What do you anticipate from the upcoming presidential debates?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

dlihcraw

The Fly
Joined
Mar 18, 2004
Messages
199
The latest CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll presents President Bush and Senator Kerry in a virtual tie for votes. With two more presidential debates and one vice-presidential debate remaining, the momentum clearly looks to be in Kerry’s corner. Debate two will be in a town hall format with live questions being posed. This format looks to be more favourable for Kerry than Bush because of the outspoken nature of Bush’s criticizers. However, the debate rules call for only soft Kerry supporters and soft Bush supporters to be present. What this means is unclear. Kerry has a questionable senate record to explain, but Bush has failed presidential records in health care, job growth, the war in Iraq, and international affairs to explain. Kerry’s faults as a senator are relative, but Bush’s failures as a president are provable. Bush’s administration has been working hard to prevent generic, affordable Canadian and British drugs from entering the United States. Bush will be the first president since the Great Depression to have a net loss in job growth. Despite claims that the situation in Iraq is improving, violence only continues to expand, and today US forces occupy less of Iraq than they did after the fall of Saddam Hussein. Globally, the reputation of the United States has been greatly diminished. Opponents to the “Bush doctrine” include France, Germany, Russia and China. Ironically, even coalition forces are questioning Bush’s logic. Tony Blair, prime minister of Britain, while cooperating with Bush in the Iraq war, has publicly questioned the president’s stubbornness in how the war should be fought. Public opinion polls in England and Australia, the two most powerful of America’s allies in Iraq, show general disapproval of the war. Domestically, polls show similar attitudes in the United States. An ally at the beginning of the war, the Philippines has since existed Iraq, and current ally Poland plans to exist in 2005. Canada, traditionally considered to be “the 51st state of America”, does not support the war and has witnessed an increase of anti-American sentiments since Bush became president. The economic policies of Bush’s administration have directly effected the lumber, beef, steel and pharmaceutical industries of Canada. In Quebec, the heart of French Canada, support for President Bush is at 11%, while in Ontario, the industrial and financial heart of Canada, support is at 19%. The third presidential debate will focus on domestic issues, which political pundits claim to be Bush’s greatest liability. If anyone remembers the Republican National Convention, they will recall how Dick Cheney came across as an angry old man. Edwards can use Cheney’s volatility to his advantage in the vice-presidential debate. A reference to Halliburton will be sure to upset the less than timid Dick.

http://edition.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/10/03/gallup.poll/index.html

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...1003/ca_pr_on_na/poll_canada_u_s&sid=81587690
 
When running for president the first time, a clip exists that has Bush call a reporter "a major league asshole!"
 
Bush didn't know he was close to a mike, if I remember correctly. The whole thing was pretty embarrassing to him. Anyway, domestic policy is where the public likes Kerry more than they do Bush. Even John McCain wants to make it legal to import drugs from Canada. There is one drug that they are charging as much as $78 a bottle for in the U.S. that costs $17 to order it from Canada. By the same token, the public expectations game has completely changed from the first debate. Now people will expect Kerry to win. If he doesn't do this decisively it may help Bush if Bush has a better showing than he did in the first debate.
 
Republicans in general are against the importation of cheaper Canadian and British drugs. I think it is a shame. If John McCain was to drop party loyalty, he'd be the most respectable politician in the United States! He hates Bush, yet he supports him. He's friends with Kerry, yet does not endore him. Come on!

And what's the deal with Bob Dole? I thought he died?
 
dlihcraw said:
Republicans in general are against the importation of cheaper Canadian and British drugs. I think it is a shame. If John McCain was to drop party loyalty, he'd be the most respectable politician in the United States! He hates Bush, yet he supports him. He's friends with Kerry, yet does not endore him. Come on!

And what's the deal with Bob Dole? I thought he died?

I agree with that bit about McCain.

As for the debates, I think they'll be tough because Bush will learn from his mistakes. He'll be better prepared, more relaxed, and he does well in town hall settings. It'll be interesting.

But i'm looking forward to 90 minutes with john edwards!!
.......it'll all be about the substance of course.........:shifty:
 
Why is everyone's attraction spent on John Edwards? Oh, wait...

Bush and live questions? Come on. I don't think he'll fare well because questions to him will have a deeper social relevance than questions to John Kerry. If one negative question is asked, I can see Bush getting flustered. He likes things to occur his way, and only his way. So far, on the campaign trail, Bush has required all persons attending his speeches to sign a contractual agreement stressing no criticism from the audience. Or, put more plainly, no democrats, no hippies, no non-Republican. Also, if Bush flusters on an important question, I think the crowd will let him know. After all, crowd participation is encouraged!
 
U2democrat said:
As for the debates, I think they'll be tough because Bush will learn from his mistakes.

Can Bush learn from his mistakes?

:tsk:
 
U2democrat said:
Ok let me put it this way:
His aides will force him to be more relaxed and not pissed.

