100k sperm and I was the fastest! (![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small} gullyvuhr) wrote,@ 2004-10-01 09:36:00 |
|
The "debate" last night.
Was less of a debate and more like a round of competitive campaigning, which irked me.
1. CNN's polls show of 450k-ish, 72% think Kerry won that debate.
2. MSNBC's polls show of 1.5 million, 62% think Kerry won that debate.
And I am in the the Kerry won camp cased on certain criteria:
- Kerry was tasked with answering one big question about his flipflopping on the war, and I think he did very clearly and succinctly - something I didn't honestly think he'd do. He thought the war was necessary, he thought the way we set out to win it is incorrect. I can agree with that.
- Bush on the other hand spent most of the time noticably aggitated, stumbled through his cards and lacked the look of a prepared orator. He fumbled and looked completely out of place and off kilter. The battle cry of "Poland" is going to be comedic material for the next 5 episodes of Saturday Night Live.
And if you think looking unprofessional or less than prepared isn't noteworthy -- I'd suggest revisiting the 2000 debate when Bush's team made a huge deal about Gore's facial expressions and body language. I had to hear about Gore rolling his eyes for the better part of two months.
This all being said I watched it rather impartially because I think Bush is a dolt, and Kerry lacks the charisma and presense of a strong leader... but I think Kerry was pretty clearly the better of the two speakers with a clearer, stronger and more refined message. That pretty much defines the winner of a debate.
I am also sure that by next week sometime, the Bush camp will be reporting that Kerry punched Bush's grandmother after the debate, and Bush was frazzled because he saved a school bus full of underprivledged orphans from falling off a collapsed bridge during a commercial break.
G.
Was less of a debate and more like a round of competitive campaigning, which irked me.
1. CNN's polls show of 450k-ish, 72% think Kerry won that debate.
2. MSNBC's polls show of 1.5 million, 62% think Kerry won that debate.
And I am in the the Kerry won camp cased on certain criteria:
- Kerry was tasked with answering one big question about his flipflopping on the war, and I think he did very clearly and succinctly - something I didn't honestly think he'd do. He thought the war was necessary, he thought the way we set out to win it is incorrect. I can agree with that.
- Bush on the other hand spent most of the time noticably aggitated, stumbled through his cards and lacked the look of a prepared orator. He fumbled and looked completely out of place and off kilter. The battle cry of "Poland" is going to be comedic material for the next 5 episodes of Saturday Night Live.
And if you think looking unprofessional or less than prepared isn't noteworthy -- I'd suggest revisiting the 2000 debate when Bush's team made a huge deal about Gore's facial expressions and body language. I had to hear about Gore rolling his eyes for the better part of two months.
This all being said I watched it rather impartially because I think Bush is a dolt, and Kerry lacks the charisma and presense of a strong leader... but I think Kerry was pretty clearly the better of the two speakers with a clearer, stronger and more refined message. That pretty much defines the winner of a debate.
I am also sure that by next week sometime, the Bush camp will be reporting that Kerry punched Bush's grandmother after the debate, and Bush was frazzled because he saved a school bus full of underprivledged orphans from falling off a collapsed bridge during a commercial break.
G.
