Fuck a bullshit debate...followed by some bullshit gallup polls...um, let me guess...Bush stammered, and good ol' boy'd his way though a speech, while Kerry said Bush was wrong for the way he went about the war...and even though it was a debate, they never actually debated directly, I know this because it was in the rules...and ultimately both parties are declaring a victory...and the gallup polls are going to Bush...is that about right? I watched the Giants, and no question about it, they won...BTW where was Nader? If he gets the 5% does he get invited in '08? That would be incentive enough to vote for him.
Anyone watch the debate?
- Thread starter I. Cold
- Start date
Nader was on the Dennis Miller or the John McEnroe Show, over on CNBC. I dont give the pundits or the spindoctors a second of my time, actually watched the debate on CSPAN, they had a split screen and you could see Dumya fidgeting and grimacing when he got called on some things. F*cking Giants got lucky.
Honest opinion: Kerry was better than Bush, but I also felt let down by Kerry. I feel he could have done a better job calling out Bush.
My main problem with Bush's words was he said nothing new. He played it too safe. He kept calling Kerry on his "mixed messages" when in fact Bush himself is the master at sending mixed messages.
My main problem with Bush's words was he said nothing new. He played it too safe. He kept calling Kerry on his "mixed messages" when in fact Bush himself is the master at sending mixed messages.
Kerry won for 2 reasons.
1. He came off better with the way he spoke and carried himself.
2. This will help pump up the demo base.
I dont give a fuck about a swing voter, to me they are a none issue in this election. I see the nation as pretty much split right down the middle (give or take 2-3 points) and it has been scence befor the DNC. The person that will win this year is the person that gets his people to the polls.
Red states will stay red and blue states will stay blue. Its all on the swing states. In these swing states voter turn out is gonna be high as fuck. Like 80-85% high. So its all going to boil down to who gets the lions share. But it could go eighter way easily.
IF
Iraq keeps getting worse..and bush does as shity in the next 2 debates thats gonna make your causal republican voters stay home on election day. Im not talking about people like us who read a shit load of articals then gather in fourms to debate points and shit. Im talking about the majority of voters who decide on talking points and sound bites. Those type of people have to be pumped up to get up go out and vote. Even though they soupport Bush and like him if the coverage they see on the news and read in the paper is like it is today they just wont show up. Their more like ahhhhhhhhhhh fuck it hes gonna lose anyway. So if iraq keeps on track and bush fucks up again in the other 2 debates then Kerry wins.
IF
Bush starts to gain ground in Iraq and does well in the other debates then the casual demo voter will stay home. and bush will win.
My prediction
Kerry will win because really if you think about it this is the first test that the republican voters are haveing to deal with.
Kerry came out the DNC and fell right the fuck into the swift boat shit.......and Bush people were pumped and hyped. Then came the RNC.......and Bush people were even more pumped and hyped........Then the flip flop issue aginst kerry really kicked into high gear and the its all that you really heard about Kerry.......and the Bush people were on a high but now theirs a small momentium switch. Can the casual Bush voter stay hyped in the comeing mounths? I dont think so. Its easy to be excited when your team is winning but whens its not...........well.......Ill call it the bandwagon effect.
When you look at all the polls so far Bush has rocked Kerry on the " whos better fit to protect you " question. Not by a small margin eighter were talking 15-20 points. Bushes piss poor showing during the debate last night might not turn those numbers but it will defently take steam out of his base. Now you got the next 2 debates on issues that Kerry is strong as fuck on. In a domestic debate i belive Kerry will mop Bush. And I dont see shit gettin better in Iraq befor Nov 2nd. All of this shit takes the steam out of the Bush casual base. In a election thats gonna hindge so big on Voter Turn Out this is a big blow to the Bush camp.
Not to mention the moveon.org movement in the battle groud states to get people registered to vote. I read demo registeration is up 200% from the 2000 election.....THATS FUCKIN BIG RIGHT THEIR.
Take the steam outta Bushes casual voters and then add in the massive groud movement that move on.org and others have done in these states and its gonna be Kerry in a big
way.
Keep in mind were a diffrent breed. Just the fact alone you come into this fourm and debate your views makes you a million times more intersted and informed that the majority of idiots who buy into sound bites and talking points. AND THESE IDIOTS SIMPLY DONT SHOW UP WHEN SHIT LOOKS BAD FOR THEIR TEAM.........Im now officaly reserving the rights to THE BANDWAGON EFFECT.
anyway thats my take on it. I may be wrong but probley not.
