Quick Debate Observation......(non-political)
 

.....mainly watching the Yankees-Sox, but just in flipping over to the debates here and there, is it me? or did Kerry look haggard, drained, and old? IMHO, he looked God-awful and from a cosmetic, non-personality perspective, Bush looked relaxed, confident, and well-rested. Anybody see this the same way? Not looking for who(m) you support - but just about presence..

Re: Quick Debate Observation......(non-political)
 

Yes, my roommate, William Kristol (weekly standard), and I all agree that Bush was way more relaxed. Kerry wasn't as smooth as he usually is, but I wouldn't go as far as you did.

Re: Quick Debate Observation......(non-political)
 

I too watched the Yankees, but the brief sections I saw of the debate made me think Bush did much better than in the first one. He looked confident and relaxed; Kerry looked uptight. And I'm voting for Kerry, so no spin here.

Re: Quick Debate Observation......(non-political)
 

I thought the exact same thing. His face looked very droopy today or as you aptly describe it, haggard and old. I wonder why...

Re: Quick Debate Observation......(non-political)
 

I'm trying to keep this non-political as well. But there are alot of people/analysts that say Bush won hands down on content.(please assume this for sake of arguement) This thread seems to prove that Bush looked physically better during the debate as well. Yet the polls show Kerry as a slam dunk win. If Bush had better arguements, and better looks, why did the polls show the debate as a slam dunk for Kerry?

Re: Quick Debate Observation......(non-political)
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm trying to keep this non-political as well. But there are alot of people/analysts that say Bush won hands down on content.(please assume this for sake of arguement) This thread seems to prove that Bush looked physically better during the debate as well. Yet the polls show Kerry as a slam dunk win. If Bush had better arguements, and better looks, why did the polls show the debate as a slam dunk for Kerry?

[/ QUOTE ]Either your analysts are wrong, or America is so desperate for someone other than Bush, that they convinced themselves that Kerry won.

Re: Quick Debate Observation......(non-political)
 

It's a silly question if I can't challenge your assumption that Kerry didn't win on content. Plus, even though I thought Kerry's face looked uglier for whatever reason, I still believe he is a much better speaker.

Re: Quick Debate Observation......(non-political)
 

[quote ]If Bush had better arguements, and better looks, why did the polls show the debate as a slam dunk for Kerry?

[/ QUOTE ]

The answer to this question is simple. Among the people polled for their debate reactions, Bush simply did not win the debate on content.

Here is the breakdown of the USA Today/Gallup poll. Note that while Bush came across as more likeable, Kerry won on most of the substantive issues and came across as being more believable, knowing the issues better, expressing himself more clearly, and even sharing peoples' values.

Re: Quick Debate Observation......(non-political)
 

You know when you go to a movie, or you're watching something on TV, or watching a lecture on an overhead, and there's a mark on the projection surface - it can be a line, a gummy bear, whatever. I find that I'm often drawn to that unwittingly until it's either removed or I make a concerted effort to ignore it.

I felt that way yesterday when Bush spent the bulk of the debate foaming at the mouth. (Someone said it was dried spit on the right side of his mouth - no matter, it was just plain creepy.)

Kerry always looks pretty much the same to me - professional, reserved, dignified. I agree that he looked a little more tired than usual yesterday though.

Re: Quick Debate Observation......(non-political)
 

There are a lot of psycological issues in situations like these. From talking to a lot of "undecided voters" i got the impression that they had all but made up their minds. Most of them enjoy in the thought that both candidates are pushing for their vote, so they remain "undecided", but in reality they are just waiting for some arbritray time to announce their decision- in this case the third debate, or it might be a political rally they planned on attending. So i think this is more of a carryover of the fact that Kerry easily won the first debate, and again won the second (though not by as much), more than kerry winning the third.