Vice-Presidential Debate
- Thread starter Drunken Master
- Start date
Have seen better, tend to call it a draw.
Edwards looked good, held his own and Cheney looked typical, good & scary.........
Edwards looked good, held his own and Cheney looked typical, good & scary.........
I actually thought cheney was going to eat the new kids lunch....he's much smarter then his boss...but Edwards held his own.i'm not sure if it was only myself reacting, but anyone notice a familiarity to his body language ?...specifically the "closed fist, thumb on top, pointed out when making a point"? some body showed him some classic clinton tapes before the debate.....noticed a tonne of nods to willy's body language on the part of edwards during the debate
I thought Edwards looked awful. Kept rolling his tongue out of nervousness, and used his hands too much.
The problem with the filthy liar Cheney is that he's really, really smart and completely unflappable.
As Tucker Carlson pointed out, you wonder what Cheney really thinks of Bush.
The problem with the filthy liar Cheney is that he's really, really smart and completely unflappable.
As Tucker Carlson pointed out, you wonder what Cheney really thinks of Bush.
He's gotta be thinkin what all of us do at times.."How the hell am I working for this Ahole??" Cheney is so much better than Bush, both in knowledge and articulation.Mao Tse Tongue said:
Yep, Edwards held his own...but it's like watching a championship fight...the challenger needed a convincing win. It was their one and only debate. He didn't help the cause...didn't kill it either, which was good. Kerry needs to come back even stronger in the next debate.
A great article on Cheney:
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/_/id/6450422?rnd=1094003520950&pageid=rs.Home&has-player=true&pageregion=single7&
"Those who have known him over the years remain astounded by what they describe as his almost autistic indifference to the thoughts and feelings of others. "He has the least interest in human beings of anyone I have ever met," says John Perry Barlow, his former supporter. Cheney's freshman-year roommate, Steve Billings, agrees: "If I could ask Dick one question, I'd ask him how he could be so unempathetic."
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/_/id/6450422?rnd=1094003520950&pageid=rs.Home&has-player=true&pageregion=single7&
"Those who have known him over the years remain astounded by what they describe as his almost autistic indifference to the thoughts and feelings of others. "He has the least interest in human beings of anyone I have ever met," says John Perry Barlow, his former supporter. Cheney's freshman-year roommate, Steve Billings, agrees: "If I could ask Dick one question, I'd ask him how he could be so unempathetic."
Mao Tse Tongue said:
Edwards did his best..........but it wasn't enough.
He came across as a lost little schoolboy at times. When Edwards clenched his fist for emphasis it was just laughable.
A classic case of a boy against a man.
Very true. Too bad Cheney's lies have pickled whereas Edwards' are still youngTiger Williams said:
Cheney
has a surprising grasp of facts and is so articulate compared to Bush - I abore what Cheney and his cast of wackos have done to seed problems in the 1980s and currently - but I had to admit - other than his misguided policies - he is much brighter debating than just reading a set speech. It is astounding that Bush could be the top dog, with very little detail or ability to articulate fully major policy, and makes you wonder who is really calling the shots.
has a surprising grasp of facts and is so articulate compared to Bush - I abore what Cheney and his cast of wackos have done to seed problems in the 1980s and currently - but I had to admit - other than his misguided policies - he is much brighter debating than just reading a set speech. It is astounding that Bush could be the top dog, with very little detail or ability to articulate fully major policy, and makes you wonder who is really calling the shots.
Edwards got crushed! The sound bite on his horrendous Senate attendance record will be replayed until the next Presidential debate.
Draw or no draw. VP debattes have little impact. I am not sure if the any debatte really has any impact.
99% of the voters have made up their mind already. The "undecided vote" is a myth. Undecided voters use that line to garner the attention from the pollsters and the politicians.
Most pollsters and politicians won't even look at you again, once you told them what your choice is. Pretending to be undecided will buy you 15 minutes of fame.
99% of the voters have made up their mind already. The "undecided vote" is a myth. Undecided voters use that line to garner the attention from the pollsters and the politicians.
Most pollsters and politicians won't even look at you again, once you told them what your choice is. Pretending to be undecided will buy you 15 minutes of fame.
For those who care...
WASHINGTON — Democrat John Edwards (search) and Vice President Dick Cheney (search) stretched the findings of U.S. intelligence to their own ends Tuesday night in tangling over Saddam Hussein's alleged ties to Al Qaeda.
