Who Won the Second Debate?

[jdl22]

It was indeed one of several obviously biased questions on both sides.

Wouldn't a better answer have been "One mistake was not pushing harder to pass X" where X is something he pledges to do in the future? This would both admit to being human (something Bush has yet to really do) as well as keep things positive. I think another good response would have been "not getting both sides to work together in a bipartisan fashion" or something to that effect. Then he could explain that he tried and will continue to try to do so. This would open him up to something from Kerry but at least it would be something. I think avoiding really answering that question, which is a negative feeling that a lot of neutral voters have about Bush, is a mistake.

[anatta]

"Bush...reeks of an inablility to admit a mistake and the need to blame others"

Your response:

[ QUOTE ]

Poor job of selecting the people to ask questions, and poor job by Gibson in keeping the topics balance

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow. You really are the real GWB.

[Analyst]

Bush did a much better job than in the first debate, though that wasn't a very high hurdle to clear. Kerry was a bit weaker than before, and frequently drove me crazy by not addressing the question, but rather just going to frequently unrelated talking points. Bush was also guilty of this, though not quite as much.

HOWEVER, these debates are about selling to the undecideds, not rousing your supporters. In that respect, I think that Kerry clearly did a better job. Witness, for example, the abortion and Supreme Court questions - Kerry came accross as more moderate and more thoughtful than did Bush. The partial-birth abortion discussion showed Bush to be much more doctrinaire than Kerry, not what you want when going for those in the middle. Don't get me wrong, Bush's answers were great for those already on board, but I think that Kerry was superior at appealing to those still undecided.

[tanda]

That question was bullshit.

Tell us three mistakes and then your opp gets time to talk about those mistakes.

On the other hand, your opp does not have to answer that question and, thus, you do not get to talk about his response.

And, it's the last question so you get to go out on a low note.

Rigged, rigged, rigged.

[anatta]

The first friggin' question was like: Senator, everybody I know thinks you're a flip flopper, can you respond? Nothing like the when did you stop beating your wife right off the bat when the TV audience is the biggest, you aren't warmed up...

So they asked a question Bush has been asked before on National TV, and he still couldn't give a satisfactory answer. Some humility, some issue that he can admit didn't come out as planned. I like the other poster, "I wish I could have been more successful in ending the divisiveness in Washington, I tried my best to unite, and I will keep trying..."

[Diplomat]

[ QUOTE ]
Bush did a much better job than in the first debate, though that wasn't a very high hurdle to clear. Kerry was a bit weaker than before, and frequently drove me crazy by not addressing the question, but rather just going to frequently unrelated talking points.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree on both points, especially with Kerry getting off-topic. He needed to be more subtle when swinging a question about Iraq over to a comment on health care, for example, and probably lost some of the appearance of genuinity that was conveyed by the rest of his presentation. Had he done this better, I believe this debate would have been clearly won by Kerry.

Bush's answers were certianly less developed and refined, but he came across a bit more genuine when conveying them. That said, Bush's composure throughout the debate was a bit questionable, particularily while not answering questions. A few times he was caught clearly smirking while Kerry spoke, which may not play well with undecided...and neither will interupting the moderator.

[ QUOTE ]
HOWEVER, these debates are about selling to the undecideds, not rousing your supporters. In that respect, I think that Kerry clearly did a better job. Witness, for example, the abortion and Supreme Court questions - Kerry came accross as more moderate and more thoughtful than did Bush. The partial-birth abortion discussion showed Bush to be much more doctrinaire than Kerry, not what you want when going for those in the middle. Don't get me wrong, Bush's answers were great for those already on board, but I think that Kerry was superior at appealing to those still undecided.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, exactly -- at first I did not like Kerry's answer simply because I thought he could have taken a slightly more pro-life stance without compromising too much (ie. losing votes from the pro-choice advocates), but then I realized most of the pro-life advocates are already voting for Bush. Kerry's answer appealed much more to those undecided, imo, simply because it emphasized individual choice and moderation instead of personal ideology. This of course is not to say one answer is better than the other in terms of substance, but rather that Kerry's answer will probably play better among those undecided.

So: IMO Kerry did well by using a more classic approach to the town hall meeting by connecting questions together, targeting undecided and hitting on key points, but faltered slightly by pushing campaign retoric a bit too much. Bush did well in terms of genuinity, but his answers were less refined and his composure was weak at times.

I say this one goes to Kerry; now let's see how both sides spin it.

-Diplomat

[Diplomat]

Both of these questions were a bit out there, but not unreasonable considering the nature of town hall debates. If I had to judge them, I'd say the Kerry question was worse in terms of timing, but the Bush question worse in terms of substance.

The frustrating part for me regarding the questions was that there were virtually no foreign policy questions outside the realm of Iraq and terrorism...I think the closest other FP question was regarding generic drugs from Canada. No international trade questions, no international health questions, no foreign aid questions...I know they are not 'hot' topics, but they are still huge issues given the USA's global position.

-Diplomat

[anatta]

I agree that both questions were reasonable, I was trying to convince the other poster that it wasn't "rigged", so I can see how it might seem like I doubted the fairness. I am not the diplomat that you are. hahahahahahaha...get it, diplomat...oh jeez...I crack myself up.

[Diplomat]

[ QUOTE ]
I agree that both questions were reasonable, I was trying to convince the other poster that it wasn't "rigged", so I can see how it might seem like I doubted the fairness. I am not the diplomat that you are. hahahahahahaha...get it, diplomat...oh jeez...I crack myself up.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah. The 'rigged' comment reminded me of all those guys in the zoo that claim internet poker is rigged. It's funny watching people react to these sorts of things. If it's anti-Bush, then OF COURSE it's the damn liberal, jew-controlled media contorting the issues to destroy Real American Values. If it's anti-Kerry, then OF COURSE it's Cheney and the rest of his Haleberton cronies plotting against the working man.

Re. my name: Well, they say the man who can make himself laugh...will probably end up building mail bombs in a woodland shed somewhere.

[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

-Diplomat

[PITTM]

i literally am more shocked everyday by what conservatives have to say. the debate questions were rigged because both people were asked a question that was obviously leading them into addressing their past failures, but the president chose to completely ignore his question so therefore the "liberal activists" in the crowd made it rigged. give me a break. its just laughable at this point. no one has mentioned the abortion question either, which seemed like a pretty loaded question to ask kerry like that. i think the loaded questions came for both candidates, bush just chose to not answer his at all. people blame kerry for being a flip flopper, but at least he answers the questions he is asked...

rj