Comments on: So, who won?

By: Blogs for Bush

Blogs for Bush — Tue, 12 Oct 2004 02:39:30 +0000

Carnival of the Bush Bloggers 31
The Carnival of the Bush Bloggers: October 11, 2004 Edition

By: Sister Toldjah

Sister Toldjah — Sun, 03 Oct 2004 22:55:23 +0000

Jim, did you see the latest posted by Drudge about the possibility that Kerry brought materials with him to the debate that he wasn’t supposed to? Drudge and Daily Recycler have linked up to it.

By: Jim R

Jim R — Sun, 03 Oct 2004 18:20:54 +0000

That john was Kerry, in the last post.

By: Jim R

Jim R — Sun, 03 Oct 2004 18:16:52 +0000

John is a sophistical rhetorician, inebriated with the exuberance of his own verbosity, and gifted with an egotistical imagination that can at all times command an interminable and inconsistent series of arguments to malign an opponent and glorify himself.

In commonly understood language, he is the suckiest suck that ever sucked.

By: Sister Toldjah

Sister Toldjah — Sun, 03 Oct 2004 13:13:33 +0000

I hope you’re right, John – this debate was supposed to be W’s debate because foreign policy is his strength. It’s troubling to me that so many who watched think Kerry was more substantive.

By: Sister Toldjah

Sister Toldjah — Sun, 03 Oct 2004 13:12:25 +0000

Don, Newsweek’s latest poll shows Kerry was the clear winner in the debate. Sigh .. I guess that means he put on a convincing act for the American people. That’s what it was – an act. I see the Prez is hammering him on the “global test” comment

By: John Salmon

John Salmon — Sat, 02 Oct 2004 16:42:57 +0000

Will this help Kerry over the long run? Doubtful-he gave too much ammunition to Bush’s admakers-especially the “global test” line. Bush performed poorly because he was frustrated by Kerry’s multiple self-contradictions and fabrications. There’s plenty of time to pick him apart on those.

By: Don H

Don H — Sat, 02 Oct 2004 03:09:55 +0000

I think Kerry won on style, Bush won on substance. Slight advantage to Kerry since ’style is substance’ in a debate. However, the Bush team will parse Kerry’s comments and give American’s a second chance to grade the substance. Bon appetit!

By: Sister Toldjah

Sister Toldjah — Fri, 01 Oct 2004 17:20:41 +0000

LOL Jim

By: Jim R

Jim R — Fri, 01 Oct 2004 17:16:14 +0000

Hopkins, The Sista’ is just askin ya to wipe away the drool, and other fluids unintentionally leaping from your body, till you’ve had some time to give it thinking.

By: Nanovirus

Nanovirus — Fri, 01 Oct 2004 13:51:43 +0000

Maybe Chimpy McFlightsuit could be president of Poland…

By: Sister Toldjah

Sister Toldjah — Fri, 01 Oct 2004 13:26:26 +0000

Hi c, while I don’t agree with your analysis, assuming it’s true, what’s your answer to your question about the obvious implication? Is it that the President won on style over substance?

By: c

Fri, 01 Oct 2004 13:05:28 +0000

I was astonished by how similar last night’s debate was to the 2000 debates. Kerry/Gore, so polished and forceful. Bush, so fumbling but sincere.

What is the obvious implication?

By: Sister Toldjah

Sister Toldjah — Fri, 01 Oct 2004 12:26:06 +0000

Thanks for commenting, Hopkins.

I did watch the same debate you and everyone else did. So did Joe Lockhart. That’s what he proclaimed on CSPAN last night that the consensus was “a draw.”

On Kerry on bilateral and multilateral talks, that’s just another one of Kerry’s “nuanced” positions he’ll have to explain at a later date. If he truly favors multilateral talks, then he wouldn’t be nearly so critical of the President’s efforts — at multilateral talks.

By: Hopkins

Hopkins — Fri, 01 Oct 2004 11:16:09 +0000

And Kerry said he would have bilateral talks with Korea as well as unilateral talks.

Very clearly, in fact.