3/3 debate wins for kerry, 0/4 bush years for midde-class

[turbo79]

After watching the third and final debate tonight, I have to say Kerry won for the third time in a row. Bush keeps on pounding to the pavement the same thing he and his Republican spin machine have been shouting the past year: that kerry is a liberal senator (constant comparisons to Edward Kennedy) who is out of touch with the mainstream. But after watching the debates, it really seems that Bush is the one out of the mainstream: (1) his denial that Iraq was not an urgent threat to the US to the point of detracting attention off Al Qaida, (2) the bigger divide between the upper and lower income brackets through his tax cuts, (3) and the crazy deficit of which us twenty-year-olds will compensate for some day. Not to mention Bush striking down a proposal to import drugs from Canada to make prescription drugs cheaper in order to favor rich drug company executives instead of a family struggling to meet rising health care premiums. A great line Kerry used tonight was his statement "I'm tired of politicians who talk about family values and don't value families." In other words, I'm tired of Bush.

turbo79

[leoncour]

Has an incumbent ever lost all of the debates....ever? In American history? This is probably unprecedented, and whats even more shocking are that his supporters, like Bush, are unwaivering and steadfast in their mindset. Which means they would follow him into the bowels of hell if he led them there.

Bush is a man who cannot even speak his primary language proficiently, and he said so last night. He had very little substance behind his arguments, and he and his campaign distort Kerry's record (like saying he voted 98 times to increase taxes and is the most liberal senator). Failing substance, Bush tried to compensate by calling him "the liberal senator from Massachusettes." Is dividing the nation between liberals and conservatives presidential? Is that what a "unificator" does? No. John Kerry is obviously the superior choice.

[pisces2473]

Reading through the transcripts now...will be back to chime in later.

I LOVE that quote, Turbo!

[Crimson King II]

There IS a reason Kerry won't discuss his senate record, and I think Bush, to a good degree discussed that. I have a real problem with a guy like Kerry parading around as a tax-cutting, small-government, strong-defense warrior. Everything in his record suggests otherwise.

That said, I don't think we have any superior choice in this election. Bush is a good man whose intention and good faith brought us to a bad place with this war. Kerry is a good man who is entirely uncomfortable with who he is and does not have much in the way of core conviction. Neither probably has a sufficient plan to fight terrorism and islamic fundamentalists. Neither have strong claims to fiscal responsibility.

Where's Bobby Kennedy? Where's Jack Kennedy? It's so warped. Follow THOSE leaders policies. It unnerves me that the Dems lose sight of those two substantial leaders. They claim the Kennedys, but the party is Ted's now....how did that happen? Bobby and Jack were ardent cold warriors, ruthless in their conviction, fiscally responsible tax-cutters....

Kerry, nor Bush, is no Jack Kennedy. Where's Reagan? Where's Ike or even Nixon, who at least was an incredibly intelligent guy?

[dietzy]

Of course there is no clear cut winners or losers. I thought Kerry stumbled like crazy last night...and in a few cases was speechless. Bush seemed very strong especially in the later rounds of the fight last night.

To say that Kerry won all 3 debates I think is misleading and spin in and of itself. It depends on who you ask. I saw most of all 3 and I would say it was 2-1 in favor of Bush. MAYBE I would go as far as to say 1-1-1 but definitely not a 3-0 in favor of Kerry.

Kerry trying to come off as religious last night made me laugh. He has been advised repeatedly by his campaign office to stay way from religion because it comes off as fake and not genuine. Didn't the Catholic church also say that he could not take part in communion? And there he was quoting the Bible and saying that religion and his beliefs in God was the core of what he based all of his decisions on. Now when Bush said it, it was believable because everyone knows that he is a devout Christian who has strong faith and beliefs.

I heard one political analyst say before the debates yesterday that the third debate and this late in the game, both sides are not really speaking to any undecided people. They are just energizing their bases and pushing for a good turn out of their bases. So much of the rhetoric will be geared toward the "red meat" as he called it for each respective party.

Did anyone see Lynne Cheney's outrage at Kerry using her daughter as a political tool last night?

And if I hear "I have a plan!" one more time I might puke. I could ask Kerry, "My toe really hurts today, what would you recommend I do about it." and the response would be "I have a plan...that no American will ever walk this great land with a sore toe." I think it is laughable to try and say that you have a plan for everything and every topic. Having that many "plans" means in my mind that you will get nothing accomplished because you have too much on your plate and have made too many promises.

