« Debate Tonight, One Million Doors Canvass This Weekend! | Main | Welcome Kerry to ABQ on Sunday »

Friday, October 08, 2004

Kerry 2, Bush 0

Go to "Bush Flips Out" on this page and check out video of the most compelling moment of tonight's debate IMO.

Most pundits seem to be admitting that Bush was weak and Kerry bested him, but they seem to consistently add that Bush supporters will say he won and that Kerry supporters will say he won. No kidding. My take is that the president was yelling/whining thruout and using loud assertions instead of facts in his rebuttals. If I say it, it's true! If I repeat the same thing 5 times, it's truer! Again he failed to come up with any mistakes he's made in his term. Well, he did claim he made a couple of mistaken appointments. I would guess he means ex-Treasury Secretary, Paul O'Neill, and terrorism czar, Richard Clarke, who both wrote scathing books about his sleazy, blundering ways.

Bush's riff on the Dred Scott case was mesmerizing in an eerie way, and his joke about picking judges for the Supreme Court who would vote for him was a groaner, to say the least. I'm sure Al Gore was out there somewhere guffawing. Before he put his fist into the wall.

Bush quote of the night re importing drugs from Canada: "And my worry is is that, you know, it looks like it’s from Canada; it might be from a Third World."

Kerry quote of the night: "The military's job is to win the war. The president's job is to win the peace."

I thought Kerry again was sharp and "presidential," and remained unflustered despite Bush's tinpot tyrant act. He actually conveyed information and facts rather than vehement beliefs at top decibels. More light than heat. I can't see how Bush's braying would be appealing to anyone undecided or wavering, can you?

Wonkette's running commentary on the debate is pretty funny.

Click through to the continuation page for some early media commentary, nicely laid out by Daily Kos. Telling that even the Faux people couldn't muster much in the way of defending Bush's performance:

Mort Kondracke: "... I think Kerry won this debate as he won the first debate I don't think... I thought that Kerry was much more aggressive and the president was basically on the defense and didn't have new arguments didn't have...wasn't as facile as he should have been." [Fox News Channel, 10/8/04]
Bill Kristol: "I guess I think if you think the President was doing okay and didn't need a win in this debate, he did fine, but I think, if one thinks that Bush missed an awful lot of opportunities to go after Kerry in the first debate he had to make some of them up in this debate, I'm not sure he really succeeded in doing so." [Fox New Channel, 10/8/04]

Brit Hume: "Is it now fair to say that in each of these debates in terms of marshaling arguments, and remembering them and presenting them that this is something John Kerry has proved he is very good at. And that it doesn't play to the president's strong suit." [Fox News Channel, 10/8/04]

Mort Kondracke: "I thought [Kerry] was very effective. I thought that he was also on the attack a lot and frankly I thought that the President seemed to be on the defense a lot and trying to explain things and not explaining them all that well." [Fox News Channel, 10/8/04]

Tim Russert: "John Kerry, also, energetic, forceful." [NBC, 10/8/04]

Jonah Goldberg: "On the question of whether Bush did everything he needed to tonight, I don't think so. I think he helped himself, but Kerry leaves these debates energized." [National Review Online, 10/8/04]

Mark Shields: "He just absolutely, I thought, demolished the President's claims about the coalition in Iraq." [PBS, 10/8/04]

James Fallows, Atlantic Monthly: [Kerry's best moment] "I think his best moment was at the series of new lines. Again like this Missouri line of saying that that I was able to do with some of my votes in the Senate what you have failed to do, which is balance the budget, so I think it was the general vividness of his approach." [CBS, 10/8/04]

Perry Bacon: "I actually was struck that Kerry was pretty strong, I thought, in the foreign policy section, actually, and sort of hit the president hard on that." [CNN, 10/8/04]

October 8, 2004 at 11:42 PM in Candidates & Races, Events | Permalink

Comments

Just found this site through barb's great comment at kos. Candlewax and headphones (and other sensory enhancements)... we had some good things going in 1971, but blogs are hard to beat, and this site is amazingly thorough!

