|
Oct. 9, 2004 Fresh from watching the second Presidential debate, courtesy of broadband internet (isn't the technology wonderful?). A lot to think about. It was good to see both candidates 'in the flesh' - with no frenzied supporters, no spin doctors, no applause team... We got the chance to put a reality check on some of the exaggerations we've being getting recently. Yes, George W. Bush did seem capable of walking and chewing gum at the same time, and yes, John Kerry did have some firm policies and could explain them. But there were some tough questions there. John Kerry face to face with a serious anit-abortionist. I think he handled that one well and I would put money on the lady voting for him even though she is opposed to him on that issue. The question about 'name three of your mistakes' - put to the President - would have been a nasty ball for anyone to field. Looking back, I bet the man wishes he had admitted to doing something wrong himself over the last 4 years. Other than the mistake of appointing certain people who made mistakes for him - that much he admitted to. Of course, the question gave Kerry a wide-open opportunity and he took it. Overall, I thought Kerry's grasp of his subjects and his ability to put out damaging Republican quotes was impressive. George W. Bush clung to his core opinions, but was inevitably forced into defending his record rather than attacking. But incumbency has other compensations. Who looked more Presidential? For me (who doesn't get to vote), it was Kerry by a country mile. But Bush has his constituency, and they will not have been disappointed at his fighting spirit. We will see... ------------ About the author: Eric lives in tropical Queensland and writes books - some naughty, some nice - that can be found through Renaissance eBooks (renebooks.com) He reads widely and when he is not thinking about lunch, worries about the state of the world. Email: ericge@westnet.com.au Tell a friend about this site! ------------ |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|