10-01-2004, 02:46 AM
The debate is now over (in Norway. Yes it started 3 o'clock at night here, and I still bothered to watch it.)
I wasn't overly impressed with either candidate. I'm off course not talking about the slip-ups and word mismatches. That can happen to anyone, let alone someone who's being watched carefully by a billion people. I'm talking about avoiding the issues. Kerry's default response was "I fought in Vietnam, I am therefore great leader. *bangs on chest*". Bush had several, but his most prominent was "my adversary changes his mind as often as I change my socks". (And what the hell was that "We are standing on the mountain looking into the valley, and it is a valley of hope"-crap?)
Both avoided the questions. That being said, when they did in fact respond to the questions, I felt Kerry performed slightly better than Bush. There was one issue I was conserned with. Bush named the number one threat "weapons of mass destruction in the hands of the enemy"; not "weapons of mass destruction." Kerry pointed out that nuclear disarmament was supposed to be mutual - that the US would also partake in its nuclear disarmament. It's this "everyone should disarm besides us"-notion, I find so arrogant in Bush's statements.
I wasn't overly impressed with either candidate. I'm off course not talking about the slip-ups and word mismatches. That can happen to anyone, let alone someone who's being watched carefully by a billion people. I'm talking about avoiding the issues. Kerry's default response was "I fought in Vietnam, I am therefore great leader. *bangs on chest*". Bush had several, but his most prominent was "my adversary changes his mind as often as I change my socks". (And what the hell was that "We are standing on the mountain looking into the valley, and it is a valley of hope"-crap?)
Both avoided the questions. That being said, when they did in fact respond to the questions, I felt Kerry performed slightly better than Bush. There was one issue I was conserned with. Bush named the number one threat "weapons of mass destruction in the hands of the enemy"; not "weapons of mass destruction." Kerry pointed out that nuclear disarmament was supposed to be mutual - that the US would also partake in its nuclear disarmament. It's this "everyone should disarm besides us"-notion, I find so arrogant in Bush's statements.
