I thought it was funny how they introduced the candidates.

She intorduced Cheney and they showed his face. No reaction.

She introduced Edwards, and he did this goofy thing where he cocked his head to the side and gave this big smiled.

Not saying this is important, but just kinda funny lookin.

Why do the Vice-Presidents debate?

fsquid Wrote:Why do the Vice-Presidents debate?

Because they would be next in line if something were to happen to the President, but I don't think that this debate will make a difference in the grand scheme of things.

GrayBeard Wrote:

fsquid Wrote:Why do the Vice-Presidents debate?

Because they would be next in line if something were to happen to the President, but I don't think that this debate will make a difference in the grand scheme of things.

no i really doubt it will. becuase nobody really won.

Tulsaman Wrote:

GrayBeard Wrote:

fsquid Wrote:Why do the Vice-Presidents debate?

Because they would be next in line if something were to happen to the President, but I don't think that this debate will make a difference in the grand scheme of things.

no i really doubt it will. becuase nobody really won.

Right.

By the way, has anybody heard if the doctors have figured out how to remove Cheney's foot from Edward's hind parts?

No, but I bet Edwards can figure out a way to get rich by suing over it.

:D



jw

I have a new rule for the debates......If on any particular question, you go back and discuss a previous question, you should not be allowed to answer the current question or talk about the previous question...you forfeit your turn.


Also, once the foot is firmly embedded in your behind, stop squirming like a little girl..err trial lawyer.

Frankly, I'd rather have Cheney or Edwards as president than the two that are candidates. Both seemed sharp and well polished, unlike the debacle we saw last Thurs.

fsquid Wrote:Frankly, I'd rather have Cheney or Edwards as president than the two that are candidates. Both seemed sharp and well polished, unlike the debacle we saw last Thurs.

most americans would argee with you on that. i know i'd rather see Edwards as the Presidential candidate .

factcheck.org is having a field day with the debate from last night. Sad that politicians can spin their crap like that.

fsquid Wrote:factcheck.org is having a field day with the debate from last night. Sad that politicians can spin their crap like that.

I didn't know about that site. I like it. Seems fair.
I bet the RNC is kicking Cheney's but for saying .com instead of .org.
jw

I like it and they do seem to be fair. Then again, what do I know?

Nice analysis Chris. I think one reason that you might not agree with the media's winners/losers of the debates is that I think they are saying who won stylistically. They are judging how the candidate handled themselves and how many zingers they got off, not the actually content of their arguments. So maybe Candidate A turned a questions around on his opponent, instead of answering the question he brought up how Candidate B lied about something or changed his mind on an issue somewhat related to the question. Score points for A.

The whole media analysis of saying who was the winner is a joke. If the media wanted to they could turn the whole election by reporting that B was the stronger candidate and A ran out of the room crying. I would be the polls would turn in the next few days.

Didn't JFK win on being "stylish"?

fsquid Wrote:Didn't JFK win on being "stylish"?

JFK won on Daley's voter fraud campaign.

I'm the first to admit the President did not look good in the last debate and lost.

That being said, I can't see how ANYONE could objectively look at last night's debate and call it anything but a Cheney blowout.

Despite the occasional mistake by both guys, Cheney made Edwards look like the inexperienced kid he is when it comes to world affairs. He had better command of the situation (has either Kerry or Edwards offered up any other analysis of Iraq than "it's a mess"?) in Iraq, better knowledge of what we're up against in dealing with other countries, and the line that resonated most with me was the Kerry/Edwards team using their 87 billion apropriations "no" vote as political currency during the Dem primary. "If they can't stand up to Howard Dean, how can they stand up to Al Qaeda?" Classic.

He reopened the scrutiny of the candidates' Senate records (which I haven't heard one person even TRY to defend), accurately pointed out Edwards' missed votes on critical issues he tried to attack the V.P. with, and very shrewdly (and correctly) tied Iraqi casualties with coalition casualties, making the resonant point that Kerry/Edwards have to discount and diminish the Iraqi sacrifice in order to prop up their weak, vacillating positions on the subject.

I gave the devil his due last Thursday...now it's time for you kool-aid drinkers to put down the latest batch and do the same. Dick Cheney made Edwards look like a whiny child.

On an aside, my wife and I got to shake the Vice President's hand last night at the post-debate rally and congratulate him on the undressing of an obviously weak, underqualified candidate. It was quite an honor.

I don't think anyone has ever confused Edwards of being a qualified individual. I like to think of him as the democrats answer to Dan Quayle.

fsquid Wrote:I don't think anyone has ever confused Edwards of being a qualified individual. I like to think of him as the democrats answer to Dan Quayle.

Hah! I've been watching clips of the Quayle/Bentsen debate...who decided that Quayle needed eye-liner? He looked more suited to the drummer auditions for 'Poison' than a VP debate.

I can't say Edwards ever looked buffoonish-but he did look incredibly weak and inexperienced when placed side-by-side with Cheney.

It was amusing to hear Edwards say over and over again that "America saw John Kerry Thursday night, and they liked what they saw" (paraphrasing). It's like, "forget 20 years of being on the wrong side of every important issue, forget the 10,000 different positions on Iraq that even I pointed out during the Democratic primaries, and forget about the fact that John Kerry turned a vote to fund our troops into a political tool to compete with Howard Dean - just remember that 90 minutes when he finally, amazingly, put it all together, and take that image with you to the polls.


Why doesn't he just ask people to lobotomize themselves?

BearcatCarl Wrote:Why doesn't he just ask people to lobotomize themselves?

Because if a Dr. does it, he can sue them. If we do it ourselves, there is no one for him to sue.