Thanks, barb
another albq nmican

Posted by: Mark Stein | Oct 9, 2004 6:59:57 AM

CNN's online headline today says that the debate was a draw, and yet the poll on their own web site shows Kerry won, 75% to 22%. The MSNBC poll shows Kerry won, 65% to 35%. Fox, of couse, shows Bush won, but by a slimmer margin, 53% to 46%. Een in the CNN story, they say that the CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll shows Kerry as the winner, but by what they call a "slight, statistically insignificant edge", 47-45%. The media love a horse race, especially if they can manufacture a come-from-behind moment.

One of my favorite moments in the deabte was when Kerry took apart Bush's grand coalition. He pointed out that nations are leaving the coalition (Bush mentioned Poland, but didn't mention that they were leaving), and then Kerry pointed out that, if thought of as coming from a nation, the Missouri contingent in Iraq would constitute the third largest national army in the coalition, behind the US and England.

On the other hand, I thought Kerry's weakest moment was in his response to the question on abortion. First he seemed to condescend to the questioner, then he rambled about his answer. He was better, and correct, moments later, when he told Bush that it is never as simple as the president would like us to believe.

Posted by: John McAndrew | Oct 9, 2004 8:37:50 AM

Yes John, when Kerry pointed out the simplistic thinking on such an important issue...i felt he really hit the nail on the head...isnt this really the case...the over simplification of complex issues.
I felt bush was so cynical and rude and angry, and then to hear the pundits justifing his beligerant answers and ways.
It is horrible.
Too bad you are not coming donw for M. Moore tomorrow, John, it would be nice to see you.
meb

Posted by: mary ellen | Oct 9, 2004 2:21:27 PM

Mark, thanks for visiting! And yes, blogs are hard to beat. It feels so empowering that vital information can whip around through the blogosphere so fast and that people can take action immediately. It's definitely a growing force to reckon with. And just think, our side is way better at it, in general, than the other side. We can read and write in complete sentences...LOL

Posted by: barb in albq | Oct 9, 2004 2:32:31 PM

John, I also thought Kerry's response to the abortion question was weak. As usual, Kerry's position takes a little time to explain and he didn't come through with much clarity. However, if someone is really into the anti-choice mode I don't think there's a chance in hell they'd even consider voting for Kerry anyway.

And how about those "internets" and Bush offering to sell "some wood" to Charles Gibson?

Posted by: barb in albq | Oct 9, 2004 2:35:00 PM

barb,

Point well taken about the likelihood of a pro-lifer switching their vote to Kerry. All the more reason that he should have taken the opportunity to do the one thing that Bush has done well in both debates: touching base with his base. Bush often mentions "tax relief", not ceding authority for America's safety to the UN or the International Criminal Court, God, and other trigger words for the far right Republican base. Kerry, on the other hand, is hard pressed to throw us a bone, and so the left's base remains committed but lacking energy. The abortion issue would have been a great time for him to say something about how, if the Bush administration were so in love with fetuses, they would be funding prenatal care. And if they love the little children, like Jesus does (according to the hymn), they would fund Head Start, and school lunch programs. But, no, their pro-life stance seems mainly concerned with telling women what they can and cannot do, and putting them under an authority not their own.

Kerry has done a good job, and has not alienated many members of his base in the debates. Can't say I was pleased with him comparing himself to Ronald Reagan, or shaking his head in dismay at being misrepresented when Bush said Kerry is against Star Wars. But I've not been tempted to flee to the Republican-enriched Nader camp. Still, Kerry could do better - much, much better - at paying attention to his base. He needn't pretend to be Howard Dean or Dennis Kucinich. He just needs to speak as if he knows that Dean's and Kucinich's supporters are in the house, and carry a lot of the load for this campaign.

Posted by: John McAndrew | Oct 10, 2004 1:11:59 AM

Post a comment