I personally liked Bush more than Kerry on style. I was put off before the debate, when the common man, Kerry...scheduled and had a manicure before the debate. Now, I can appreciate that he wanted to look good, but the tanning and the manicure was a bit too much. He does not relate to the common voter. He has no clue that he attempts to paint himself as something less than an elitist is failing and creates more distrust.
He is an elitist, and he should be who he is.
Bush was determined to preach about continuity and he did. He played it safe, did not allow for any openings which would allowed his opponent a chance to get coverage the following day. He succeeded. Both parties are blowing their horns, but the candidates were asked good questions and are different. I want to hear specifics and when Bush started on Kerry on the numbers not working, he had an opportunity to score points, I think he is saving that for a future debate when the voting history will be tied in.
Kerry had a chance to use the "change" card, much like Reagan used the peace card and failed to follow up on that, so he comes out weak on that point.
From a debate point of view, I believe we had a chance to see how different the two are, and if one wants an agressive attack on terrorism, there is but one candidate. If one wants more discussions and negotiations to take place, then there is but one candidate. |
