The W
Views: 99054386
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
19.9.14 2302
The W - Current Events & Politics - Debate Reaction Thread (Page 5)
This thread has 98 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Thread rated: 4.81
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
(1056 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (125 total)
OlFuzzyBastard
Knackwurst








Since: 28.4.02
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 8 days
Last activity: 3 hours
AIM:  
#81 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.13
(deleted by CRZ on 1.10.04 2210)
CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator








Since: 9.12.01
From: ミネアポリス

Since last post: 7 hours
Last activity: 7 hours
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#82 Posted on | Instant Rating: 9.07
(deleted by CRZ on 1.10.04 2210)
OlFuzzyBastard
Knackwurst








Since: 28.4.02
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 8 days
Last activity: 3 hours
AIM:  
#83 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.13
(deleted by CRZ on 1.10.04 2210)
CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator








Since: 9.12.01
From: ミネアポリス

Since last post: 7 hours
Last activity: 7 hours
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#84 Posted on | Instant Rating: 9.07
Perhaps that makes it clearer!



CRZ
Net Hack Slasher
Banger








Since: 6.1.02
From: Outer reaches of your mind

Since last post: 3556 days
Last activity: 1976 days
#85 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.01
I think Kerry biggest achievement was doing a good job in removing the buzz word "flip flopper" that was put on him. He pretty much stated ends don't always justify the means, and everything not black and white. Is Saddam a bastard, of course. It's better that he's not around but doesn't mean running in there and take him out without having a proper plan. Kerry really explained this better then even I expected him to... A point for Bush is that he really played up the "USA USA USA , We are American's, we do what we want". Which I fear probably plays up better than the Kerry "We are a global village". Even though I think Kerry's view point is a lot more sensible.

One thing I didn't understand Bush kept commentating Kerry of saying "Wrong war, wrong place, wrong time" and how Kerry has been critical of war and how can he be the leader of the country now we are in this situation... I just find that really strange viewpoint, even in my personal life. If something isn't good, I'd like someone to tell me and that's the first step of improving a situation. Bush's viewpoint seems like "Hey keep the rose colored glasses on & stay positive". For me seeing something isn't going well and changing your plans is a better option then digging the hole even deeper. Again I think that's a good point for Kerry saying "I've seen wars go wrong, staying on the same failed course just causes thing to get worse"

Few other notes that I remember was Kerry talking about protecting homeland more and Bush questions "Where will you find the money". The only thing I thought was "Ooh George should you really question anyone for how they spend money after the Billions you put in Iraq"... G Dub's fascination with Poland was funny. It was one of those moments that you just new the Satire folks will have a field day. Second he mentioned Poland I thought "Poland? Is your #2 on your helper list?" Even when Kerry helped out by mentioning Australia which seems much more of a big name help (no offense to Polish here lol). Bush replies "You forgot Poland again, haha. He's really going for the Putski family vote!

I think Bush was distracted by the flashy lights(no, not a Bush joke. I'm serious lol) I think the timer threw him off, and I found him distracted by the lights and wanting to time his answer therefore the stalls. I think one reason is Bush really speaks in sound bites and liners, and really didn't seem to want to go in depth with his position on a few answers... Kerry seemed more comfortable with it, and just spoke. One other positive is that Kerry really looked more confident up there than what I've seen him before (which includes his DNC speech). He stood tall and smiled at Bush's responses as Bush seemed more flustered and uncomfortable.

I also think Kerry really won on many points and made himself look much better then he did 48 hours ago. Bush wasn't a disaster, but I don't think he made Kerry looks worse or less of a opponent... So I say advantage Kerry. Yes I'm pro Kerry, but if he didn't do well I'd be the first on his case in screwing up. Like I (and a few other Kerry supporters have) during his campaign.



smark/net attack wienerville advisory holds at ORANGE alert - High (JBL is STILL WWE champion and now smarks arch enemy HHH is the World Champion. Major red threat, but the undercard seems okay. The alert holds... for now)- 9/19
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1236 days
Last activity: 1033 days
#86 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
    Originally posted by Net Hack Slasher
    One thing I didn't understand Bush kept commentating Kerry of saying "Wrong war, wrong place, wrong time" and how Kerry has been critical of war and how can he be the leader of the country now we are in this situation... I just find that really strange viewpoint, even in my personal life. If something isn't good, I'd like someone to tell me and that's the first step of improving a situation. Bush's viewpoint seems like "Hey keep the rose colored glasses on & stay positive". For me seeing something isn't going well and changing your plans is a better option then digging the hole even deeper. Again I think that's a good point for Kerry saying "I've seen wars go wrong, staying on the same failed course just causes thing to get worse"
Kerry's problem here is that he said "wrong place, etc." several times, then asked if he thought the war was a mistake said "absolutely not." This is why I don't understand how people can think Kerry shed the flip-flop lavel considering he flip-flopped half a dozen times during the debate.