[Crimson King II]

And that's a good point...this looks like a base election. Turn out more of your people and you win. If the Reps do that, and do win, then will anyone in hindsight say that Kerry "won" the debates. That was a pretty undecided thing in 1960, 1980, 1984, 1988, and 2000...the winner of the election will, in hindsight, be thought to have won the debates....

[pisces2473]

Originally posted by dietzy
Kerry trying to come off as religious last night made me laugh. He has been advised repeatedly by his campaign office to stay way from religion because it comes off as fake and not genuine. Didn't the Catholic church also say that he could not take part in communion? And there he was quoting the Bible and saying that religion and his beliefs in God was the core of what he based all of his decisions on. Now when Bush said it, it was believable because everyone knows that he is a devout Christian who has strong faith and beliefs.
Yeah, that's true about him coming off as fake. The Church said that priests could refuse him communion if he tried to receive it because of the fact that he is so outspoken on abortion. Also, does anyone know if he got an annullment from his first wife? If not, he is living in sin with Teresa, according to the Church.

[dietzy]

Anyone know what the latest polls are saying, as far as who's "ahead" in the election (not who won the debates)?

I am not sure about post debate....but before this last debate it all depended on which poll you looked at. And each poll has different groups of people they ask and different ways they ask which can have a direct impact on their results. To give you the two extremes that I have heard...the most I have heard Kerry up by was 3 points...and Bush up by as many as 6 and all the others were somewhere in between there.

[Benwa]

I agree that Kerry should leave religion out of it. I also think Bush should shut up about his faith as well. I've no use for talk in that subject. I prefer someone to act like christ rather than tell people how he's such a great christian. Behave in a christlike manner. And neither of them behave in that way. Kerry comes off as phoney and Bush, geez don't get me started. From what I've learned from the bible, Jesus wasn't for wars. He wasn't "your with us or against us". His attitude never involved using premtive force. He didn't appear to be for spending insane amounts of money on military while the citizenry could use that money for something that might be useful (ie food, medicine, shelter). And I wouldn't say I'm necassarily judging them. It's plain as day. If jesus preached certain things and they do the exact opposite, then how can they claim to be christian? It baffles me and I wish they would both shut up about it.

[pisces2473]

I agree with you there, Benwa.

Another thing, Jesus never walked around going "I'm a good person. I am doing the right thing. I am great." He was humble. Neither of the two are acting very Christ-like when putting it on that scale w/ humility.

[dietzy]

I agree that Kerry should leave religion out of it. I also think Bush should shut up about his faith as well.

But when the moderator asks you a question directly about your faith and your religion then you pretty much have to talk about it. Otherwise GW would get slammed for avoiding the topic!

[pisces2473]

You're right. It's appropriate to answer questions, but not to just babble on about it in speeches and campaigning things.

[dietzy]

But I think that Bush's actions...the way he lives his daily life...is rather Christ like. But he is in a position where he is a public figure and has to speak about issues. Does this mean that he is not a Christian? Does this mean that Billy Graham or Rick Warren is not a Christian because they have major audiences that they speak to and publicly say that they believe in God and pray and rely on their faith?

[turbo79]

Indeed Kerry batted 1.00 (3/3) with the presidential debates. Here is the latest poll according to all three meda outlets (USA Today/CNN/Gallup):


1st Debate: Kerry 53% Bush 37% Neither 1% Tie 8%
2nd Debate: Kerry 47% Bush 45% Neither 1% Tie 7%
3rd Debate: Kerry 52% Bush 39% Neither 1% Tie 8%

What's amazing is that the poll results for the this last and final debate are nearly equal to the first debate, the one that was disasterous for Bush.

The last few weeks a substantial number in the American public has become more familiar with Kerry as a person and his views, and that he is a much more presidential figure than the scowling Bush. party but when the candidates were forced to talk about real issues side-

Bush makes the term "compassionate conversative" and as an "uniter" an oxymoron. Favoring the drug companies instead of making family health care more affordable is compassionate?
Failing to ban assault gun rifles to increase the safety of police gun officers in order to favor the NRA lobby is compassionate?
Repeatingly separating America between "liberals" and "conversatives" makes him an uniter?