1. He came off better with the way he spoke and carried himself.
2. This will help pump up the demo base.
I dont give a fuck about a swing voter, to me they are a none issue in this election. I see the nation as pretty much split right down the middle (give or take 2-3 points) and it has been scence befor the DNC. The person that will win this year is the person that gets his people to the polls.
Red states will stay red and blue states will stay blue. Its all on the swing states. In these swing states voter turn out is gonna be high as fuck. Like 80-85% high. So its all going to boil down to who gets the lions share. But it could go eighter way easily.
IF
Iraq keeps getting worse..and bush does as shity in the next 2 debates thats gonna make your causal republican voters stay home on election day. Im not talking about people like us who read a shit load of articals then gather in fourms to debate points and shit. Im talking about the majority of voters who decide on talking points and sound bites. Those type of people have to be pumped up to get up go out and vote. Even though they soupport Bush and like him if the coverage they see on the news and read in the paper is like it is today they just wont show up. Their more like ahhhhhhhhhhh fuck it hes gonna lose anyway. So if iraq keeps on track and bush fucks up again in the other 2 debates then Kerry wins.
IF
Bush starts to gain ground in Iraq and does well in the other debates then the casual demo voter will stay home. and bush will win.
My prediction
Kerry will win because really if you think about it this is the first test that the republican voters are haveing to deal with.
Kerry came out the DNC and fell right the fuck into the swift boat shit.......and Bush people were pumped and hyped. Then came the RNC.......and Bush people were even more pumped and hyped........Then the flip flop issue aginst kerry really kicked into high gear and the its all that you really heard about Kerry.......and the Bush people were on a high but now theirs a small momentium switch. Can the casual Bush voter stay hyped in the comeing mounths? I dont think so. Its easy to be excited when your team is winning but whens its not...........well.......Ill call it the bandwagon effect.
When you look at all the polls so far Bush has rocked Kerry on the " whos better fit to protect you " question. Not by a small margin eighter were talking 15-20 points. Bushes piss poor showing during the debate last night might not turn those numbers but it will defently take steam out of his base. Now you got the next 2 debates on issues that Kerry is strong as fuck on. In a domestic debate i belive Kerry will mop Bush. And I dont see shit gettin better in Iraq befor Nov 2nd. All of this shit takes the steam out of the Bush casual base. In a election thats gonna hindge so big on Voter Turn Out this is a big blow to the Bush camp.
Not to mention the moveon.org movement in the battle groud states to get people registered to vote. I read demo registeration is up 200% from the 2000 election.....THATS FUCKIN BIG RIGHT THEIR.
Take the steam outta Bushes casual voters and then add in the massive groud movement that move on.org and others have done in these states and its gonna be Kerry in a big
way.
Keep in mind were a diffrent breed. Just the fact alone you come into this fourm and debate your views makes you a million times more intersted and informed that the majority of idiots who buy into sound bites and talking points. AND THESE IDIOTS SIMPLY DONT SHOW UP WHEN SHIT LOOKS BAD FOR THEIR TEAM.........Im now officaly reserving the rights to THE BANDWAGON EFFECT.
anyway thats my take on it. I may be wrong but probley not.
In short:
Bush's response to a question about military action taken in Iraq... "The enemy attacked us, Jim, and I have a solemn duty to protect the American people, to do everything I can to protect us."
Kerry's own words in response to what bush said..."...In answer to your question about Iraq and sending people into Iraq, he [Bush] just said, "The enemy attacked us." Saddam Hussein didn't attack us. Osama bin Laden attacked us. Al Qaida attacked us..."
After exhausting all justifications for the war in Iraq (which were all proved false), Bush tried to make a connection between 9/11 and Saddam Hussein, but he got... SHUTDOWN like a lil' BITCH.
Bush's response to a question about military action taken in Iraq... "The enemy attacked us, Jim, and I have a solemn duty to protect the American people, to do everything I can to protect us."
Kerry's own words in response to what bush said..."...In answer to your question about Iraq and sending people into Iraq, he [Bush] just said, "The enemy attacked us." Saddam Hussein didn't attack us. Osama bin Laden attacked us. Al Qaida attacked us..."
After exhausting all justifications for the war in Iraq (which were all proved false), Bush tried to make a connection between 9/11 and Saddam Hussein, but he got... SHUTDOWN like a lil' BITCH.
....Full context of my last post, (so that there is no confused bush supporters who come bitching about my post)
Important parts are in bold
Excerpt from the Debate:
LEHRER: Mr. President, new question. Two minutes. Does the Iraq experience make it more likely or less likely that you would take the United States into another preemptive military action?