JustinShapiro
Scrapple
Moderator








Since: 12.12.01
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 3 hours
#87 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.70
OMEGA: According to the Daily Show, Kerry was writing " I am SO crushing this guy!"

I believe it was just "I'm SO Crushing!" Or we're each seeing what we want to see, in which case that means I ... wait.

Malarky
Bauerwurst








Since: 19.8.04

Since last post: 3633 days
Last activity: 3630 days
#88 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.33
Yeah, the "you forgot Poland!" moment was class. It just really put the current state of the coalition in a worse light than a million years of DNC harping could ever do. He was clearly clutching at straws at that point.


One commentator put the debate in context for me with this line; "Last night it appeared as though the President had ran out of Karl Rove's one-liners by the 9 minute mark. Unfortunately this was a 90 minute debate."


Edited: Well, it's official. Kerry 47 Bush 45 among registered voters.

(edited by Malarky on 2.10.04 1206)

(edited by Malarky on 2.10.04 1603)
Teppan-Yaki
Pepperoni








Since: 28.6.02

Since last post: 904 days
Last activity: 874 days
#89 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.83
    Originally posted by Grimis
    Kerry's problem here is that he said "wrong place, etc." several times, then asked if he thought the war was a mistake said "absolutely not." This is why I don't understand how people can think Kerry shed the flip-flop lavel considering he flip-flopped half a dozen times during the debate.


Seeing how the Bush administration misled the public about Saddam's nuclear capabilities, what's worse -- someone who changed his mind due to convictions and seeing the plan was wrong or someone who was flat out wrong?

And if you're going to argue that Kerry flip-flopped during the debate, I'm happy to argue that W was a talking-point broken record after about 30 minutes.

P.S. -- You forgot Poland.
ges7184
Lap cheong








Since: 7.1.02
From: Birmingham, AL

Since last post: 11 days
Last activity: 2 hours
#90 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.80
I do believe that Grimis does have a point here. The thing that handcuffs Kerry (and many other war opponents) is that they can't bring themselves to say that the world is not really that much better place with Saddam out of power. So it really becomes difficult to see how one can say on the one hand that the world is a much safer place with Saddam out of power, but then on the other hand say it was the "wrong war". After all, you can talk all you want about other courses of action, but the only guaranteed way to get someone out of power is to take him out. And if the world is indeed a much safer place for it, how big of a mistake could such an action be? (I would also add that the world can only be a safer place with Saddam out IF Saddam was a threat to attack other nations, which once again justifies the position of the pro-war crowd)

Since Kerry cannot (or at least will not) take a position to indicate that maybe Saddam wasn't that big of a threat and the world really isn't better off with him out of power, he will always have to straddle a fence when talking about this issue, and thus will always look like a "flip-flopper".

(edited by ges7184 on 2.10.04 2236)

(edited by ges7184 on 2.10.04 2237)

The Bored are already here. Idle hands are the devil's workshop. And no... we won't kill dolphins. But koalas are fair game.
PalpatineW
Lap cheong








Since: 2.1.02
From: Getting Rowdy

Since last post: 2796 days
Last activity: 2639 days
AIM:  
#91 Posted on | Instant Rating: 9.00
    Originally posted by Malarky
    Yeah, the "you forgot Poland!" moment was class. It just really put the current state of the coalition in a worse light than a million years of DNC harping could ever do. He was clearly clutching at straws at that point.


    One commentator put the debate in context for me with this line; "Last night it appeared as though the President had ran out of Karl Rove's one-liners by the 9 minute mark. Unfortunately this was a 90 minute debate."


    Edited: Well, it's official. Kerry 47 Bush 45 among registered voters.

    (edited by Malarky on 2.10.04 1206)

    (edited by Malarky on 2.10.04 1603)


I'm not expert at this, but I tend to look very suspisciouly at any poll claiming an eight-to-ten point swing in public opinion over one day, barring catastrophe.

I assume you refer to the latest poll from Newsweek (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6159637/site/newsweek/)

The only thing we know about this poll is that is was taken of registered voters, not likely voters. Already a strike against its reliability.

