm |
|
All that Kerry jabbed at was Bush and how he screwed, or is screwing up. Kerry is looking pretty sharp. 
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Thu Sep 30, 2004 9:59 pm |
|
He was on both sides of Iraq, though, Kerry was.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Thu Sep 30, 2004 10:01 pm |
|
Either way, he is opening up alot of places that he thinks Bush is screwing up. People see that, they forget if someone is a flip-flop.
|
|
|
Arellia
The Quiet One
Joined: 23 Jan 2003
Posts: 4425
Location: Dallas, TX
|
| Thu Sep 30, 2004 10:46 pm |
|
| Founder wrote: | | Republican_Man wrote: | Alright:
1. Conveying of points: Kerry
2. Points: Bush
Overall debate: Tie. However, it may actually hurt Bush a bit in the long run--not much, but a bit. :O |
I disagree. The President did well. He told it point blank while Kerry tried to jab at each issue. |
Not really. Dissapointments: Not jumping on anti-war, NOT jumping on the body armor, and NOT going at it, gloves-off.
Bush made some good points. I think Kerry did badly, but that's only because I know personally that he did. Bush looked nervous to me. I say tie, as well.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Thu Sep 30, 2004 10:48 pm |
|
| Exalya wrote: | | Founder wrote: | | Republican_Man wrote: | Alright:
1. Conveying of points: Kerry
2. Points: Bush
Overall debate: Tie. However, it may actually hurt Bush a bit in the long run--not much, but a bit. :O |
I disagree. The President did well. He told it point blank while Kerry tried to jab at each issue. |
Not really. Dissapointments: Not jumping on anti-war, NOT jumping on the body armor, and NOT going at it, gloves-off.
Bush made some good points. I think Kerry did badly, but that's only because I know personally that he did. Bush looked nervous to me. I say tie, as well. |
I disagree with part of that. I don't think that Bush looked nervous so much as tired.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Arellia
The Quiet One
Joined: 23 Jan 2003
Posts: 4425
Location: Dallas, TX
|
| Thu Sep 30, 2004 10:49 pm |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: |
I disagree with part of that. I don't think that Bush looked nervous so much as tired. |
*shrugs* You could be right. He would obviously have good reason to be tired.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Thu Sep 30, 2004 10:50 pm |
|
| Exalya wrote: | | Republican_Man wrote: |
I disagree with part of that. I don't think that Bush looked nervous so much as tired. |
*shrugs* You could be right. He would obviously have good reason to be tired. |
Oh yes. Lot's of campaigning, lot's of speeches, lots of planning, and of course lots of Presidential work.
--EDIT--
Here's another way to put my belief:
Bush won on Substance, Kerry won on style.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Fri Oct 01, 2004 7:37 am |
|
I think Bush looked as though he was incredibly aggrivated with Senator Kerry, which he probably was. However, I don't think it came off making him look his best.
|
|
|
Arellia
The Quiet One
Joined: 23 Jan 2003
Posts: 4425
Location: Dallas, TX
|
| Fri Oct 01, 2004 11:01 am |
|
| JanewayIsHott wrote: | | I think Bush looked as though he was incredibly aggrivated with Senator Kerry, which he probably was. However, I don't think it came off making him look his best. |
He actually had the facial expressions of my father last night; I couldn't help laughing.  But yeah. The media isn't too thrilled with that. I don't think it was that bad, myself. He wasn't glaring or something like that. Kerry looked overly smug when Bush was speaking from my view, and I found that to be worse, but it could just be my opinion of Kerry at work there.
|
|
|
Toad
Chief of Security
Joined: 28 Aug 2003
Posts: 936
Location: The Great Plains
|
| Fri Oct 01, 2004 1:28 pm |
|
Kerry won on style, but guess what, Bush had substance. Substance is the only thing that really matters. If we elect a president based on how he answers a question and how he carries himself, then we deserve 4 bad years for America.
|
|
|
Jeremy
J's Guy
Joined: 03 Oct 2002
Posts: 7823
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
|
| Fri Oct 01, 2004 2:25 pm |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | | Exalya wrote: | | Founder wrote: | | Republican_Man wrote: | Alright:
1. Conveying of points: Kerry
2. Points: Bush
Overall debate: Tie. However, it may actually hurt Bush a bit in the long run--not much, but a bit. :O |
I disagree. The President did well. He told it point blank while Kerry tried to jab at each issue. |
Not really. Dissapointments: Not jumping on anti-war, NOT jumping on the body armor, and NOT going at it, gloves-off.
