VP Debate - What'd ya think?

[Bob Hubbard]

Cheney had a few good points, but I think Edwards came out ahead on points. Definately had a more polished presentation.

Overall though, alot of good points came out.

Thoughts?

 

[Feisty Mouse]

I only saw a fraction of the debate - curious as to what others thought.

:lurk:

 

[bignick]

i'm curious too...i missed this one...and i didn't catch the presidential debate 'til i saw it re-aired on CNN?...sunday morning...

i'm always training at night and i forget about stuff like this...

 

[Sapper6]

in the minds of most americans, i believe foreign policy is the largest factor at play in this election. this being the case, i strongly feel VP Cheney did a much better job discussing those issues.

lots of good points and fine rebuttals, but overall, i think Cheney took it home :ultracool

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Transcript at CNN:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/10/05/debate.transcript/index.html

 

[michaeledward]

I watched the entire debate on CSPAN, continuously the best television in politics.

I think Gwen Ifill did a poor job moderating. I think she once directed two questions in a row to Senator Edwards, and once gave him an extra 15 second rebuttal that was not his. It was disappointing.

This debate, I thought was much more interesting and much more closely matched. Although, the insta-polls are showing a strong win for Senator Edwards.

At the beginning of the debate, Vice President Cheney got hung up on Karl Rove's line about the inconsistancy of Kerry. It didn't work for the President last week ... it didn't work for the Vice President tonight.

Senator Edwards clearly had strong command of the facts on all the topics discussed, and really did an excellent job controlling the direction of the debate. Often, taking 90 seconds of his 120 second answer time to talk about a prior question. Which also forced Vice President Cheney to follow his lead.

I give Vice President Cheney credit for speaking his piece and shutting up. Several times, he completed his thought before the 30 second warning light lit up the desk. Those lights destroyed the President last Thursday, as he stuggled to fill up the time. Also, I clapped for the Vice President when he acknowledged the kind words of Senator Edwards concerning his wife and daughter(s) and then did not continue to take his response time.

The question was about gay marriage / civil unions. The Vice President said that the President sets the policy, and he supports the President; end of discussion. It was very brave. It was the correct thing to do. And it will end up hurting the President's candidacy.

The Vice President did a very good job deflecting Halliburton questions. He did a very poor job explaining why medical mal-practice requires limiting damage awards.

I thought it was really close as I watched it (didn't it bother that the Vice President couldn't keep his microphone out from under his jacket). But, as I type this, I think, really that Senator Edwards controlled the debate more, had better command of the issues, and therefore probably won.

I will say this ... Dick Cheney was much better than George Bush.

 

[Xequat]

Well, I think Kerry won the first Prez debate and Cheney won this one. He did a pretty good job of fending off the Halliburton questions and had some sharp answers to other questions. Edwards was a little more polished, but that is what I think made it harder for him to win in the first place; he was kind of favored. People expected him to win and Cheney to look old and decrepit, but that didn't happen. It's like when you go to see Episode One of Star Wars and expect it to be the greatest movie ever but you get a crappy Gungan ruining a movie instead. It might have been better if we weren't expecting so much more. Cheney did sort of dodge the gay marriage thing, but he did it with tact. He made his point about it being up to the states and the issue was over. Plus, I found it refreshing when he said that he didnnt know that AIDS statistic. So many people in debates won't admit to not knowing anything at all, so it was nice that he was honest. I also was impressed with VP's ability to back up his claims with hard numbers rather consistently.

Another thing was that it didn't get personal until Edwards started with the Halliburton stuff. Then Cheney fired back with the "Senator Gone" story. Attacks like that don't usually work unless you're on the defensive from your opponent attacking first, and that's what happened, so it just helped Cheney.


It was close on style and presentation, but on substance, I think I'd have to give the victory to Cheney because he had an uphill battle to start and he came through. It's not really fair to incorporate expectations ahead of time, but that's the reality of how I think some to many people will see it.

 

[michaeledward]

With the overnight having passed, the insta-polls (non-scientific) are looking like this:

MSNBC - Cheney 33% - Edwards 67 % - 879,000 votes

CNN - Can't seem to find their insta-poll.

