Kerry wiped the floor with Bush

In a draft of prepared remarks reported in the Boston Globe, Kerry told a group in 1984: "As some of you may know, I am part-English and part-Irish. And when my Kerry ancestors first came over to Massachusetts from the old country to find work in the New World, it was my English ancestors who refused to hire them."

Then in 1986 on the floor of the Senate, John Kerry said, "For those of us who are fortunate to share an Irish ancestry, we take great pride in the contributions that Irish-Americans ..."

It's interesting that each of these events occurred relatively early in Kerry's career, at a time when ethnic voting patterns would be the most important to a candidate. It's also interesting that, in classic Kerry fashion, the senator claims they never happened.

Having said all this, I take heart in three points:

1) There are a lot of Americans who actually prefer Bush's rhetorical style to Kerry's. What some of us see as clumsy, many others see as straight talking.
2) The pundits, generally, have declared the debate an effective draw. Perhaps because they are factoring in #1 more than I have, or because they understand that in reality, all that these debates are are highwire acts where you can't win, unless your opponent falls off the wire.
3) If the press keeps reporting that it was a tie, everyone who didn't watch the debate and a fair number of people who did, will come to believe it was a tie. I'm not thrilled about this dynamic but hope it works in favor of my political position this time around.

georgeob1 wrote:

I enjoyed a very pleasant dinner with friends and missed the debate. My impression from the news reports was that Kerry was Kerry, and Bush was Bush. If so, probably not an event that will significantly change the current trajectory with the voting public.

I saw a post by someone directly after the debate, punditing that Kerry won and predicting how that would be evidenced by the reactions of Republicans: "look out for them to try to make it into a non-event".

If the stance that Kerry is inconsistent because it is different than Iraq then the reverse must be true for Bush?

Anyway. I know what Kerry means. North Korea wanted to have talks with us so it would have behooved us to have talks with them considering what was at stake instead of taking the typical school yard approach of doing whatever the opposite is of what the enemy wants.

The polling data may be correct, but this is the same CBS who twice in the last two weeks has been caught using falsified documents/information for stories uncomplimentary to Bush.

Philadelphia Daily News: "OK, given that we've already endorsed John Kerry, it would be fair to think we would view the senator's performance during last night's presidential debate with some positive bias. But the man
smoked President Bush....Bush was like a doll with a pull string. Ask him about Iraq, pull the string and the same words came out: 'It's hard work, it's hard work, it's
hard work'."

World seems to think Kerry won

Friday, October 1, 2004

LONDON, England (AP) -- John Kerry scored points against George W. Bush on the Iraq war during their televised debate, but both men avoided the kind of gaffe that could be a turning point in the presidential election, foreign analysts and media said Friday.

Whatever the early verdicts were, one thing was clear: the debate attracted a lot of viewers overseas, even though Europeans had to stay up late to see it, and Asians had to wait until Friday morning their time.

Kerry "won more points," said Stephan Strothe, a commentator on Germany's N24 news channel.

"Kerry seemed to show that he had the stuff to be president. He had more facts in his head, and he was able to explain his position in Iraq," Strothe said. "He is back in the race. This will help him in the race."

London's Financial Times portrayed it as more of a draw, but one that didn't seem to immediately benefit Bush.

"There was no single moment which sealed the debate for one man," correspondent James Harding wrote on the paper's Web site.

He cited the results of three post-debate polls that suggested U.S. viewers were impressed by Kerry, with most saying he outdid Bush.

"Ahead of the debate, there was a sense that Mr. Bush could effectively seal the election by winning the debate on Thursday night. That, judging by the unreliable instant polls, did not happen," he wrote.

During the debate, Kerry claimed that Americans have been left with an "incredible mess in Iraq."

Bush said Kerry's varying positions about the war have left U.S. troops wondering how they could follow him as their president.

Kerry also questioned Bush's handling of North Korea and Iran, two countries that are suspected of pursuing nuclear weapons programs.

In addition, the two presidential candidates debated the situation in Russia, with Kerry saying President Vladimir Putin's crackdowns during the war on terror have been excessive for a democracy.

Still, Iraq dominated the debate ahead of the U.S. election in November, and many see that as the turning point issue.

Kerry "managed to keep the outcome open in this duel," Gernot Erler, a senior lawmaker with German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder's Social Democrats, told n-tv television.

"I had the impression that Bush used his popular appeal very cleverly," he said.

But Germans couldn't help but notice that Kerry's stand regarding the Iraq war is closer to Germany's, a country that refused to send soldiers to Iraq, Erler said.

Kerry "is against unilateral American actions. He doesn't believe that the superpower America can solve all the problems of this world alone. That corresponds with the beliefs of ... the German government."

Germany's ZDF television introduced the debate on its morning news bulletin with the words "John Kerry won -- at least the first television debate."

Reporting from the debate site in Florida, the British Broadcasting Corp. headlined the analysis on its Web site: "No knockout blow."

"Mr. Kerry was able to strike some serious blows against the president in his handling of the war in Iraq. He charged that the war was poorly planned, and that it had been a distraction in the war on terrorism," the BBC report said.

"Even some of President Bush's supporters are likely to say that they would have liked to have seen him make a more convincing defense of his policies."

Still, the BBC said that despite Kerry's criticism, Bush "didn't make any serious gaffes that could have left a serious opening for the challenger."

Some Asian viewers also saw Kerry come out ahead in the debate.

"I don't think President Bush did such a good job on the issues. He seemed to waver," said auditor Rob Liew, a critic of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq who watched the debate while sipping coffee in Singapore.

Thousands of miles away in Tokyo, salesman Yasuyoshi Eguchi was certain about who ought to be U.S. president.

"The ties between Japan and the United States got better after Bush took office," said Eguchi, who hadn't yet heard the debate. "I think Bush is more suitable for the job."

Interest in the U.S. race is high in Asia, where countries such as Japan, South Korea and Singapore support the U.S. policy in Iraq.

TV stations such as Singapore's Channel NewsAsia carried the whole debate with commentary, and China sent five professors to attend the debate to learn more about American politics.

China didn't comment on the U.S. presidential race, but Beijing is clearly interested in the candidates' stands on Taiwan -- a topic which did not come up in the debate.

And I think Kerry's argument pretty much boiled down to "Vote for me because I served in Vietnam and I say I'd be a different President" ... not much of a rallying point.