CNN.com: 79% say Kerry won debate

Neo · 10-01-2004, 09:07 AM

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 · 10-01-2004, 10:10 AM

wow, that is a HUGE percentage.

GiMpY-wAnNaBe · 10-01-2004, 10:37 AM

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 · 10-01-2004, 12:46 PM

One of those votes is mine.

Typhoid · 10-01-2004, 01:44 PM

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 · 10-01-2004, 05:09 PM

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

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 · 10-01-2004, 05:43 PM

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 · 10-01-2004, 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blackmane

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

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 · 10-01-2004, 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vampyr

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

Kerry

dropCGCF · 10-01-2004, 11:39 PM

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 · 10-02-2004, 12:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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.

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 · 10-02-2004, 02:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GiMpY-wAnNaBe

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 · 10-02-2004, 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hostilecrayon

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 · 10-02-2004, 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blackmane

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 · 10-02-2004, 03:44 PM

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.