FOX - Can't seem to find their insta-poll.

I think it is strange that CNN & FOX don't have a 'Who do you think won?' poll on their sites. I think that has to be bad news for the Bush Cheney campaign.

 

[Fool Wolf]

Cheney schooled Edwards last night. It is always easy for someone who has done nothing to criticize those that make decisions and act. Edwards and Kerrys arguments seem to come down to "We will do what bush is doing...but faster and better." It is like inventing the 7 minute abs workout in answer to the 8 min Abs.

my 2 cents

FW

I'm trying to get this political stuff straight

I'm trying to get all this political stuff straightened out in my head so I'll know how to vote come November. Right now, we have one guy saying one thing. Then the other guy says something else. Who to believe.
Lemme see; have I got this straight?

Clinton awards Halliburton no-bid contract in Yugoslavia - good...
Bush awards Halliburton no-bid contract in Iraq - bad...

Clinton spends 77 billion on war in Serbia - good..
Bush spends 87 billion in Iraq - bad...

Clinton imposes regime change in Serbia - good...
Bush imposes regime change in Iraq - bad...

Clinton bombs Christian Serbs on behalf of Muslim Albanian terrorists- good...
Bush liberates 25 million from a genocidal dictator - bad...

Clinton bombs Chinese embassy - good...
Bush bombs terrorist camps - bad...

Clinton commits felonies while in office - good...
Bush lands on aircraft carrier in jumpsuit - bad...

No mass graves found in Serbia - good...
No WMD found Iraq - bad...

Stock market crashes in 2000 under Clinton - good...
Economy on upswing under Bush - bad...

Clinton refuses to take custody of Bin Laden - good...
World Trade Centers fall under Bush - bad...

Clinton says Saddam has nukes - good...
Bush says Saddam has nukes - bad...

Clinton calls for regime change in Iraq - good...
Bush imposes regime change in Iraq - bad...

Terrorist training in Afghanistan under Clinton - good...
Bush destroys training camps in Afghanistan - bad...

Milosevic not yet convicted - good...
Saddam turned over for trial - bad...

Ahh, it's so confusing!

______________

Recently, John Kerry gave a speech in which he claimed Americans are actually paying more taxes under Bush, despite the tax cuts. He gave no explanation and provided no data for this claim.

Another interesting fact: Both George Bush and John Kerry are wealthy men. Bush owns only one home, his ranch in Texas. Kerry owns four mansions, all worth several million dollars. (His ski resort home in Idaho is an old barn brought over from Europe in pieces. Not your average A-frame).

Bush paid $250,000 in taxes this year; Kerry paid $90,000. Does that sound right? The man who wants to raise your taxes obviously has figured out a way to avoid paying his own.

Remember - Only 32 days until the election.

 

[Xequat]

According to the radio, the ABC poll showed Cheney victorious, 43-35. I'll see what else I can find.

 

[GAB]

Fool Wolf,

Good information, stuff like that should help the people who have not quite got the picture, but then some love the participants, the flash and the glitz, they are bored with information.

So to stay on topic, I will participate with thought, Bush 0 Kerry 1, Cheny 1 Edwards 0.

But as far as speakers to the new and modern more liberal world that America seems to be, with the people who rejoice in speaking their views. I am sure they will feel that the debates are being won by the Demos.

I am really more interested to see what will happen this November and where it will happen. (Votes)

I also would like to see more people vote and participate in this thing we call freedom. About 18%, decide who will be the one.

I find the amount of Church's in our fair land a good indicator as to how many people, really like to think on their own, and not be guided by others.

My observation and thoughts, at this time and place.

Who will I vote for? I don't kiss and tell.

Regards, Gary

 

[loki09789]

According to the radio, the ABC poll showed Cheney victorious, 43-35. I'll see what else I can find.

X,

I laughed (heartily, not sarcastic or snidely) at the "I in team" quote. I usually use that one in my class (as a half joking cliche) and get the M and E response.

To which, I respond "Yes, but the only way to get the ME out of team, it must be torn apart...." It was a desparation response to a smart alleck in class and stuck...funny how those pressure moments can have long lasting impacts.

