Well that clears everything up!

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-17-2004
Well that clears everything up!
26
Thu, 09-30-2004 - 11:38pm

Chris Matthews is trying to reconcile Kerry's statements from the debate about Iraq...


Matthews: So, is Kerry's position on Iraq A or B?


Joe Lockhart: Well, uh, I think it's C.

Renee ~~~

Renee ~~~

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-12-2004
Fri, 10-01-2004 - 11:16am
I didn't have any trouble deciphering what he had to say. Perhaps if you are already hostile to someone it becomes more difficult. Why not read the transcript of the debate, I think Sen. Kerry had many well reasoned out answers and Pres. Bush had some too. Also in another post you complained about Mr. Kerry's appearance, I hope your vote for President is not based on that. If that were the criteria, then Abraham Lincoln (father of the Republican party to many) would never have been elected.
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-22-2003
Fri, 10-01-2004 - 11:36am
Aw come on, give Americans a break, they are not that dumb. I think they can understand intelligent answers if they put their mind to it. Bush kept repeating "it is hard work" more than 10 times. I am sure everyone can see that he was at loss of words because he was ill prepared . I do appreciate that you accept that Kerry spoke intelligently (even though being a Bush supporter) and that he did better. I also think Bush made some good points initially and the first time he said "wrong war wront time etc, mixed message" it was effective, but then when he repeated that 10 times it lost all the effect.
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2004
Fri, 10-01-2004 - 12:14pm
There is no doubt that Kerry is a much more polished public speaker, as debates are the achillies heel of President Bush, and I agree that Kerry did exactly what he wanted, which was to answer the questions in a conscise and coherent manner. I may not agree with what he said, but he did get his message across in a better manner than Bush.

In doing so, he prevented what could have been a disaster for him. If Bush had outright won this debate, the election would be over.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2004
Fri, 10-01-2004 - 12:15pm
I disagree slightly only because Bush had an opportunity to knock Kerry out of the race, and since he is not a good debater, failed to do so.
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2004
Fri, 10-01-2004 - 12:16pm
Which version?
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2004
Fri, 10-01-2004 - 12:19pm
CNN ran a poll that showed that more people felt that Kerry got his message across better, but in the two catagories that seem to matter a lot to voters:

Believability:

Bush: 50%

Kerry: 45%

Likability:

Bush: 48%

Kerry: 41%

The debate was a mixed bag, as most people knew going in that Kerry is a much better orator, but he is less believable and less likable (which is a strange way to elect a President, I agree, but lately, elections do seem to be popularity contests.)

Was it me, or did the debate seem to drag on a bit...Perhaps it was because of the moderator, although I think he did a better job this time, then he did with Bush / Gore.

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-12-2004
Fri, 10-01-2004 - 12:34pm
True.
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-01-2004
Fri, 10-01-2004 - 12:40pm
What was wrong with Lincoln? Do you have something against tall guys? I happen to think that Lincoln was pretty snappy looking, what with his tall top hat and all, I mean the guy could really accessorize.

I would only vote based on appearance for the position of First Lady (if it were only possible) and Laura Bush would get my vote hands down.

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-12-2004
Fri, 10-01-2004 - 12:43pm
That's interesting about those numbers you sighted, apparently likeability really helps Pres. Bush.

I think the format of the debates made it seem to drag on. There were lots of questions about similar things and each contestant (oops the lights made me think it was a game show, I mean candidate) was allowed only a short time period and then they had to ask for extra time. Very tedious, I think they both did as well as they could considering the way it was structured.
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-01-2004
Fri, 10-01-2004 - 12:45pm
Its not that anyone (even in the Bush campaign) thinks that Americans are stupid. They purposely use a different speaking technique. They want him to sound different from Kerry for a reason. The majority of Republicans are middle-class midwesterners who don't like double-speak and want people to get to the point. Their approach must have worked because you seem to remember a lot of what he said (even if you don't agree).