The latest national polls (USA Today/CNN/Gallup show Kerry with 50% and Bush with 48%. (taken October 9th-10th). This is from which Kerry overcame a 8% deficit, which arose right after the Republican National Convention. Clearly it appeared that the Republicans threw a seemingly better convention be-side, it clearly showed the Emperor Bush had no clothes.

turbo79

[pisces2473]

Originally posted by dietzy
But I think that Bush's actions...the way he lives his daily life...is rather Christ like.
How so, exactly?

[dietzy]

Failing to ban assault gun rifles to increase the safety of police gun officers in order to favor the NRA lobby is compassionate?

Funny how Kerry and democrats can say this and yet one of the specific guns that would be banned under these regulations was a single shot firing gun with a pistol grip that Kerry himself was seen shooting during a press opp where he was trying to show that he was a manly man.

People confuse fully automatic and semi-automatic weapons that should be banned with weapons that LOOK like more than they really are. Ban them or not, criminals and terrorists will still have them and get them and use them.

Originally posted by pisces How so, exactly?

Too much to get into and I really don't have the time today. Read the book "God and George W. Bush". I personally greatly admire Bush for his religious viewpoints and having the moral compass that he has. I think there are others that are even stronger on this issue that have been mentioned as being future Presidential candidates, but they would DEFINITELY be called "far right wing radicals" if Bush is being called that.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0060760508/qid=1097765487/sr=2-2/ref=pd_ka_b_2_2/103-6802834-5283853

[pisces2473]

I don't have time to read that book! Can you just give me a few examples? Are you talking about the fact that he's from a strong family and he's been married to the same woman for like 30 years?

[turbo79]

Originally posted by dietzy
But I think that Bush's actions...the he lives his daily life...is rather Christ like. But he is in a position where he is a public figure and has to speak about issues. Does this mean that he is not a Christian? Does this mean that Billy Graham or Rick Warren is not a Christian because they have major audiences that they speak to and publicly say that they believe in God and pray and rely on their faith?

That's what frightens me so much about Bush. He integrates his religous views too much with his presidential policies. It is good to live up to your religion in your private life. But you cannot let it significantly influence your presidential actions. As America's president, he must represent not only Christian Americans, but agnostics, athiets, Jewish Americans, Muslim Americans, Buddhists Americans, etc. Unlike Kerry,s he doesn't not really respects other people's spritiual views, which is consistent with his stubborn 'my way or the highway' approach to things. His drive to push a consistitutional ammendment banning same-sex marriage and banning stem cell research are signs he wants to impose his religious views on others. You can't abuse the US constitution like that Thomas Jefferson and other founding fathers knew about the perils of radical religion and inscribed in the constitution that there must be a clear between church and state.

Two of my more favorite quotes:

John F. Kerry: "I would like to paraphrase what someone wisely once said, that I am less concerned about God being on our side, and that I am more concerned about us being on God's side.

John F Kennedy: "I'm not running to be a Catholic president. I'm running to be a president who happens to be Catholic."

turbo79

[dietzy]

Interesting parallel, IMO, to the leaders of our nation moving farther and farther away from wearing their faith on their sleeves so to speak and leading on those standards and the decline in our society as we move away from those types of leaders and those standards.

[leoncour]

ABC Who won the debate?
Among Democrats – Kerry: 81%
Among Republicans – Bush: 73%

CBS Poll uncommitted voters:
Who won the debate:
Kerry-Edwards: 39
Bush-Cheney: 25
Tie: 36

CBS POLL, Kerry has clear positions on issues:
Before: 29%
After: 60%
CNN Poll:
Kerry 52%
Bush 39%

MSNBC Keith Oberman:
12 Rounds Kerry
4 Rounds Bush
MSNBC Online poll:

Who won the debate?
Kerry 75, Bush 25%

KERRY WINS ABC REPUBLICAN HEAVY POLL:
Of the 566 People Polled (38% Were Republican, 30% Democrat, 28% Independent) Kerry Won 42%-415
Kerry In Control And Winner

Bob Novak: “Kerry seems to be overpowering Bush.” (cnn.com, 10/13/04)