Bush made some good points. I think Kerry did badly, but that's only because I know personally that he did. Bush looked nervous to me. I say tie, as well. |
I disagree with part of that. I don't think that Bush looked nervous so much as tired. |
I heard from the reports that we had over here he was supposed to be very tired, but that earlier in the day he had been visiting the victims of the hurricanes in Florida. He was also supposed to have made quite a few repeating points, which some people say is his strength, and some a weakness. It was also basically on Iraq, which was interesting.
|
|
|
Angeldust
The Mob Queen
Joined: 28 Jul 2004
Posts: 6498
Location: In your most wonderful, screwed up dreams. :P
|
| Fri Oct 01, 2004 4:58 pm |
|
Yeah, sorry Conserves. Kerry wiped the floor with him.
-------signature-------
"You want to dance with the angels? Then embroider me with gold; and I will fly with the angels...and you can dance with me."
|
|
|
Arellia
The Quiet One
Joined: 23 Jan 2003
Posts: 4425
Location: Dallas, TX
|
| Fri Oct 01, 2004 5:25 pm |
|
| Angeldust wrote: | | Yeah, sorry Conserves. Kerry wiped the floor with him. |
I wouldn't say that. "I've had one consistant position on Iraq" ...? "Global Test"...? Bush isn't as good a debator, true. And Bush didn't jump on everything he could. But Kerry was in error with a good deal of what he said, regardless.
|
|
|
Kyre
Commodore
Joined: 15 Mar 2002
Posts: 1263
|
| Fri Oct 01, 2004 6:03 pm |
|
| Lt.CmdrWorf wrote: | | Kerry won on style, but guess what, Bush had substance. Substance is the only thing that really matters. If we elect a president based on how he answers a question and how he carries himself, then we deserve 4 bad years for America. |
Ask and yee shall receive. If substance is the only thing that matters, why are these debates even on the calendar?
|
|
|
Arellia
The Quiet One
Joined: 23 Jan 2003
Posts: 4425
Location: Dallas, TX
|
| Fri Oct 01, 2004 6:27 pm |
|
| Kyre wrote: |
Ask and yee shall receive. If substance is the only thing that matters, why are these debates even on the calendar? |
One wonders. The debates have very little outcome on the elections. The majority of people have made up their minds. And anyway, no one says much--or anything--that we haven't heard.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Fri Oct 01, 2004 7:55 pm |
|
| Exalya wrote: | | JanewayIsHott wrote: | | I think Bush looked as though he was incredibly aggrivated with Senator Kerry, which he probably was. However, I don't think it came off making him look his best. |
He actually had the facial expressions of my father last night; I couldn't help laughing. But yeah. The media isn't too thrilled with that. I don't think it was that bad, myself. He wasn't glaring or something like that. Kerry looked overly smug when Bush was speaking from my view, and I found that to be worse, but it could just be my opinion of Kerry at work there. |
Agreed, but I odn't think Bush's disgust with that idiot scumbag that should just shove it (I'm just following the lead of a certain First Lady candidate ) was really bad.
| Lt.CmdrWorf wrote: | | Kerry won on style, but guess what, Bush had substance. Substance is the only thing that really matters. If we elect a president based on how he answers a question and how he carries himself, then we deserve 4 bad years for America. |
Yes, and that's what I've been saying. EXACTLY. I've said that much today, especially, and was attacked by Liberals who say that Kerry won period.
| Jeremy wrote: | | Republican_Man wrote: | | Exalya wrote: | | Founder wrote: | | Republican_Man wrote: | Alright:
1. Conveying of points: Kerry
2. Points: Bush
Overall debate: Tie. However, it may actually hurt Bush a bit in the long run--not much, but a bit. :O |
I disagree. The President did well. He told it point blank while Kerry tried to jab at each issue. |
Not really. Dissapointments: Not jumping on anti-war, NOT jumping on the body armor, and NOT going at it, gloves-off.
