Okay, okay. I can't ignore the debate. What do I think? I think that Ivy League debate coaches would award Kerry a victory on points. But, I can't imagine that any voters were swayed.
Bush was unusually fumble-mouthed and Kerry avoided his typically convoluted, incomprehensible gibberish. But Bush did have his facts lined up better than Kerry and Kerry repetitive "I can do better" line wore very thin, especially because there were no specifics. We're just supposed to believe that he can execute his secret plans because he's so damned smart.
On the other hand, Kerry committed the big screw ups on the evening. I thought he really stepped in it over North Korea, exposing an abyssmal ignorance of diplomatic strategy and of the facts on the ground.
I think he also screwed up when he would slip into Michael Mooreisms, such as when he accused Bush of putting Halliburton's profits ahead of diplomatic opportunity. I'm sure that all the Howard Deaniacs jumped out of their chairs and screamed "yeah, baby, yeah!" But I think that made most undecided voters watching cringe and neutralized any gains Kerry might have made with his smooth diction.
If the goal was to move the polls, I don't think either candidate accomplished a damned thing. I was so bored after 15 minutes that I wanted to turn it off, but couldn't because a friend who couldn't watch was expected me to fill her in. So, I suffered to the end and turned the tube off as soon as the last word was spoken and haven't watched any news since. I hate post-debate analysis even more than being stuck in heavy commuter traffic.
No comments:
Post a Comment