Candy Crowley: “If what you’re looking for in a candidate is the best debater, I mean, that is definitely John Kerry. He has a quick command of the facts, he is very articulate, and I think the poll reflects that.” (CNN, 10/13/04)

Ron Reagan: “I will predict that the polls tomorrow, just as they have in the two previous presidential debates, will say that Kerry won.” (MSNBC, 10/13/04)

Pat Buchanan: “Kerry was, I thought, very much at the top of his game and I thought toward the end, when you saw Kerry, you saw more of the humanity of the man in some of those questions, which was very helpful to them; talking about the daughters and things. I thought he had some excellent moments.” (MSNBC, 10/13/04)

John Roberts: “I would probably have to give it to John Kerry. He seemed a little bit more poised.” (CBS, John Roberts, 10/13/04)

Joe Scarborough: “It gave Democrats a reason to be excited about John Kerry.” (MSNBC, 10/13/04)

Jon Meacham, Newsweek: “John Kerry took the populist war straight to the President.” (MSNBC, 10/13/04)

Tavis Smiley: “I think, Peter, that you have to shore up your bases…I think Mr. Kerry did that with people of color on the left.” (ABC, 10/13/04)

Bill Schneider: “Well this was a decisive win for John Kerry. It was just about as decisive as his win in the first debate, which everyone agreed was a blowout. His, the first debate he won by 16 points; this debate, Kerry won by 13 points. According to the views of the viewers polled immediately after the debate so they had no chance really to be influenced by the spin.” (CNN, 10/13/04)

Andrea Mitchell: “Kerry says, well we all, you know, married above ourselves and some would say, me more than most – joking about Teresa Heinz and her extraordinary fortune and I thought that was actually showing a lot of self confidence of John Kerry to joke about that disparity.” (MSNBC, 10/13/04

Kerry’s Momentum Grew And Grows

David Gergen: "John Kerry, Sen. Kerry gained strength as the debate went on and I thought he became much more effective and if anything I thought the last part of the debate was his." (PBS, 10/13/04)

Carlos Watson: “As we went along, as we talked about social security, as we talked about immigration, as we talked even about the Supreme Court, I thought John Kerry ultimately found his voice. And when all is said and done I think Kerry will be proclaimed the winner, which I think will be significant because I think he will be viewed as having won all three debates.” (CNN, 10/13/04)

Dean Reynolds: “I think the candidate whose numbers have been moving in the right direction for the last 10 days has been Senator John Kerry, this debate did nothing to stop that, and I think from the Kerry point of view they’ll be happy about the results tonight.” (ABC, 10/13/04)

Anthony Mason: “Dan, the uncommitted voters in our survey have given the edge in this debate, to this final debate, to John Kerry.” (CBS, 10/13/04)

[dietzy]

Ron Reagan: “I will predict that the polls tomorrow, just as they have in the two previous presidential debates, will say that Kerry won.” (MSNBC, 10/13/04)

WOW! And I thought Reagan would come out for Bush! HAHAHAHAH! There is an unbiased opinion.

I think any one of us could go out on the web and put together a list just as big from big media outlets and other sources saying that Bush crushed Kerry.

[cazort]

I think there was one moment in the debate where Bush really snapped. Bush seemed very collected and intelligent in the last debate, in stark contrast to his "deer in the headlights" performance in the first. I thought he was actually coming across stronger than Kerry at times---

---Until the question about the minimum wage was asked. Now, Kerry and Bush both evaded questions earlier in the debate. But, I saw Kerry give a clear answer on that question, and Bush just totally dodged it, refusing even to comment, and instead just talked about "No Child Left Behind", which sounds like a good idea, except that every teacher I know, Republican or Democrat, is starkly opposed to it because of how it puts demands on schools without providing enough funding for them.

Now, I'm not here to argue about the economics of the minimum wage---there are strong arguments on both side of whether or not (and how much) to raise it. But when Bush dodged that question, it was over. I could sense that Kerry gathered a sense of confidence after that question, and Bush was just shaky. It was obvious that he was trying to defend himself, change the subject off difficult topics, and make pot-shots while possible.

And that's why Kerry won the Debate--because Bush didn't have anything to say about that question--or about the general social concerns underlying the questions, the questions concerning the poor. It became apparent in that moment that Bush is truly a candidate of the rich. It's that simple.