Bush made some good points. I think Kerry did badly, but that's only because I know personally that he did. Bush looked nervous to me. I say tie, as well. |
I disagree with part of that. I don't think that Bush looked nervous so much as tired. |
I heard from the reports that we had over here he was supposed to be very tired, but that earlier in the day he had been visiting the victims of the hurricanes in Florida. He was also supposed to have made quite a few repeating points, which some people say is his strength, and some a weakness. It was also basically on Iraq, which was interesting. |
1. Yes, he repeated "hard work" around 15 times, literally.
2. It was much on Iraq because that is a KEY issue.
3. If he was visiting the Floridians, of course that would add to his being tired!
| Angeldust wrote: | | Yeah, sorry Conserves. Kerry wiped the floor with him. |
I laugh at that.
| Exalya wrote: | | Angeldust wrote: | | Yeah, sorry Conserves. Kerry wiped the floor with him. |
I wouldn't say that. "I've had one consistant position on Iraq" ...? "Global Test"...? Bush isn't as good a debator, true. And Bush didn't jump on everything he could. But Kerry was in error with a good deal of what he said, regardless. |
EXACTLY.
| Kyre wrote: | | Lt.CmdrWorf wrote: | | Kerry won on style, but guess what, Bush had substance. Substance is the only thing that really matters. If we elect a president based on how he answers a question and how he carries himself, then we deserve 4 bad years for America. |
Ask and yee shall receive. If substance is the only thing that matters, why are these debates even on the calendar? |
It's not ALL that matters, it's just what mostly matters. And my friend, the debates are for the expressing of views, which DEALS WITH SUBSTANCE.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Fri Oct 01, 2004 8:07 pm |
|
A few more things.
1. Bush: Substance Kerry: Style Overall: Draw
2. Kerry was on both sides of Iraq
3. Kerry attacked Bush for saying that he would have done the same decision knowing what we know now, when HE said that not too long ago, then opposed it, and on Tuesday on the Today Show with Diane Sawyer he said it "depends on the outcome." What if Lincoln had said that at Gettysburg? Huh?
4. Kerry argues for bilateral talks with North Korea(or "both," I'm not sure) and yet wanted multi-lateral efforts in Iraq. If we go bilateral, then China will be gone.
5. Global test? Come on! If I were President, I would defend my country first and formost.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Kyre
Commodore
Joined: 15 Mar 2002
Posts: 1263
|
| Sat Oct 02, 2004 8:45 am |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | | It's not ALL that matters, it's just what mostly matters. And my friend, the debates are for the expressing of views, which DEALS WITH SUBSTANCE. |
In reality, substance is all that matters. But we only get to realise its importance well after the elections have taken place. Elections are all about style, and that's it. Tony Blair promised the banning of fox hunting with dogs, in the run up to the 1997 General Election. He became Prime Minister, not solely due to that promise, but I digress. It is now 2004 and fox hunting with dogs is still legal.
It's all about style. Your problem is that you have yet to experience voting. We're both in the same boat. Although I am eligible to vote, the first oppertunity I had, about a year and a half ago, resulted in my being registered in the town I used to live in instead of the new town I was a citizen of. A few months ago I had yet another oppertunity to vote, but turned it down because I had yet again moved house, and decided it would be unfair to vote on style (I had no knowledge of the local area and it's elected politicians).
But if you ask people who have voted for the Conservatives, or Labour, they'll rant on about how they're not going to vote for them again. It's broken promises you see? People are sick of them. And then they tell you they can't vote for The Liberal Democrats because that's just a protest vote.
Maybe Democracy doesn't work. 
|
|
|
Jeff Miller
Fleet Admiral
Joined: 22 Nov 2001
Posts: 23947
Location: Mental Ward for the Mentaly Unstable 6th floor, Saint John's 1615 Delaware Longview Washington 98632
|
| Sat Oct 02, 2004 11:38 am |
|
I thought it was funny watching Bush's facial expressions
|
|
|
CJ Cregg
Commodore
Joined: 05 Oct 2002
Posts: 1254
|
| Sat Oct 02, 2004 1:06 pm |
|
| Kyre wrote: | | Elections are all about style, and that's it. Tony Blair promised the banning of fox hunting with dogs, in the run up to the 1997 General Election. He became Prime Minister, not solely due to that promise, but I digress. It is now 2004 and fox hunting with dogs is still legal. |
There have been several votes in the commons pushing this through but it keeps getting rejected by the unelected house of lords. Blame the lord not blair for it still being legal
|
|
|
|
Search
FAQ
Log in
