Thursday, October 14, 2004

Debate Reaction Round-Up

Despite what the post debate internet polls might say (the internet polls are taken over at the end of each debate by Kerry supporters at the direction of the DNC) President Bush mopped the floor with John Kerry in the third debate. A reaction from around the blogosphere and tv pundits:

Jim Geraghty at Kerryspot:

John Kerry came across as an old, tired, worn out, stretched-out Leftist Tree Spirit belched forth by the fiery pits of Massachusetts liberalism. Despite citing Ronald Reagan so frequently that one might think he had a nervous tic, his answers made clear that a President Kerry would chart the country on a course further to the left than Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, and LBJ. We know what we’ve got in George W. Bush. Conservative most of the time, moderate when he doesn’t have the votes; a guy who may make mistakes, but you’ll always know where he stands.

Hugh Hewitt

Kerry finished the debate sequence as the candidate of global tests, truth tests, France, tax hikes, government health care, uncomfortable with faith, for taxpayer funded abortion, and very well spoken in saying all those things.

Bush finished the debate joking about his mangled syntax, speaking from the heart about his faith and prayer, praising Laura Bush to the sky, promising to keep working hard for children and the armies of compassion, resolute in the war, thrilled by Afghanistan, optimistic about Iraq, and comfortable with every voter in his potential pool.


However the President really did well tonight. He was focused, informative, and charming while driving home the point that his opponent is a Massachusetts liberal. His opponent, on whom the pressure was on to win the debate, was not as good as he was in the first debate or even the second debate.

Mickey Kaus, Slate:

When I criticized John Edwards for gratuitously mentioning Dick Cheney's gay daughter, I got lots of email suggesting that Edwards was simply being nice. Sorry, that won't fly after Kerry bizarrely, needlessly and explicitly raised the subject again ("I think if you were to talk to Dick Cheney's daughter, who is a lesbian, ....") There must be some Machiavellian strategy behind the Democratic urge to keep bringing this up--most likely it's a poll-tested attempt to cost Bush and Cheney the votes of demographic groups (like Reagan Dems, or fundamentalists) who are hostile to homosexuality or gay culture or who just don't want to have to think about it. Or maybe Kerry was just trying to throw Bush off stride. In either case, the fake embrace was even creepier coming from Kerry than it was coming from Edwards--Edwards had at least been debating Cheney at the time. After the debate, Kerry campaign manager Mary Beth Cahill said Cheney's daughter was "fair game." Fair game? Who was being attacked? (It was supposed to be a discussion of whether homosexuality is a "choice" or innate. Bush had said he didn't know.) ... P.S.: If Kerry was being Machiavellian, he went way too far in the culturally liberal direction by talking about friends who "finally sort of broke out"--e.g. came out. (With the support of their wives!) Why "finally"? Is liberation from sexual repression a priority item for Kerry's first term? Of course not, but Kerry's language can't have made socially conservative voters comfortable--negating the effect of the Cheney mention, if that was supposed to make them uncomfortable with Bush. ... Update: Here's some evidence (in a NYT "undecided" panel) of Kerry's Mary Cheney mention backfiring ("a low blow"). ...

Gallup and other organizations run polls immediately following the debates asking people who won. These polls are as reliable as Dan Rather. Although Conservatives have come to realize that Bush Derangement Syndrome has driven the left in this country to go to great lengths to defeat Bush, we do not yet realize how far they are willing to go. The polls are not trustworthy and should be ignored.

As I said last night, the Bush/Cheney ticket beat the Kerry/Edwards ticket 3.5 - .5 for all debates. It is important to remeber that teh mainstream media and the Democrats are willing to go to any length, say or do anything to beat this President. Nothing that comes out of the mouth of any mainstream news anchor or commentator should be taken at face value. Nothing. The questions in the last two debates have been loaded. Bob Scheiffer was terrible last night, and two of the town hall questions were so ridiculous as to be laughable ("name three mistakes" and "why have you taken all of my rights away with the patriot act")? Yet the President managed to answer even the most biased questions with more substance than Kerry could answer the most leading, softball question.

When you listen to Kerry talk about policy you get a feeling that he has been thinking about what he would do as President for decades, and that he developed his policy years ago while daydreaming about it. Now he has the chance to be President, an he will be damned if a little thing like September 11th is going to change his policy ideas.

The choice is clear. If you want a crusty Massachusetts liberal on the left of Ted Kennedy who has propsed nothing but September 10th olg time big government solutions, to whom the war on terror is just another line item in his vast agenda, vote for Kerry. If you want a moderate, common sense conservative who is focused on the protection of the country while increasing the amount of ownership at home. vote for Bush. When you peel away all of the spin, that is the basic choise voters have on November 2nd. In a normal year a candidate like Kerry would not have a chance of being elected by the American people. But never has the press been so aligned against a cndidate as they are against the President. He has zero allies (except a few token "conservatives" networks pull out to give the appearance of fairness) in the press. They will stop at nothing to see him defeated so they can go about rewriting the history of the past few years.

We cannot let that happen. Many people have talked about the potential of an October surprise. I still think it is possible. Will we pull Bin Laden out of a hat? Don't know. But I do know that the President understands the stakes of this election for the American people, he understands the massive amount of Democratic voter fraud he will have to overcome, and he understands that the clearest way for him to make a point is with an "event" that cannot be spun, and the power of which can be understood by all. We will have to see what happens.

Be sure to check the current posts for updates.