 

[kenpo tiger]

Gary, Not everyone attends a church. So where does that leave us? By the by, the majority of us vote, and we're mostly Dems.

I watched and listened with great interest. I must admit to being impressed by Mr. Cheney on a few occasions, and must also concur that he kicked butt on the Halliburton questions. Major points to him also for his humble-sounding answer to Mr. Edwards' statements concerning his daughter.

However, I didn't hear straight answers to a few things, such as why OBL wasn't captured when we had him, precisely how and when the retraining of the Iraqis will take place (and exactly who'll be doing it!), or -- and this is key -- when will our troops come home.

The emotional rx from me: Bush's policy on Israel and the establishment of a dual homeland for us and the Palestinians. Where? When? Under whose auspices? Funded by whom? And who's hanging around to keep the peace once the moderators are gone and the militant Arab factions decide to stir the pot? Not good enough, from either side.

 

[loki09789]

precisely how and when the retraining of the Iraqis will take place (and exactly who'll be doing it!), or -- and this is key -- when will our troops come home.

.

Some of the dodge on that one is that he doesn't want to be blasted if his prospective timeline has to change because of some variable (increase resistence, weather, budget/transportation .... ) the other may be because of intelligence issues as well. The nuts and bolts of timelines for troop training/preparation/movement in country is a sensitive subject. Of course, in a debate, such a security based deflection would seem weak and like a 'I have no answer' dodge.

Don't know for sure, but after reading the transcripts (partly) that could be the logic.

I just don't know how you can compete with the youth and charisma of Edwards when you are Cheney. If the guy stays in politics, he will have to beef up some more on substance here and there, but he definitely has to charisma thing down...lucky bastard

 

[AaronLucia]

Well....


I seemed to think Cheney actually told the solutions, whereas Edwards just said, "We have solutions under our plan."

Other than that, i loved the point where they were talking about senate attendance.

Cheney said that he, as Vice President is President of the Senate, had his first meeting with Edwards last nite, even though Edwards has been in the Senate a good time longer than that.

 

[PeachMonkey]

Cheney said that he, as Vice President is President of the Senate, had his first meeting with Edwards last nite, even though Edwards has been in the Senate a good time longer than that.

Which was, along with pretty much everything else that comes out of Cheney's mouth, a complete lie.

See:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm.../ap/20041006/ap_on_el_pr/debate_first_meeting

 

[PeachMonkey]

More on Cheney's lies in the VP debate:

http://www.democrats.org/news/200410060007.html

 

[PeachMonkey]

Oh, and the "Senator Gone" zinger? Another Cheney distortion.

http://www.mediainfo.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000660420

 

[Xequat]

To which, I respond "Yes, but the only way to get the ME out of team, it must be torn apart...." It was a desparation response to a smart alleck in class and stuck...funny how those pressure moments can have long lasting impacts.

Whoa, good answer! I like it, lol.

"I didn't hear straight answers to a few things, such as why OBL wasn't captured when we had him." Yeah, I wish he had answered that one better too, because the answer is so easy. We didn't know 100% that we had him. Bush missed this opportunity, too. The Pakistanis offered their help to capture OBL at Tora Bora, but since we weren't totally sure he was there, we let them do the fighting. Just think how bad the Bush team and Tommy Franks would look if they sent a bunch of US troops in there to get OBL and he weren't even there.

I also thought it was pretty ballsy for Cheney to cite factcheck.org, because there is also anti-Bush ad stuff on that site. Cheney is such the no-BS, straight-forward, no lies, no dodging, no stalling to fill up all of his seconds type of guy that I like to see in a debate. He actually answers questons, rather than spending large chunks of time dedicated to one question on answering previous questions, which Edwards, Bush, and Kerry all did. He answered them right the first time and was ready to move on. Very refreshing.

 

[Phoenix44]

my 2 cents

FW

I'm trying to get this political stuff straight

Lemme see; have I got this straight?

No Fool Wolf, you HAVEN'T got this straight, and I'll tell you and everybody else why on another thread, entitled "Serbia vs Iraq"