CNN.com: 79% say Kerry won debate

[Neo]

As of last night 79% of respondents said Kerry won the first debate, compared to only 18% for Bush. 4% said they were evenly matched. The results are even more surprising when you consider that it's reasonable to assume that more republicans than democrats have internet access.

MSNBC put Kerry at 64% and Bush at 36%.

[Perfect Stu]

wow, that is a HUGE percentage.

[GiMpY-wAnNaBe]

go Kerry. He got some key points on Bush.

One thing that Bush is really goood at is avoiding the question, for example, the question regarding whether the lives lost in Iraq were "worth it", Bush's response was "All lives are precious", avoiding the obvious trap of the question really shows that Bush is a good debator. Alas, Kerry outmatches him in this area though, the key evidence that showed the Bush was not up to Kerry's level were the facial expressions, Kerry was shrewd, and impossible to decipher, whereas Bush's face was like an open book, showing disappointment, or enjoyment alike. Kerry was definately more controlled as well, never went over the time, never interrupted, and always waited his turn.

[GameMaster]

One of those votes is mine.

[Typhoid]

That was the most bumbling I have ever seen Bush doing. But it was basically on that one rebuttle. Good times.

Is Bush going to lose the presedency? Who knows. He has never lost a debate until now. Perhaps his cockyness has caught up with him.

With his remarks like:

Chairman: "Mr. Bush, do you think this country will fall to another terrorist attack if senator Kerry is elected president?"

Bush: "Its not gonna happen.........i think the american people will re-elect me."

Or something like that.

And if Bush has ever said something about getting re-elected, i find that slightly humorous, considering he wasnt elected in the first place. Perhaps he should say "Re-appoint me." or something.

[Blackmane]

Yes, online opinion polls really show the outcome of something. :rolleyes:

Personally, I think they both did a lot of dancing around answers. Bush fumbled a lot of words, and Kerry named off dozens of names of people I don't care about, like I should care about them. Kerry did keep better control of himself, which is good, but I think most of Bush's answers were honest and fairly straightforward.

Eh, stylistically, Kerry won, and that is why everyone online is praising him. Content...who knows who won.

[Jonbo298]

The questions about terrorists and "If you become president, can you prevent another 9/11?". You can't guarantee it won't happen. Things slip up. Questions like those make no sense in a debate.

[Vampyr]

Yes, online opinion polls really show the outcome of something. :rolleyes:

Personally, I think they both did a lot of dancing around answers. Bush fumbled a lot of words, and Kerry named off dozens of names of people I don't care about, like I should care about them. Kerry did keep better control of himself, which is good, but I think most of Bush's answers were honest and fairly straightforward.

Eh, stylistically, Kerry won, and that is why everyone online is praising him. Content...who knows who won.

Isnt the opinion of the people what determines if someone "wisn" a debate? The majority of people think Kerry won, therefore he did.

I watched most of the debate last night, and I found it slightly humorous how kerry or bush would state a "fact", then the other one would state a "fact" that blatantly contradicted it. So it was as plain as day that ONE of them was lying.

In the end I do think Kerry came out on top, though. Bush spent almost all of the debate on the defensive side.

[Typhoid]

I found it slightly humorous how kerry or bush would state a "fact", then the other one would state a "fact" that blatantly contradicted it. So it was as plain as day that ONE of them was lying.



But who?



Bush:sneaky:Kerry

[dropCGCF]

They're both dirty liars who've sold their souls to Satan multiple times. But Kerry actually seems to be able to speak with fluidity and coherency. Plus, he's against the draft and I'm too much of a ***** to go to Iraq.

[GiMpY-wAnNaBe]

That was the most bumbling I have ever seen Bush doing. But it was basically on that one rebuttle. Good times.

Is Bush going to lose the presedency? Who knows. He has never lost a debate until now. Perhaps his cockyness has caught up with him.

With his remarks like:

Chairman: "Mr. Bush, do you think this country will fall to another terrorist attack if senator Kerry is elected president?"

Bush: "Its not gonna happen.........i think the american people will re-elect me."

Or something like that.