BUSH: I would hope I never have to. I understand how hard it is to commit troops. Never wanted to commit troops. When I was running -- when we had the debate in 2000, never dreamt I'd be doing that.
The enemy attacked us, Jim, and I have a solemn duty to protect the American people, to do everything I can to protect us.
I think that by speaking clearly and doing what we say and not sending mixed messages, it is less likely we'll ever have to use troops.
I was hopeful diplomacy would work in Iraq. It was falling apart. There was no doubt in my mind that Saddam Hussein was hoping that the world would turn a blind eye.
So to answer your question, I would hope we never have to. I think by acting firmly and decisively, it will mean it is less likely we have to use force.
LEHRER: Senator Kerry, 90 seconds.
KERRY: Jim, the president just said something extraordinarily revealing and frankly very important in this debate. In answer to your question about Iraq and sending people into Iraq, he just said, "The enemy attacked us." Saddam Hussein didn't attack us. Osama bin Laden attacked us. Al Qaida attacked us. And when we had Osama bin Laden cornered in the mountains of Tora Bora, 1,000 of his cohorts with him in those mountains. With the American military forces nearby and in the field, we didn't use the best trained troops in the world to go kill the world's number one criminal and terrorist.
They outsourced the job to Afghan warlords, who only a week earlier had been on the other side fighting against us, neither of whom trusted each other.
That's the enemy that attacked us. That's the enemy that was allowed to walk out of those mountains. That's the enemy that is now in 60 countries, with stronger recruits
........................................
Important parts are in bold
Excerpt from the Debate:
LEHRER: Mr. President, new question. Two minutes. Does the Iraq experience make it more likely or less likely that you would take the United States into another preemptive military action?
BUSH: I would hope I never have to. I understand how hard it is to commit troops. Never wanted to commit troops. When I was running -- when we had the debate in 2000, never dreamt I'd be doing that.
The enemy attacked us, Jim, and I have a solemn duty to protect the American people, to do everything I can to protect us.
I think that by speaking clearly and doing what we say and not sending mixed messages, it is less likely we'll ever have to use troops.
I was hopeful diplomacy would work in Iraq. It was falling apart. There was no doubt in my mind that Saddam Hussein was hoping that the world would turn a blind eye.
So to answer your question, I would hope we never have to. I think by acting firmly and decisively, it will mean it is less likely we have to use force.
LEHRER: Senator Kerry, 90 seconds.
KERRY: Jim, the president just said something extraordinarily revealing and frankly very important in this debate. In answer to your question about Iraq and sending people into Iraq, he just said, "The enemy attacked us." Saddam Hussein didn't attack us. Osama bin Laden attacked us. Al Qaida attacked us. And when we had Osama bin Laden cornered in the mountains of Tora Bora, 1,000 of his cohorts with him in those mountains. With the American military forces nearby and in the field, we didn't use the best trained troops in the world to go kill the world's number one criminal and terrorist.
They outsourced the job to Afghan warlords, who only a week earlier had been on the other side fighting against us, neither of whom trusted each other.
That's the enemy that attacked us. That's the enemy that was allowed to walk out of those mountains. That's the enemy that is now in 60 countries, with stronger recruits
........................................
USUSALLY I STAY OUT OF POLLITICS, BUT I JUST SO HAPPEN TO WATCH THE LAST OF THE SHIT AND WATCHED A RE-RUN OF IT AND KERRY SEEMED QUITE WELL SPOKEN AND DIPLOMATIC. BUSH LOOKED LIKE A PUPPET, BLINKIN' LIKE A MUTHA-FUKA, AND SAYIN' "UMMM" BEFORE EVERY SHORT SENTENCE. THEN DOODLIN' ON HIS NOTE PAD FOR LIKE TWO SECONDS(IF YOU KNOW ABOUT WRITIN', IT TAKES LONgER THAN THAT TO JOT SHIT DOWN). BUT WHEN I WATCHED THE RE-RUN, I SMOKED A FATTY WITH MY HOMIE AND WE WERE JUST CRACCIN' THE FUK UP, JUSTY NOTICIN' THAT LITTLE SHIT. I HONESTLY BELIEVE BUSH WAS DOODLIN' STIK FIgURES OF KERRY. LOL
Bush clearly lost the debate.
For those interested in other parties here's a recent debate between Cobb (The Green Party) and Badnarik (The Libertarian Party) :
http://www.libertarian-tv.com/09-30-04-peoplesdebate.wvx
For those interested in other parties here's a recent debate between Cobb (The Green Party) and Badnarik (The Libertarian Party) :
http://www.libertarian-tv.com/09-30-04-peoplesdebate.wvx