[Crimson King II]

Candidate of the Rich? Riiiiight. And John Kerry worked himself up from the gutter. Why do we neglect that Kerry is over 12 times wealthier than Bush??? And he's got a voting record of increasing taxes and opposing cuts on ALL Americans.

[Crimson King II]

And realize that any poll with Kerry in the lead has him well within the margin of error. After his FINEST performances, he can't secure a stable lead. Mondale won a debate once too. Think if Bush wins the election....still a strong probability given the electoral college AND the national polls....that ANYONE claims a Kerry debate victory???

[Crimson King II]

A substantial bit is tied to the culture. No matter what the left says, we do have a heritage that reflects and mixes with religion. Also, bear in mind that much of old Europe still looks askance a bit at religion mixing with politics, as they sat under Catholic church influence so heavily for hundreds of year. Also, Christian or not....France hates America...I expect nothing less of them...

[Crimson King II]

Watch the Catholic vote very closely. I think the Catholic vote may decide the election. The rust belt swing states have heavy Catholic populations, and they have begun to trend heavily, heavily Republican and they are trending to reject the Dems on things like abortion and gay marriage. Bush still leads in "war on terror numbers," but swing Catholics can help him overcome deficits on domestic issues. If the break Republican, and indications are that they will, then that carries Ohio, West Virginia, and possibly Pennsylvania. I think Bush wins Ohio and West Virginia, and I think he carries Florida more clearly than in 2000. I think undecideds, as they tend to do in every presidential election, break 70-30 for the incumbent. That's how Bush wins. And I think it still happens.

[Crimson King II]

I think France may not hate America, but France's leaders are envious of America, they were bilking the food-for-oil program in Iraq, and they want France to return as a power and they are undermining American interests at every turn in an effort to equalize themselves with us. Their people support their efforts, as would be expected, while ours are beginning to not support ours...


And they DO have a right to do so. We also and similarly have a right to then cut them out of our economic policy, refuse to protect them should they need it, and point out to them that we saved their bacon not just in the French Revolution, but also in WWI, and again in WWII. Ingrates....

[heatherf]

Go back to the one thread with the link to the newspaper letter about the christian guy, who doesn't necessarily vote for republicans- don't know where that is right now.....

See, my mom is hard core born again, at church at least 2 times a week, true believer. And she has major problems with Bush- especially with the Iraq war and the environment. The way my mom feels, specifically about the environment, is that this Earth is God's, he made every living thing on it, and it is our duty as his children to keep and protect it. Bush's record on the maintaining and improving the enviornment is simply unacceptable in my mother's eyes. I think she actually sees the larger picture of the world, and actually wants it to improve for future generations, rather than continue to spiral downwards.....

Thank God for people like my mother, who even though devoutly Christian, choose to vote against Bush.

I'd like to think that the summers around here won't continue to get warmer and warmer. We're dealing with out of control wildfires here right now- you can't even see the sun here today- ash is literally falling from the sky. The mutilation has got to stop.

[Crimson King II]

Clearly, not all Christians are republicans, but Evangelicals typically are. But there's a divide....for everyone like your mom who sees the "bigger picture" as you say, there is likely at least one (perhaps 1.3 or more) that believe they see the "bigger picture" and find Bush on that side...

[heatherf]

Agreed. It's simply too bad that those other people are incorrect. ;)

[Crimson King II]

Incorrect, or as they like to call it, "NOT doomed to an eternity of hellfire and painful, dark, ugly, horrible damnation at the hands of Satan."

Take your pick...

[heatherf]

Actually CK, as for my belief and the belief of born again Christians (which our President is), once one has committed their life to God and accepted God as their Lord and Savior, they are "saved" and going to heaven.

[Crimson King II]

Perhaps lily. But we shouldn't be so willing to let them have it both ways. It ALWAYS seems to be in their best interests to beg and plead for us to help them when they're being invaded or threatened by Nazis or Fascists, but then when they want money in lieu of us similarly protecting ourselves or others they turn their back.....

That's why Tony Blair is great. He's not a cowardly simp, and he'll support us when in need as we did England. France and Germany though....

[Crimson King II]

And by the way, uh....Turbo. Why are we overlooking the clear and obvious notion that these debate "win polls" aren't reflected in the horserace election polls. Conservatives are always going to say that Bush won....he said what they agree with. Liberals are always going to say that Kerry won....he said what he needed to say to 1) potentially win (which they want) and 2) ensure them that he is still a liberal (which they too agree with).