And if Bush has ever said something about getting re-elected, i find that slightly humorous, considering he wasnt elected in the first place. Perhaps he should say "Re-appoint me." or something.
that one quote actually really showed Bush's strength: avoiding a obviously deadly questioin. Its an extremely useful tool in debates, that helped him win last year as well. Similarly he avoided the "Were the lives lost in the War in Iraq worth it?" he answered "every life is precious". Its one of his strengths.

[hostilecrayon]

that one quote actually really showed Bush's strength: avoiding a obviously deadly questioin. Its an extremely useful tool in debates, that helped him win last year as well. Similarly he avoided the "Were the lives lost in the War in Iraq worth it?" he answered "every life is precious". Its one of his strengths.

It's also called the Red Herring Fallacy and is absolutely irrelevent to the matter at hand. I only watched a small portion of the debates because I know they are both liars, and I was too busy laughing at all of the fallacies they committed to really pay attention. Pretty much no argument in the debate was actually a valid argument. They were all fallacious. The average person however, has no actual training in logic, and has no idea that the stuff they are saying shouldn't be taken seriously. They give you no reason whatsoever to believe their conclusions. They give no real evidence to back it up. It's almost as bad as walking around with a sign with a useless catch phrase on it.

Who am I voting for? Kerry. Why? Because I don't want to see Bush screw up our country anymore than he already has.

[Blackmane]

It's almost as bad as walking around with a sign with a useless catch phrase on it.

Who am I voting for? Kerry.

You want to talk about useless catch phrases...

"Help is on the way"

"Reporting for duty!"

How cheesy can you get? That is one reason I am against John Kerry, because rather than talk about important issues, he would rather say stuff like "I would tell the soldiers in Iraq that 'Help is on the way'." Yeah, that is really what they want to hear. That is one thing I can appreciate about Bush, behind his bumblings, he says things that have a little meaning.

If anyone actually took the time to really look up the things Kerry has said instead of blindly following him because he isn't Bush, then you would realize he is no better fit to lead.

[Typhoid]

You want to talk about useless catch phrases...

"Help is on the way"

"Reporting for duty!"



What about Bushs "catch" phrases?

" and America is safer"

"God bless America"


I think he has said those enough to boost them into catchphrase status.

[The Germanator]

I believe he also said, "Hey, it's hard work" at least 27 times during the debate as well.

Being the President...Hard work? Since when. :rolleyes:

[Blackmane]

What about Bushs "catch" phrases?

" and America is safer"

"God bless America"


I think he has said those enough to boost them into catchphrase status.

Everyone says God bless America. I was more talking about things that only Kerry likes to say. But, Bush did say America is safer a lot. But, unlike Kerry's dumbass "help is on the way", saying america is safer is stating something that has meaning.

And, yes, being president is hard work. I would not like to have that job of being responsible for an entire nation of people and everything that happens to them.

[Typhoid]

Everyone says God bless America. I was more talking about things that only Kerry likes to say. But, Bush did say America is safer a lot. But, unlike Kerry's dumbass "help is on the way", saying america is safer is stating something that has meaning.



Are you dense?

Kerry saying "Help is on the way" is an underlying metaphor for sayin America will elect him.

And saying "America is safer" doesnt have meaning. He says it alot every speech he gives. It shows he has no stronger points in his speeches, so he has to constantly bring up terrorist attacks. Plus he constantly (except for the debate i think, i didnt watch all of it) uses 9/11 as a reason to elect him. Like, he was there, so they shoul;d elect him.

And Bush is proposing all these things he plans to do with his presidency, things that need to be done. Things he promised would be done last election if he was elected.

[The Germanator]

And, yes, being president is hard work. I would not like to have that job of being responsible for an entire nation of people and everything that happens to them.

Yeah, and that's the point to my sarcasm. He's the ****ing President. OF COURSE it's hard work. He repeats this and tells us like it's some sort of revelation.

[KillerGremlin]

I thought that the fundamentals of both candidates where so similar, that the basis on which they where arguing was skewed and irrelevant.

Personally, I felt that Kerry was better composed then Bush. However, that's the main thing that people are judging the winner/loser of the debate by, because it is certainly not being based off the "facts" or "ideas" presented by the candidates in the debate.

