Originally Posted by dy156

As a Bush supporter, I hate watching debates. Last night, I was on the road, and listened to it on the radio. Without seeing the candidates, you really did get a chance to concentrate on the words themselves.
I haven't read the other debate thread, and did not listen to the post debate commentary, mainly because I was waiting to pull into a gas station and pee until the debate was over, and about that time I could start picking up the ESPN FM radio station. All that to say this is pretty much my virgin, unplaigarized analysis.

Kerry won, but he didn't deliver a knock out punch. A good debater would have done well against Kerry, and Bush is not a good debater.

Bush ouches:
"I've most certainly gone after Sadda..uh, I mean Osama Bin Laden.."
"transhipment of weapons" (transportation + shipment = transhipment? )

BUsh missed opportunities:
Kerry talks about the troops without armor and how their family sends them armor from the internet, and says help is on the way-- Bush should have said something very pithy about how Kerry voted against the increased funding for the troops.

Asked about Russia, he could have talked about how freedom is the first step in a difficult road toward democracy. The US defeated the British, but it was years before our Constitution was put in place. Similarly, even though Russia is free from the former communist regime, it's experiencing growing pains, and has for more than a decade, and we hope it is on the right path toward becoming a responsible nation. That's also why even though the Iraqi people are free, it is very difficult work and will take some time before it is a productive, peaceful, and well run nation and member of the international community.

asked about whether he would be more or less likely to use force in a second term because of the experience in Iraq, instead of stumbling around, he should have said something like-- I think it will be less likely, because we did what we said we would do and followed through in Iraq. A perfect example of this is Libya, which voluntarily surrendered 50,000 pounds of chemical weapons. I have no doubt that had we not been strong in Iraq, we might have had to deal with that threat in the coming years.

"he said Saddam is a great threat" come on, Kerry said alot more powerful things than that in support of the war, Bush, you just couldn't remember them in the heat of the moment, and it would have been helpful if you could!

Rather than repeat the same tired phrases over and over, Bush should have used more real examples, and I bet there were plenty available.

Kerry-"Bush is spending lots of money for firefighters in Iraq while our firefighters are having to close stations in America and shut down the COPS program"
Bush should have offered a valid criticism of the COPS program and said that


well, you get the picture, I could go on and on. Just listening to the debate, Kerry sounded very polished, but his substance was ripe for a good picking apart by Bush.
Bush just is not a great communicator, and never has been. He has a hard time verbalizing a connection of ideas. He did better when he deviated from his pre-rehearsed phrases. Did well in questioning "the Global test" and on the matter of questioning our allies. Kerry still is a much better speaker and clearly "won" the dabate, in my opinion. I bet the media has a feild day with Bush's "ouch" moments.

However, none of this changes whose ideas I think are more correct and better for the country.