Quote:
|
Originally Posted by roachboy
the audience was much more fun than the debates themselves, yes.
events like the debate seem like things that should be taken in publically.
they are better public events than the alternative possibility available to me: when the eagles manage to get into the playoffs.
|
I've watched debates in public before and can't say I enjoyed them as much. Certainly does give you a better sense of how certain things "worked" in the debate but more often than not the audience isn't anywhere near a representative sample to base any real analysis on.
Last night I watched the debate with my fiancee. She is undecided so it was interesting to me to hear her questions and reactions.
She was trying very hard to understand Kerry's positions on things but was confused by them. Of particular interest to her was when Kerry said that he wanted both bilateral discussions and multi lateral discussions with North Korea. She said it didn't make sense. Pick one or the other not both. This is of particular interest to her because her sister lives about fifteen minutes from the border in Korea.
Additionally, she thought Bush seemed cocky but not in a bad way. He was repetitive and that turned her off but she couldn't understand why Kerry was hung up on the fact that Iraq didn't attack us on 9/11. She said "Didn't Kerry watch Bush's state of the union address when he said he would go after all countries who support, harbor, or commit terrorist acts? It was pretty clear that Bush was going to target anyone that we thought had links to terrorists."
I even got a chuckly when she said "Why the hell is he talking about Vietnam? What's that got to do with anything?"