2 GO BACK AND FORTH ON ISSUES DOMESTIC
President Bush lashed out at Sen. John Kerry on Saturday for his stands on domestic programs ranging from retirement to health care, saying the Democrat is obstructing needed reforms that would give workers more control over their financial future.
Ref. https://deseretnews.com/dn/view/1%2C1249%2C...95709%2C00.html
QUOTE (JB@Trinidad @ 1-Oct 04, 8:04 AM) |
So what is the verdict? Who did better in the debate? Personally I think Bush made the mistake of repeating himself too much. Kerry's big mistake is not really saying how his 'better' plan is specifically different from Bush's current strategy. |
International Level: Envoy / Political Participation: 241 24.1%
TOE-TO-TOE ON IRAQ WAR
In a sharp face-to-face exchange in the opening parry of the vice presidential debate, Sen. John Edwards accused Vice President Dick Cheney of "not being straight with the American people" about Iraq, prompting Cheney to vigorously defend the administration's record on foreign policy and to challenge the national security credentials of the Democratic ticket.
Ref. https://deseretnews.com/dn/view/1%2C1249%2C...96447%2C00.html
So how did everyone think the one and only Vice Presidential debate went? Personally, I believe Cheney had the edge in that he used facts and years of experience to prove that Edwards is not ready for the Vice Presidential role. It was clear that Edwards is heavily relying on Kerry to carry him through the campaign while Cheney can stand on his own. It is also clear that Edwards has motives on his own for running with Kerry; ie, he is looking towards a Presidential bid at a later stage, while Cheney made it clear this is as far as his political career goes. I found it quite amusing when Edwards was asked how he could defend an economic policy of Kerry's that he stated during the primaries would make the deficit worse instead of better.
International Level: Envoy / Political Participation: 241 24.1%
I was quite pleased with the VP debate. One commentator said afterwards that Edwards was like a "liitle yapping dog" next to Cheney, who was composed and en pointe.
Two events that stuck with me were, first, when the host asked Edwards what his qualifications are for being VP. He went completely off topic and never actually answered the question. Cheney directly pointed that out to the host, who made no comment. And second, when Edwards had the gall to go on about Cheney's "gay" daughter! That is absolutely the most tactless, classless thing I've ever seen a politician do in public.
IMO
Roz
International Level: Ambassador / Political Participation: 595 59.5%
Tonight is supposed to be a town meeting. This means that people can ask questions on any subject, and the candidates will have to react on the fly. Domestic issues, foreign policy questions, everything is on the table for this one. ABC News anchor Charles Gibson is the moderator for tonight. He'll choose the questions, which will have been submitted in advance. So Charlie will be the only one who will know what the subjects will be. Now once the questioner has actually asked his or her question out loud, and it has to be the same one they submitted, their microphones will be cut immediately. No follow-up, no dialogue with the candidates.
Now the stakes, and the spin, have certainly changed since the last one. Before the first debate, both sides were trying to lower expectations about their man, praising the debating skills of their opponent. But the polls were unanimous in saying that the viewers felt that Sen. Kerry had won that debate. So there is more pressure on the President. And the polls also show the race is tightening up to a virtual dead heat. So clearly these debates are having an effect.
Ref. Leroy Sievers and the Nightline Staff
Nightline Offices ABCNEWS Washington D.C.
With the recent Afghan elections having gone well, and now blessed by the UN (see here) what are your opinions on how this will affect President Bush' re-election bid. This has been one of his campaign issues in getting a fair and balanced election process in once terror striken countries like Afghanistan and Iraq. Will it provide favorable public opinion or not?
International Level: Envoy / Political Participation: 241 24.1%
Kerry made a major faux pas this weekend... Here is commentary on the original article from the New York Times Magazine (the Times requires registration, so this is an alternate source).
''We have to get back to the place we were, where terrorists are not the focus of our lives but they're a nuisance,'' Kerry told the New York Times Magazine on Sunday.
Kerry compared the activities of groups like al-Qaida and Hamas to the kind of petty street crime he fought earlier in his career.
''As a former law enforcement person, I know we're never going to end prostitution. We're never going to end illegal gambling," he told the Times.
"But we're going to reduce it, organized crime, to a level where it isn't on the rise. It isn't threatening people's lives every day, and fundamentally, it's something that you continue to fight, but it's not threatening the fabric of your life.''
The top Democrat's words are sure to fuel the impression that he's unwilling to wage an all-out war against the terrorist threat but instead take a more European view that a certain amount of terrorism is acceptable.
https://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/10/11/84148.shtml
International Level: Ambassador / Political Participation: 595 59.5%