This is a "turn out your base" election. If the Reps get more people to the polls...they will win. The Dem base...though more excited than a month ago...still divides on the War on Terror, Gay Marriage, Tax Cuts, and Iraq (with substantial numbers of Dems still taking the Bush line, or at a minimum the Clinton position, which starkly contrasts with Kerry's). I think the Reps DO turn out more for Bush, the Dems do NOT unify AS MUCH, with some ciphoning to the President at greater rates than the vice-versa....even the favorable Kerry polls show that dynamic in the internals.

[Crimson King II]

But let me let everyone in on a secret.....


America is not France.


Shhhhhh.


Take no offense....I'm just illustrating a point. We aren't France, and we do not have the same interests. Nor do we want to be France, whose policies have largely relegated them to insubstantial, second-world status on the international stage. That would not be acceptable for the United States. Why? Because then, when it comes time to face down Hitler, Stalin, or the Cold Warrior evils, who do moderately democratic nations align with? The answer becomes far less clear, and 1) our interests are overlooked and 2) it's far more likely that evil takes root within such coalitions without an American presence.

[Crimson King II]

I AGREE....alliances ARE made and BROKEN. The left does not seem to recognize that, I think, repeatedly insisting we go get our OLD alliances to approve our policies. About the only nations NOT with us are France and Germany.

I see the point...but how can we reconcile 1) the position that we're "going our own ways" and 2) the position that we MUST keep these OLD alliances going, which seems to not recognize the first position?

If things truly change, and that is acceptable...the Kerry position weakens. If they do not, then to some degree our allies are ingrates.


Also...why WON'T we be able to do it forever? There's NO real reason we cannot, is there?

[Crimson King II]

The EU IS growing. But who says France and Germany are the power-brokers of the EU. England will always be a HUGE force in the EU...as will Italy and Spain (though to a less degree with a socialist government now). But in terms of military and foreign policy, that economic influence will not translate, because the riches of the EU policy must always be split among disparate nations with disparate influences. Imagine dividing the US into 20 regions, each with it's own Congress and President, then try to forge a consistent budget every year. Economically wealthy, sure? Comparable to the US? Probably not. Consistent translation to foreign policy? Probably not. A unified military? Doubful. That still puts a big strength (and burden) squarely on the U.S.

[Crimson King II]

You could be right. But does anyone see France, with the nationalistic pride that it is showing in these times, ever deciding to submit itself and its people to a conglomerate, pseudo-nation state comprised of the other nationalities of Europe?

[Crimson King II]

Peace-out, homey-G-smack.

[leoncour]

Originally posted by Crimson King II
You could be right. But does anyone see France, with the nationalistic pride that it is showing in these times, ever deciding to submit itself and its people to a conglomerate, pseudo-nation state comprised of the other nationalities of Europe?

There is a belief among conservatives that France is composed of effeminate snobs that look down upon every other culture. But I can tell you CK that according to a Pew research finding when asked the question "our people are not perfect, but our culture is superior,"around 1/3 of the French agree with this statement, while 3/5 of Americans agree. So I guess that kind of debunks the conservative stereotype of France because Americans are snobbier, but I doubt that will change anyones mind. I have a few French freinds myself and I can can attest they are some of the most genuinely good people I know.

http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=3393

[dietzy]

CK SAID - Watch the Catholic vote very closely.

Yeah it will be interesting to see where the Christian vote goes. I think Kerry comes off very weak in this area and just looks like he is once again pandering to an audience that he wants a vote from and not being truly genuine. He attended like 3 church services this weekend. I am still amazed that Kerry, Clinton and others can get away with preaching/politicing from the pulpit with no scrutiny on it from anyone. Bush, to my knowledge anyway, has never done this because he knows it is improper. If he did he would be slammed by the media for a violation of church and state.

Naturally Europe is trying to act in its own best interests, just like America does.

I think it might be a little different when France is taking money from a dictator, torturer and terrorist via the Oil for Food program in exchange for undercutting the US in the UN and to push Sadam's agenda. They sold their soul to the devil, IMO. And yet they are just trying to act in their own best interests? Yeah...I guess that is rather accurate the more I think about it.