Author Topic: Presidential Debate #2 Debate  (Read 4321 times)

Offline Russian

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2992
Presidential Debate #2 Debate
« Reply #180 on: October 09, 2004, 12:05:11 AM »
To me Bush won this one but lost first debate. So this makes it a draw.

Offline Nash

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11705
      • http://sbm.boomzoom.org/
Presidential Debate #2 Debate
« Reply #181 on: October 09, 2004, 12:09:09 AM »
Kerry won.

It was a draw if you factor in history, the expectations game, the pandering to either the center or your core, or of style vs substance.

That's totally not what this debate means.

Offline Martlet

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4390
Presidential Debate #2 Debate
« Reply #182 on: October 09, 2004, 12:11:36 AM »
Bush beat Kerry bad.  You could see Kerry wilt right in front of you.

Offline Nash

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11705
      • http://sbm.boomzoom.org/
Presidential Debate #2 Debate
« Reply #183 on: October 09, 2004, 12:13:20 AM »
What's with people and all the references to "wilting" today? Is this about some national US holiday I'm not aware of?

Offline NUKE

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8599
      • Arizona Greens
Presidential Debate #2 Debate
« Reply #184 on: October 09, 2004, 12:13:31 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Nash
Kerry won.

It was a draw if you factor in history, the expectations game, the pandering to either the center or your core, or of style vs substance.

That's totally not what this debate means.


But, Bush still won.

Offline MrCoffee

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 934
Presidential Debate #2 Debate
« Reply #185 on: October 09, 2004, 12:16:01 AM »
Overall I thought Kerry did better and though Bush did perform better than his original debute this year, I dont think he could keep up with Kerry. After watching this last debate I understand now why I find a liking to Kerry. Its based on logic and Kerry says and has the right agenda that makes the logic cells in my brain spark.

For example, Bushs stance on stem cell research is more based on his own rational of preserving life based on his faith. I can respect that except the cells in question are frozen and if not used will probably be thrown away. Wheres the logic in that?

Bush overspends and cuts back on internal domestic issues and then gives a passive tax break to the wealthiest. How do you spend and give tax breaks, theres no logic to it. Is that suppose to have cured the ressession and create jobs. Look at the job figures, it hasnt.

And of course the entire Iraq debate. He went into Iraq under supposed threats from Sadam, non of which turned out to be true. No wmd or nuclear programs, no links to A-Q. That was the original reason for going into Iraq. Over eleven hundred soldiers have lost their lives. And lets be real about this. A-Q are not operating in Iraq as their focus of operations. They cells are hidden around the world so as to survive and not be caught. The only people resisting in Iraq are  insurgents groups who are sympathetic to Iraqs fight against invading foreigners and the Iraqis themselves.

I cant help but to notice these and other statements and claims such as Kerry is weak on defense. Factcheck.orq clearly shows his voting record and the years he voted against military spending post cold war. They even drew similar comparisons to Bush sr who cut military spending by 30% so is Bush sr weak on defense.

I would consider not attending your intelligence meetings for the first eight months of office weak on defense. I consider two airliners crashing into the two world trade centers weak on defense. I also consider presenting incorrect facts on Iraq as a valid threat weak on defence. The hard  line voters are going to vote for whomever regardless of logical thinking and relying ont he news to give a fair analysis is like shooting yourself in the head for the answers. I havent seen them more biased then ever but I expected it nearing the election. About the only fair and  resonable news channel left is CNN.
« Last Edit: October 09, 2004, 12:47:22 AM by MrCoffee »

Offline NUKE

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8599
      • Arizona Greens
Presidential Debate #2 Debate
« Reply #186 on: October 09, 2004, 12:20:03 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by MrCoffee
Overall I thought Kerry did better and though Bush did perform better than his original debute this year, I dont think he could keep up with Kerry. After watching this last debate I understand now why I find a liking to Kerry. Its based on logic and Kerry says and has the right agenda that makes the logic cells in my brain spark.



Kerry and logic are two different things. What has Kerry ever done that you agree with?

Offline Steve

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6728
Presidential Debate #2 Debate
« Reply #187 on: October 09, 2004, 12:20:46 AM »
Quote
gives a passive tax break to the wealthiest



Don't get caught up in liberal speak.  You can only give tax breaks to people who actually pay taxes.
Member: Hot Soup Mafia - Cream of Myshroom
Army of Muppets  Yes, my ingame name is Steve

Offline MrCoffee

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 934
Presidential Debate #2 Debate
« Reply #188 on: October 09, 2004, 12:22:16 AM »
He voted to balance the budget in the early 90s. He voted to cancel production of B-2s. We have enough B-2s and more numbers are only needed for a full scale war against the soviet union. In limited campaigns of today, we have enough B-2s. Those are some examples.

Offline MrCoffee

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 934
Presidential Debate #2 Debate
« Reply #189 on: October 09, 2004, 12:23:48 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Steve
Don't get caught up in liberal speak.  You can only give tax breaks to people who actually pay taxes.


Everybody who works pays taxes, even people in the military pay taxes.

Offline NUKE

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8599
      • Arizona Greens
Presidential Debate #2 Debate
« Reply #190 on: October 09, 2004, 12:24:30 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by MrCoffee
He voted to balance the budget in the early 90s. He voted to cancel production of B-2s. We have enough B-2s and more numbers are only needed for a full scale war against the soviet union. In limited campaigns of today, we have enough B-2s. Those are some examples.


So you back Kerry?

Offline MrCoffee

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 934
Presidential Debate #2 Debate
« Reply #191 on: October 09, 2004, 12:25:46 AM »
lol, yes.

:rolleyes:
« Last Edit: October 09, 2004, 12:28:32 AM by MrCoffee »

Offline Sandman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17620
Presidential Debate #2 Debate
« Reply #192 on: October 09, 2004, 12:29:28 AM »
According to the poll on Yahoo!:

Quote

Question: Who Won the Oct. 8 Presidential Debate?

210709 votes since Oct 7 2004
Bush    33%    68988 votes
Kerry    64%    134446 votes
Tie    4%    7275 votes

sand

Offline NUKE

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8599
      • Arizona Greens
Presidential Debate #2 Debate
« Reply #193 on: October 09, 2004, 12:29:30 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by MrCoffee
Yes, gladly.

:rolleyes:


Then you backed Kerry when he voted to use force in Iraq? You backed Kerry when he said that he was glad Saddam was out of power and that the Iraq war was the right thing to do?

You back Kerry when he says he thinks it's wrong to send troops into Iraq without  proper equipment, then votes against funding the troops?

Offline Sandman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17620
Presidential Debate #2 Debate
« Reply #194 on: October 09, 2004, 12:34:28 AM »
According to CNN:

Quote

 Who won the second presidential debate?
President Bush
  20%
61525 votes

John Kerry   
  78%
236047 votes

Evenly matched
  2%
6559 votes

Total: 304131 votes
sand