Rhetorical question: How do you feel about Gallup saying Bush is ahead 11?

Edit: Because I care, I've gone and done a little homework. Newsweek's last poll, showing George Bush ahead, sampled 41% R, 31% D and 28% I. This one samples 35% R and 37% D.

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=109&STORY=/www/story/10-02-2004/0002263797&EDATE=

Either they wanted a comeback narrative or they're just sloppy. That's some poor methodology. James Carville's Democracy Corp shows a much more modest bump for Kerry.

http://www.democracycorps.com/reports/surveys/Democracy_Corps_September_30_2004_1st_Debate_Survey.pdf

(edited by PalpatineW on 3.10.04 0505)


In Theo We Trust
StaggerLee
Scrapple








Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 8 hours
Last activity: 6 hours
#92 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.17
Could somebody please explain what "sounding Presidential" means? John Kerry doesnt SOUND LIKE any President I remember in my 34 years on the planet (Ford-GWB). What he DOES sound like, to me, is a stuffy, self important blowhard who really wants you to THINK he is sophisticated.

I like the way some of the Kerry Supporters here are saying that he "explained" his flip flopping and "removed the stigma" of being a flip flopper. I think President Bush made a better statement when he said that he wouldnt waiver from his core beliefs, even if it is politically more palatable. At least you know he wont bow to pressure of critics.



Thank you for your irrelevant opinion.

Doe, Ray, Me, Fa, So, La, TITO SANTANA!
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1236 days
Last activity: 1033 days
#93 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
    Originally posted by Malarky
    Edited: Well, it's official. Kerry 47 Bush 45 among registered voters.
Except that a poll from registered voters is useless...

    Originally posted by ges7184
    Since Kerry cannot (or at least will not) take a position to indicate that maybe Saddam wasn't that big of a threat and the world really isn't better off with him out of power, he will always have to straddle a fence when talking about this issue, and thus will always look like a "flip-flopper".
And that is a problem because it was an easily avoidable one. If Kerry had been on board with the war and consistantly said so from the beginning, he could focus on domestic issues and expanding the coalition. And he probably would be comfortable ahead right now. The Kerry campaign, instead, decided to try and make sure that the Dean voters stuck with them and changed their position to the far left on the war.




Malarky
Bauerwurst








Since: 19.8.04

Since last post: 3633 days
Last activity: 3630 days
#94 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.70
    Originally posted by Grimis
      Originally posted by Malarky
      Edited: Well, it's official. Kerry 47 Bush 45 among registered voters.
    Except that a poll from registered voters is useless...

      Originally posted by ges7184
      Since Kerry cannot (or at least will not) take a position to indicate that maybe Saddam wasn't that big of a threat and the world really isn't better off with him out of power, he will always have to straddle a fence when talking about this issue, and thus will always look like a "flip-flopper".
    And that is a problem because it was an easily avoidable one. If Kerry had been on board with the war and consistantly said so from the beginning, he could focus on domestic issues and expanding the coalition. And he probably would be comfortable ahead right now. The Kerry campaign, instead, decided to try and make sure that the Dean voters stuck with them and changed their position to the far left on the war.




-LoL-

I was just waiting for the Grimis "I don't want to believe this so I'll attack it's legitimacy" response.You were perfectly willing to get your panties knotted in sheer excitement over polls showing Bush with an 11 point lead using the same methods.

Edit: Palpatine, that DOES strike me as some sloppy/negligent polling. I guess manufacturing news requires more input from news outlets than I thought.

(edited by Malarky on 3.10.04 0818)
rockdotcom_2.0
Frankfurter








Since: 9.1.02
From: Virginia Beach Va

Since last post: 548 days
Last activity: 163 days
AIM:  
#95 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.48
    Originally posted by StaggerLee
    At least you know he wont bow to pressure of critics.


Like his military and foreign policy advisors?



"I could be wrong, but I doubt it"---Charles Barkley
StaggerLee
Scrapple








Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 8 hours
Last activity: 6 hours
#96 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.18
Meaning? His military advisors bowed to pressure?
Or he bowed to military advisors?

Either way, its still better than basing your entire platform on the bloggers of America's latest opinions.



Thank you for your irrelevant opinion.

Doe, Ray, Me, Fa, So, La, TITO SANTANA!
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1236 days
Last activity: 1033 days
#97 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
    Originally posted by Malarky
    LoL-

    I was just waiting for the Grimis "I don't want to believe this so I'll attack it's legitimacy" response.You were perfectly willing to get your panties knotted in sheer excitement over polls showing Bush with an 11 point lead using the same methods.
Except I consistantly question the legitimacy of any poll of registered voters.