Gothca'! :wink:

Is Edwards that attractive? He's no Perot!
 
The President will have to go on the attack. Foreign policy was supposed to be the issue that he could really "get" Kerry on. At the very least I think the President missed an opportunity to do that. Now we go to debate themes where Kerry is polling much better than he is in Iraq and terror issues.
 
The latest GALLUP poll shows that voters prefer:

Bush on Iraq!

51% for Bush 44% for Kerry

Bush on Terrorism!

56% for Bush 39% for Kerry

Bush on who is the strongest leader!

56% for Bush 37% for Kerry
 
STING2 said:
The latest GALLUP poll shows that voters prefer:

Bush on Iraq!

51% for Bush 44% for Kerry

Bush on Terrorism!

56% for Bush 39% for Kerry

Bush on who is the strongest leader!

56% for Bush 37% for Kerry

The Gallup fetish strikes again!!

Do you realize that their polling methods are extremely sketchy? They VASTLY overweight Republicans, and they're clearly slanted Republican (their CEO is a major GOP contributor).
 
Mr. Gallup is no longer running the Gallup poll. I suppose ABC is run by a major GOP contributor since they still have the President up 5 points after the debate. I'd also like someone to point out a legitimate poll that has Bush behind on any of those three issues. Bush has a double digit lead in most of them and is ahead in all of them that I have seen.
 
drivemytrabant said:
Mr. Gallup is no longer running the Gallup poll. I suppose ABC is run by a major GOP contributor since they still have the President up 5 points after the debate. I'd also like someone to point out a legitimate poll that has Bush behind on any of those three issues. Bush has a double digit lead in most of them and is ahead in all of them that I have seen.

For your enjoyment!

http://edition.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/10/03/gallup.poll/index.html
 
DaveC said:


The Gallup fetish strikes again!!

Do you realize that their polling methods are extremely sketchy? They VASTLY overweight Republicans, and they're clearly slanted Republican (their CEO is a major GOP contributor).

That was ONE poll where there were SLIGHTLY more Republicans than usual. The latest poll had a breakdown similar to the 2000 election as to the number of Independents, Republicans, and Democrats.
 
deep said:


How strong is he
if he can be taken out by a pretzel?

Oh yeah the usual stuff instead of proof and facts a smack. Thats nice. Lets just say that 56% of Americans think he can overcome the pretzel issue along with terrorists. As opposed to 37% for Kerry without a snack food issue.
 
drivemytrabant said:
The President will have to go on the attack. Foreign policy was supposed to be the issue that he could really "get" Kerry on. At the very least I think the President missed an opportunity to do that.

There were several times when, instead of saying something to directly dispute Kerry, he said "Being President is hard work." No duh! Kerry got a few lucky breaks with Bush being a pussy.


The problem now is that Bush may come out like an attack dog. Kerry will remain calm and do the same thing he did the other night and Bush will come off as being an attacker, trying to bait a fight. Remember Gore? Went from sighs to showing no emotion. People hated too much emotion and no emotion.

In addition, Bush's supposed strength was foreign policy. How is he going to do domestically? Not good, based on his track record.
 
sharky said:


There were several times when, instead of saying something to directly dispute Kerry, he said "Being President is hard work." No duh! Kerry got a few lucky breaks with Bush being a pussy.


The problem now is that Bush may come out like an attack dog. Kerry will remain calm and do the same thing he did the other night and Bush will come off as being an attacker, trying to bait a fight. Remember Gore? Went from sighs to showing no emotion. People hated too much emotion and no emotion.

In addition, Bush's supposed strength was foreign policy. How is he going to do domestically? Not good, based on his track record.

You are right Kerry did get lucky because Bush was off his game. Not because he had more substance or is a better debater or is more in touch with the facts or any other reason. Bush had a bad night and Kerry took advantage.
 
Bush is perfectly capable of doing a good job in a debate. He did this in 2000. He was off his game during the first debate, but I'm sure he'll work very hard not to repeat. The catch is that domestic policy is not his strength, his strength is national security.
 
I haven't seen the first debate, just news clips and what I've read. I did see the whole thing for 2 of the Bush/Gore debates. Gore was all facts and figures. Bush was all smart arse. Bush kicked Gores butt in those debates because people responded to personality. So this time around, was Bush off his game just in regards to the substance or was he just flat in all areas?

I had expected these debates to be pretty similar to 2000, only updated to suit the times. Kerry would (hopefully) come out with all the stats and evidence to prove Bush wrong and tear him to shreds. Bush would smile, lean over the podium like its a bar, make some simplified comment that makes Kerry look like a nerd (haha! nerd!) then stand up and spit out some Jerry Bruckheimer line about liberty and tyranny or some shit and that would be that. Bush 1, Kerry 0. Fox News goes mad.

What went wrong? Did he just lack in general? Did he lose, or did Kerry win?
 
Back
Top Bottom