Tonight was John Kerry's finest moment on the 2004 campaign trail. John Kerry won the debate more than George W. Bush lost the debate. Kerry looked presidential. Bush didn't. Did Bush let Kerry back into the horse race by agreeing to three debates?

Bush had several Cameron Diaz moments. He searched for words. He asked for more time and then stared into the camera without much to say. He repeated himself on lines that weren't effective the first time. The "ems" and "ahs" prefaced just about every statement.

Kerry, on the other hand, fought on George W. Bush's alleged home court (foreign policy) and won. He appeared dignified, serious, confident (not his usual arrogance), and articulate.

At 8:59 EDT, George W. Bush sat somewhat comfortably in the driver's seat. At 10:31 EDT, George W. Bush could be seen fighting with John Kerry over the steering wheel.

Kerry is Agile, Bush has conviction?

Kerry seems capable of continually assimilating new information in order to make the right decisions, rather than simply "being right."

Bush knows what he believes and nothing can make him change those beliefs. Translation--I've made up my mind and I won't be dissuaded with facts!

I think we were all well aware of how this was going to go and there were no big surprises here with regards to how each candidate appeared.

Anybody who expected Bush to come out like Churchill or Kerry to start sounding like Forrest Gump was not in tune with current events.

However, the opposite was not true either.

Kerry repeated the same humdrum soundbites he's been regurgitating as his mantra for the last nine months without offering a hint of what his secret 'plans' are to accomplish his ends. And Bush did a very good job of jabbing him defensively and offensively.

I don't agree that Bush did not sound Presidential even while stumbling for words. He was forceful, factual and I think convincing portrayed his convictions.

Kerry was the better speaker clearly but again did not offer any substantive answers.

Ultimately, I think that most people have made up their minds and have the slant on this that suits them. Objectivity makes for good discussion but outside of a small percentage of the voters, people know what they're going to do in Novemeber.

The best thing about this debate is that since Kerry decided to basically sound like Howard Dean (a bold move since most of this country supported the Iraq War for some reason or other) the president is now feeling the heat very specifically in that one area that he allowed the neocons to take over. Hopefully, that will be a wake-up call to at least Karl Rove, if not Bush personally, to clean house if he does in fact win reelection.

Did anyone crack-up when Bush suggested that he "didn't know where Kerry was going to get the money to pay" for all the security improvements he wanted to make? That was rich from someone who has spent with reckless abandon money that doesn't exist.

And I caught Kerr's "Treblinka" mistake when he said it, that was real funny as well.

I suppose on a board where the conservatives dislike Bush as much as the liberals do that Kerry would be lauded as the winner. I didn't see that at all.

For example: Bush clearly pointed out that Kerry cannot condemn the war as pointless and convince others to commit forces; Bush quoted Kerry's inconsistencies without rebuttal from Kerry; he called Kerry on the "global test" for military action; and he demonstrated that Kerry does not have a firm handle on North Korea.

At best, the debate as a whole was a wash, which for Kerry is a loss. And given that America tuned out before the half-way mark, it was (in my humble opinion) a victory for the president.

Yeah, I loved that 'Global Test' crud. This is a preview, for most of the public that doesn't already know, of what a whacked out liberal point of view Kerry has.

Bush called him on it big time.

Last night's debate showed me numerous things. Kerry is quick on his feet, well rehearsed and has a mind like a steel trap. However, Bush has the conviction that many admire.

Anyway, I call the debate close, with the edge to Kerry. The expressions on Bush's face when Kerry was talking will be a sticking point for some. Also, Bush's "word salad" left much to be desired. However, I still wait for Kerry to tell me just HOW he is going to fix things.

I was amused this morning with all of the spin I saw. Our local paper had a panel of 8 watching the debates, then showed their opinions today, along with other interesting facts. The four Republicans think Bush won, the four Dems say Kerry won.

You spin me right round baby right round...

Be well,

Sponge

Yes. While GW has been running the country and trying to win a war, Kerry has had plenty of time to learn his script.

Kerry is a multi millionaire in his own right, is worth billions by marriage, hasn’t worked a day as a Senator (not ONE!) for the last two months and, overall, has been missing for work 80% this year (so far) and about 50% last year.

He’s tanned (so to speak), rested and outside of campaigning and being Mr. Heinz, he doesn’t have much to do but to study his lines.

ASDF
Prior to 9/11 (8 months on the job) GWB was on vacation 3 months. Since then he has emerged as the most vacationed President ever. He is shameless with the amount of time off he has taken.
Conservatives like you will say anything to
re-elect daddy's boy. Try sticking to the issues and hopefully the facts.

This is the information age. The West Wing, along with the Pentagon, CIA and FBI all travel with the president electronically. The idea that Bush can't conduct presidential business while on 'vacation' is ridiculously dated.

On the other hand, it is pretty hard to cast votes on the floor of the senate when you're wind surfing or playing flag football at good ole Lambert field.

Highly doubt that GW has taken more vacation than Slick Willy the goldbricker.

Kerry takes the cake though. Even Dole had the class to give up his Senate seat when running for President. Some little thing about not wanting to do a disservice to his constituency.

Kerry doesn't let things like that bother him. He's conspicuously AWOL from his job, takes his pay and all of the prestige of the office and when he's not getting a $2,000 dollar hair cut, he's windsurfing on the Federal dime.

What a scumbag.

And back to the issues we go...

Bushco keeps planting this seed of curiousity in everyone to know Kerry's exact plan. My question for them is: how is Kerry supposed to detail an exact plan when he hasn't made it into office yet. He doesn't yet have access to the resources he would potentially be using to fix the situation. He's layed out as detailed a plan as can be expected. Mr. Bush, however, has had four years to outline a plan and some of us are still waiting to hear it, while some have given up on hearing it, while his supporters are just the type to say: "we don't need a plan. We trust Bush to tell us when to bark and when to rub our nose in our sh*t." And I'm not satisfied by: "We've got a plan; we're just not telling." We can't keep sending mixed messages to the rest of the world by asking them for transparent governments and then hiding everything in our own government behind the great wall of fear.

His plan seems to be that he wants other countries to start taking more casualties. Exactly how does one sell that to the other countries we want in the coalition?

Kerry has no substantive problem solving plan.

He didn't have a plan as Lt. Gov. of Massachusetts, he doesn't have a plan as a Senator, he doesn't have a plan as the Democratic nominee.

The only plan that Kerry has, is to make sure he's married to rich ladies and keeping cushy no-heavy-lifting goverment jobs and making sure his hair is right.

This run for the White House is what he's been practicing for his whole life.

Now, he's studying for the "Global Test".

So you ask over and over for a plan from Kerry, and when he lays out a plan in clear and consise language, you say he hasn't included any substantive details. And I ask what is Bush's plan. And I read your post and ask what are your arguments, and what are their factual bases? Bush wears women's underwear to the gym. What are my factual bases? I'll tell you mine when you tell me yours.

Are you for real? Bush obviously has a plan as he is currently executing his plan. He doesn't need to answer to a do nothing Elitist Senator.

Kerry has not articulated a plan in any detail and his whole platform exists to tell us how bad everything is when it isn't.

ASDF, Right now Kerry represents the mouthpiece for those who want some answers from this administration. Yes, Bush has a duty to his constituency, which is everyone, including liberals, to answer questions about his policies. Don't be so thin skinned. Bush should probably thicken his skin as well. It makes him sound like a monkey when he says war was a last resort and then can't control his temper in a simple debate.