Feel free to criticize me, but get your facts straight and don't rely on sloppy data....



The Thrill
Banger








Since: 16.4.02
From: Green Bay, WI

Since last post: 156 days
Last activity: 2 days
#98 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.25

    Originally posted by JMShapiro
    OMEGA: According to the Daily Show, Kerry was writing " I am SO crushing this guy!"

    I believe it was just "I'm SO Crushing!" Or we're each seeing what we want to see, in which case that means I ... wait.




Careful...last time Teen Girl Squad's So-and-So said that, she got hit with the dreaded van of CHILDREN!

Uh...as seen here.



Star wipe, and...we're out.
Thrillin' ain't easy.



THE THRILL
ACW-NWA Wisconsin
Home Video Technical Director...&
A2NWO 4 Life!
(Click the big G or here to hear the Packers Fight Song in RealAudio...or try .AU, .WAV or .MIDI!)
SKLOKAZOID
Bratwurst








Since: 20.3.02
From: California

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 3 hours
AIM:  
#99 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.71
Kerry won the first debate. There's still two more to go, so let's not contrive ways in which Bush won the first debate.

When I heard about the 2-minute initial statement thing, I thought this would clearly favor the "bumper sticker" speaking President Bush, and harm the overly-articulate John Kerry, but it ironically ended up helping Kerry.

Kerry managed to get his opinions down to nearly 2 minutes exactly and finished on the red just about every time. When Bush hit red, he had to rush his statements to finish, or he had only 30 seconds worth of material and kept repeating the same things to fill space. Or there was dead air. Bush couldn't fill those two minutes effectively.

Kerry was very clear and concise on all of his statements and kept a cool head the whole time. That doesn't mean he had all of the facts straight, or that his plans were flawless, but he talked like a guy who knew what he was talking about.

I don't think Kerry addressed the "flip flop" label as well as he could have. It was wise of him not to address it directly (instead, saying "my opponent has a word for that"), but aside from pointing out that he has had one position, I don't think he shook it all that well. Bush, however, had just as many contradcitions as Kerry did in the debate.

Bush had trouble. He demonstrated that he does not seem emotionally capable of dealing with a dissent. All of those "loyalty pledges" have come back to hurt him. No one has been challenging him for the last four years, and he was finally met with challenges to his leadership in the debate. He didn't handle it very well. Bush kept getting lost in mid-sentence in just about every opportunity he had to speak. There was also that "Can you let me finish?" in the MIDDLE of his time, when no one had any chance of interrupting him.

There were instances where Bush's only response was, "It's my job to keep America safe," and he was responding to Kerry pointing out numerous instances where Bush hasn't done so, like the untranslated terrorist tapes. He seemed unprepared.

Both Bush and Kerry inflated numbers to make their point. Kerry erroneously used the $200 Billion spent in Iraq number when we're closer to $120 at this point. Bush claims that 100,000 Iraqi troops are trained, but that 100,000 number is actually a combination of many things which the majority isn't related to combat.

Bush claimed that AQ Khan has been "brought to justice," but if I remember correctly, he's sitting just fine in Pakistan right now after selling nuclear secrets to everyone in the area. I'm not saying we should invade Pakistan, just that Bush's statement is wrong. The network was disbanded, but the damage was done.

Kerry claimed that Bush "outsourced that job too" in Tora Bora when we were after Bin Laden, but we still can't really verify that Bin Laden was ever there. I still think Kerry was right about the misuse of tactics, though. Bush had been given a free ride on Tora Bora until the debate.

NOTE: It's not a flip-flop to say we needed to use Americans to find Bin Laden, but international bodies to bring peace in Iraq. The issue with trust was much greater in dealing with Afghan warlords to find Bin Laden ("our #1 priority", as Bush said) than it is in rebuilding Iraq. We don't need to worry that Iraq is going to escape into Pakistan. "Trust, but verify."

The biggest moment I saw was when Kerry corrected Bush on the "Saddam attacked us" statement. Bush said "Of course I know Osama attacked us" VERY defensively. I think this moment will stick for those that hadn't consciously thought about it. Every time Bush brought up Osama Bin Laden, it was because Kerry brought him up.

Yeah, I know: Kerry forgot about Poland. Kerry demonstrated the importance of coalitions. I don't think people don't understand how we have 90% of the responsiblity and cost in this war. Kerry really did establish how weak our coalition was.