If people judged the candidates by the information that was presented, they would most likely scratch their heads, and say something along the lines of: "what the ****, these two guys are nearly identical, only Kerry has some pretty skewed short-term goals which won't get accomplished any faster then if Bush were in charge."

hostilecrayon has the right idea, but I would vote for Bush instead of Kerry. Bush, I think, knows that he ****ed up. But, he's holding steady. Kerry is going with what the people want, and unfortunately, in a time of war, what the people want may not be in the best interest of the war.

But does it really matter who wins the election? The war on terrorism isn’t going away, America still has to deal with Iraq, and Russia’s nuclear supply isn’t going to disappear during Kerry’s first year in office.

[Typhoid]

Russia’s nuclear supply isn’t going to disappear during Kerry’s first year in office.


Possibly it will.

Kerry has said numerous times he wants to gain respect for America in the world through diplomacy, not force.

Im not saying that guarantees anything, im just saying its better than the diplomatic talks Bush is doing. But I like Kerry, because while he seems all uppity about keeping a strong military, he also wants to establish better communications (lack of better word) with other countries so they respect the US more.

[Blackmane]

Possibly it will.

Kerry has said numerous times he wants to gain respect for America in the world through diplomacy, not force.

Im not saying that guarantees anything, im just saying its better than the diplomatic talks Bush is doing. But I like Kerry, because while he seems all uppity about keeping a strong military, he also wants to establish better communications (lack of better word) with other countries so they respect the US more.

Diplomacy or not, these countries are not going to follow us any faster. It is ridiculous to think that having a different leader is going to change other countries opinion of America in general. People don't like us not because we are a powerful nation so much as they dislike us for what we stand for.

Besides, Kerry says he can unite the world with diplomacy, but those are just empty words. I can guarantee he doesn't know any other nation leader that has spoken to him and said, "If you are elected, we will follow you." or even a, "If you did a better job than Bush did and were nicer to us, we will be more friendly to you." Kerry's assumptions are meaningless because they have no backing.

Now, I'm not saying it can't be done, but I mean, that is his MAIN support for how he will fight the war in Iraq better. In fact, I don't remember him mentioning ANY other way that he would fight the war in Iraq better. If that is the only thing he plans to do differently, then why should I vote for him?

Its funny because we have the support of 30 nations, but because we don't have France, Germany, and Russia, everybody thinks that we are fighting this alone. Eh, I guess they are all that matters.

Oh, and Kerry's plan for removing Russia's extra uncontrolled nuclear material is based on the Russian's support as well. I can almost guarantee he won't get it done in 4 years.

[The Germanator]

Its funny because we have the support of 30 nations, but because we don't have France, Germany, and Russia, everybody thinks that we are fighting this alone. Eh, I guess they are all that matters.



Yeah, those 30 other countries that have contributed a whopping 10% of the economic costs and 10% of the troops in the war. The U.S is basically fighting it alone.

[Blackmane]

Yeah, those 30 other countries that have contributed a whopping 10% of the economic costs and 10% of the troops in the war. The U.S is basically fighting it alone.

Oh, and I suppose France will come in and throw in 20% or more? That's wishful thinking. IF they contributed ever, it would be similiar to Great Britain's contributions.

[hostilecrayon]

I agree that Kerry isn't much better than Bush. He has unstable voting records and a lot of contraversy follows him around. However, I still think he's better than Bush. Bush has done nothing but screw up. He pissed off a lot of our allies, he went to war and then went "Oops, what we went for wasn't true." I'd rathar give Kerry a chance than knowingly re-elect someone I'm sure doesn't know what he's doing.

You want to talk about useless catch phrases...

"Help is on the way"

"Reporting for duty!"

Hey, I never said he doesn't use them. They both do. As a matter of fact, 98% of what comes out of either of their mouths happen to be fallacious arguments or lies. It's the way politics work today, sadly.

[GiMpY-wAnNaBe]

People don't like us not because we are a powerful nation so much as they dislike us for what we stand for.
.
what DO you stand for?

I personally have a skewed and lower vision of America since after Bush entered the white house, i dislike America for it's leader's actions, but have nothing against Americans themselves.