« Welcome to the Debate | Main | Go.Now.Immediately. »
September 30, 2004
The debate -- analysis and reactions
Allah, peace be upon him, is rounding up the reactions and spot analysis.
My immediate, personal reaction: GW did not knock it out of the park. Kerry ahead on style points (very smooth) very Senatorial vs off-the cuff business/CEO in the trenches non-politician. No obvious mistakes by either.
However, while GW's pauses, his slow starts (and when he relaxes, he's very personable and articulate) will elicit the usual "stupid chimp" slams, Kerry didn't get the upper hand on substance like he needed to do to make inroads against GW. Infact, what with the FL hurricanes and other aspects of the job of President that GW has been carrying on, even up to the time of the debate, I'd say GW was cautious this round to feel his way in what Kerry would toss his way. There are two more debates. Rope-a-dope? GW is known for his poker playing.
Kerry also let slip some policy things that can come back to haunt him... the "tax the rich," the blaming GW for North Korea and wanting to pursue talks with NK that would push China aside, the continued sneering at the coalition, even to giving nuclear fuel to Iran.
And the "global test" was something GW immediately picked up on, because the American citizenry has been witness to the huge corruption and moral cowardice of the UN since 9/11. Kerry says he won't ask for a permission slip then goes right ahead and says he won't do anything that "the world" disapproves of.
Now THAT's something no President of the USA should ever even hint at!
UPDATE Debate transcript
Posted by Darleen at September 30, 2004 08:07 PM
Comments
Come on, Darleen. Kerry dominated.
While the nation saw an unfiltered John Kerry who looked presidential and capable, Bush supporters hoping for some real content and realism from Bush were left with an empty feeling. Bush couldn't offer anything other than campaign speech vagueness about "freedom" and "it's hard."
When it really mattered, Bush could not show us anything new. America is realizing that it has had enough, and that John Kerry has the goods to tackle the job.
We do need allies in the world, for trade and for help in defeating terrorism. If we can't even handle Iraq, much less Afghanistan, we can't fight the whole world. The right winger fantasy of taking on a world full of pissed-off countries isn't realistic. Bush's America isn't a beacon of opportunity, it's a reckless and incompetent bully.
Face it, Bush just isn't very good at this war stuff. Or the economy stuff. Or the homeland security stuff. Or evidence stuff. He's only good at fooling his loyal minority base.
Posted by: Binacontenda at September 30, 2004 11:25 PM
Scott, I ready said Kerry won on style, and he didn't make any in-your-face gaffes. But he contradicted himself several times.
Kerry also was sloganeering..he used the laughable "stronger at home, respected throughout the world" theme and referred to his Vietnam service several times.
Hell, we now know that Kerry "served in combat" but someone wandering in the debates would have had no idea what Kerry has been doing for the past 20 years. Lehrer never once directed any questions to Kerry dealing with his Senate voting record. Not one.
And you know as well as I do that much of the debate will be replayed, dissected and poured over for the next several days. Reading the transcript makes GW's substance over Kerry even more apparent than the performance on screen.
"Global Test" is by far the first and most obvious segment that points to the fundamental differences between Kerry and GW. Kerry takes the "internationalist" POV, where the USA is secondary to the world at large. Indeed, Kerry indulged in some eye-opening moral equivalency when he scolded the USA for pursuing bunker-buster bombs while denying WMD's to terrorists. Come on, Scott! Do you see any moral equivalency that denies Police departments from researching and deploying state-of-the-art weaponry because gangbangers can't have them, too????
Posted by: Darleen at October 1, 2004 06:13 AM
Darleen, just because the potential leader of the free world wants to win over allies does not mean that he asks the world for a permission slip. Do you really have to be so simplistic? It's about LEADING by EXAMPLE. We had the world on our side after 9/11 and now we don't. Do you really think that that is simply because the world doesn't understand the terror threat?
Unlike our make believe hero Spiderman, George Bush clearly does not believe that with great power comes great responsibility.
Posted by: Brad at October 1, 2004 09:15 AM
When all the countries of the world were asked, only asked, the UN Security Council authorized all member states to take "all actions necessary" to bring about full and unconditional compliance with all extant UN Resolutions.
Following George Bush and Tony Blair's example, there were many other nations took part in a multilateral decision to do just that.
The only actual example that I heard Kerry mention was to suggest that he would end the development of bunker buster bombs- and hope that --what? That other countries and terrorists would then gladly agree to store there WMD in more easily accesible places?
Posted by: Rev. Churchmouse at October 3, 2004 05:29 PM
Brad
The President of the US is charged with our protection. Now why should the CinC bend over for Chirac when France does not have American interests at heart; indeed, as the UNSCAM has unfolded, France has deliberately sabotaged the USA because it was in a very large bed where Saddam was dominate and France, Russia, Germany and much of the venal UN were all submissive harem whores.
Again, I truly don't understand your unwillingness to look at the reality of foreign policy. Our national interest comes first. There was no other plausible option to invading Iraq to topple Saddam.
An even half way sucessful democracy in Iraq is something the Islamists want to stop by any means possible. As the elections in Iraq approach, the terror goes up.
Kerry wants to cut and run; he is channeling his 1971 persona of "America is the problem."
You want to see an accelerated Islamicization of Europe?
Elect Kerry.
Posted by: Darleen at October 3, 2004 06:06 PM