There were a few ideas exchanged, nothing too new, but let's give both candidates a break here. After all, it's hard work.

    Originally posted by AWARulz

    BUSH: Actually, we've increased funding for dealing with nuclear proliferation about 35 percent since I've been the president. .....
    We busted the A.Q. Khan network. This was a proliferator out of Pakistan that was selling secrets to places like North Korea and Libya. We convinced Libya to disarm.
    .....
    I'll tell you another way to help protect America in the long run is to continue with missile defenses.
    ....
    My opponent opposed the missile defenses.



Kerry opposed the missile defenses with good reason. We aren't under the threat of a ballistic missile attack.

The missile defense shield isn't what we need to deal with nuclear proliferation as it currently is. The biggest threat right now is a suitcase/dirty bomb smuggled into the US, not a ballistic missile from Russia like in the Cold War.

Port screening is a MUCH bigger issue, which Kerry actually brought up and Bush didn't. So is border patrolling. Investing $200 Billion to put up that shield isn't anywhere near our top priority yet. However, as long as we let North Korea increase their arsenal, it may just get that way. I hope we don't just "let" North Korea do that.

    Originally posted by policus
    The funniest one of all, and Giuliani pointed this out on FNC. in the beginning of the debate Kerry kept saying "Sadam isn't our enemy" a few times and at the end he said "Sadam is our enemy". I can't wait to see the commercial for this one.


This was after Bush had done the same thing several times, however. After 90 minutes of straight debating with Bush, it's no wonder Kerry did that. I was confused by the end myself.

Who attakced us again? Oh, right. Mohammed Atta and all those other dead guys.

    Originally posted by Grimis
    Kerry's problem here is that he said "wrong place, etc." several times, then asked if he thought the war was a mistake said "absolutely not." This is why I don't understand how people can think Kerry shed the flip-flop lavel considering he flip-flopped half a dozen times during the debate.



Kerry's response was actually, "It doesn't have to be a mistake." He said there was a right way to disarm Saddam and a wrong way, and that we decided to do things the wrong way. By doing things the wrong way, we isolate ourselves in Iraq and make ourselves more vulnerable.

Kerry did say that "wrong place, etc." in several speeches around Labor Day, but not once during the debates. Bush was the one that kept hammering that and Kerry retorted with how we were doing things wrong over there.

    Originally posted by ges7184
    So it really becomes difficult to see how one can say on the one hand that the world is a much safer place with Saddam out of power, but then on the other hand say it was the "wrong war". After all, you can talk all you want about other courses of action, but the only guaranteed way to get someone out of power is to take him out. And if the world is indeed a much safer place for it, how big of a mistake could such an action be? (I would also add that the world can only be a safer place with Saddam out IF Saddam was a threat to attack other nations, which once again justifies the position of the pro-war crowd)



Removing Saddam was a good thing but by doing so we have created a hotbed for anti-US sentiment in the region. Hardly the atmospehre we want. That is the mistake.

Diverting military personnel from Afghanistan as they increase their opium production and the Taliban regroups is also a mistake. We're going to have a heroin epidemic here soon. We didn't have to take on Iraq in March 20, 2003.

So, to summarize: getting Saddam (good), creating a hotbed of terrorist activity (mistake).

(edited by SKLOKAZOID on 5.10.04 0912)
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1236 days
Last activity: 1033 days
#100 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
    Originally posted by SKLOKAZOID
    Kerry opposed the missile defenses with good reason. We aren't under the threat of a ballistic missile attack.

    The missile defense shield isn't what we need to deal with nuclear proliferation as it currently is. The biggest threat right now is a suitcase/dirty bomb smuggled into the US, not a ballistic missile from Russia like in the Cold War.
We're not? Are you kidding? The PDRK and the Iranians are developing ICBMs. There is not enough necessary command and control over Russian ICBMs. And you are telling me that we should not protect ourselves from such risks? This is why Democrats are perceived as being weak on security is because they oppose common sense defenses to avoid 100,000 deaths in one foul swoop.



Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Thread rated: 4.81
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Thread ahead: This is why we are on the offensive....
Next thread: Teacher fired for putting up Bush's picture
Previous thread: Obituary endorsing Kerry
(1056 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Well, gee, that wasn't on the record either. I'm not going to repeat myself, so feel free to scroll up and see what I said after your last post.
- CRZ, John F'in Kerry (2003)
The W - Current Events & Politics - Debate Reaction Thread (Page 5)Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.148 seconds.