--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I thought he did a great job. He asked tough questions that neither candidate probably wanted to answer without seeming to be attacking either one. The format limited his ability to do any follow-ups and that's kind of a shame because there were a couple of times I thought both Bush and Kerry ducked the question.
While I'm at it, here's my plug for "The News Hour with Jim Lehrer" on PBS. If you've never watched it, take a gander some time. They do about 10 minutes of headlines and then devote the rest of the entire hour to an in-depth discussion of two or three topics. Typically, they bring in two conservatives and two liberals to discuss the issues. The best part is that I can't recall it ever descending into the shouting matches seemingly so favored by CNN and Fox.
MAKO Wrote:--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I thought he did a great job. He asked tough questions that neither candidate probably wanted to answer without seeming to be attacking either one. The format limited his ability to do any follow-ups and that's kind of a shame because there were a couple of times I thought both Bush and Kerry ducked the question.
While I'm at it, here's my plug for "The News Hour with Jim Lehrer" on PBS. If you've never watched it, take a gander some time. They do about 10 minutes of headlines and then devote the rest of the entire hour to an in-depth discussion of two or three topics. Typically, they bring in two conservatives and two liberals to discuss the issues. The best part is that I can't recall it ever descending into the shouting matches seemingly so favored by CNN and Fox.
I agree with you MAKO, Lehrer did a great job. I was really impressed. I also thought that Kerry showed excellent debate skills. He still didn't have much substance, but his skills at the podium were excellent. Now Bush on the other hand seemed to be partially comatose; he had good points and substance, but the delivery and demeanor was pathetic.
I have to give the debate to Kerry.... :bang:
The News Hour is probably the most objective news that anyone will get these days. It's clearly done on a tight budget, but thazt doesn't matter when the content is of such high quality.
Lehrer could be a lead anchor at any network, but he sticks to PBS and that is a credit to him.
GrayBeard Wrote:MAKO Wrote:--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I thought he did a great job. He asked tough questions that neither candidate probably wanted to answer without seeming to be attacking either one. The format limited his ability to do any follow-ups and that's kind of a shame because there were a couple of times I thought both Bush and Kerry ducked the question.
While I'm at it, here's my plug for "The News Hour with Jim Lehrer" on PBS. If you've never watched it, take a gander some time. They do about 10 minutes of headlines and then devote the rest of the entire hour to an in-depth discussion of two or three topics. Typically, they bring in two conservatives and two liberals to discuss the issues. The best part is that I can't recall it ever descending into the shouting matches seemingly so favored by CNN and Fox.
I agree with you MAKO, Lehrer did a great job. I was really impressed. I also thought that Kerry showed excellent debate skills. He still didn't have much substance, but his skills at the podium were excellent. Now Bush on the other hand seemed to be partially comatose; he had good points and substance, but the delivery and demeanor was pathetic.
I have to give the debate to Kerry.... :bang:
I would agree with this...but I'm not banging my head against a proverbial wall. I EXPECTED Kerry to win the debate. He had nothing to lose, and he has excellent debate skills.
I watched part of the debate a second time, minus my own nervousness...and came away more impressed with Bush than at first glance. I thought he missed golden opportunities to point out Kerry's inconsistencies...but I gotta tell you, Kerry's Iraq position is no clearer to me and his North Korea ideas are clearly inferior to Bush's.
All that said, Kerry showed his fine debating skills and I feel he won on style points. I'm sure his base will be enthused.
On the other hand, I kind of felt Bush's team had lapsed back into "run out the clock" mode much like they did in the last week of the 2000 campaign. I have a feeling this will re-energize the Bush team, as well.
BTW-did you hear Kerry praising our "Cold War Strategy" of pre-emption? He OPPOSED Reagan and his pre-emptive policies at every turn.
If Kerry goes any further right, we'll have TWO conservatives running for President.
I have to disagree about Lehrer. A lot of the questions he asked were taken from Kerry cues. Which is why President Bush was almost immediately put on the defensive. Probably a good part of the reason why the President became so frustrated. He couldn't call Lehrer out and just had to take it. As the debate goes, I think it went as the Kennedy/Nixon debate did. Kerry had style, but President Bush had substance. In my less than humble opinion, of course.
Lehrer sucked as a moderator. He asked hard questions to Bush and COMPLETELY omitted serious questions everyone has about Kerry. He is, as George Stephanopolis put it, "The Liberals Moderator".