Edwards said the connection between Saddam and the terrorist network was minimal or nonexistent; Cheney asserted Saddam's Iraq "had an established relationship with Al Qaeda."
Both statements mask what intelligence sources have said. The contacts were limited and sketchy, mostly Iraqi intelligence agents and Al Qaeda operatives, and did not amount to state sponsorship of Al Qaeda (search) or any link to the Sept. 11 attacks, U.S. intelligence officials have said.
But the recent Senate Intelligence Committee report on flawed Iraqi intelligence did conclude that the CIA reasonably assessed there probably were several contacts between Iraq and Al Qaeda throughout the 1990s, although they did not add up to a formal relationship.
The exchange was typical of a night in which each accused the other of mangling facts and traded accusations at a faster pace than in the presidential debate last week.
"More attacks, more problematic facts," said Kathleen Hall Jamieson, director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania, comparing this debate with the last. She said Edwards and Cheney had more of a chance to challenge each other on distorted claims than President Bush and Democrat John Kerry did, but "still a lot of factual inaccuracies were left standing."
In perhaps the most awkward blooper of the evening, Cheney told Edwards to his face that they had never met before the debate, despite evidence they had.
Edwards' campaign later provided a transcript of a February 2001 prayer breakfast at which Cheney began his remarks by acknowledging the North Carolina senator. The campaign said the two also met when Edwards accompanied the other North Carolina senator, Elizabeth Dole, to her swearing-in ceremony.
Cheney was trying to make the point that Edwards was an absentee senator. "The first time I ever met you was when you walked on the stage tonight."
At one point, Edwards attacked Cheney for the administration's decision to give billions of dollars in new contracts to the vice president's former company, Halliburton. But congressional auditors recently reviewed those contracts and concluded U.S. officials met legal guidelines in awarding the business without competition — in part because Halliburton was the only company capable of doing some of the work.
WASHINGTON — Democrat John Edwards (search) and Vice President Dick Cheney (search) stretched the findings of U.S. intelligence to their own ends Tuesday night in tangling over Saddam Hussein's alleged ties to Al Qaeda.
Edwards said the connection between Saddam and the terrorist network was minimal or nonexistent; Cheney asserted Saddam's Iraq "had an established relationship with Al Qaeda."
Both statements mask what intelligence sources have said. The contacts were limited and sketchy, mostly Iraqi intelligence agents and Al Qaeda operatives, and did not amount to state sponsorship of Al Qaeda (search) or any link to the Sept. 11 attacks, U.S. intelligence officials have said.
But the recent Senate Intelligence Committee report on flawed Iraqi intelligence did conclude that the CIA reasonably assessed there probably were several contacts between Iraq and Al Qaeda throughout the 1990s, although they did not add up to a formal relationship.
The exchange was typical of a night in which each accused the other of mangling facts and traded accusations at a faster pace than in the presidential debate last week.
"More attacks, more problematic facts," said Kathleen Hall Jamieson, director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania, comparing this debate with the last. She said Edwards and Cheney had more of a chance to challenge each other on distorted claims than President Bush and Democrat John Kerry did, but "still a lot of factual inaccuracies were left standing."
In perhaps the most awkward blooper of the evening, Cheney told Edwards to his face that they had never met before the debate, despite evidence they had.
Edwards' campaign later provided a transcript of a February 2001 prayer breakfast at which Cheney began his remarks by acknowledging the North Carolina senator. The campaign said the two also met when Edwards accompanied the other North Carolina senator, Elizabeth Dole, to her swearing-in ceremony.
Cheney was trying to make the point that Edwards was an absentee senator. "The first time I ever met you was when you walked on the stage tonight."
At one point, Edwards attacked Cheney for the administration's decision to give billions of dollars in new contracts to the vice president's former company, Halliburton. But congressional auditors recently reviewed those contracts and concluded U.S. officials met legal guidelines in awarding the business without competition — in part because Halliburton was the only company capable of doing some of the work.
CONTINUE
He also asserted, "They sent 40,000 American troops into Iraq without the body armor they needed," a comment that might suggest they had no body armor at all, when in fact they did.
Gen. Peter Pace, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs, said 40,000 troops did not have the brand new, improved armor but, "every soldier and Marine on the ground over had body armor."
Cheney accused Kerry of voting for taxes 98 times. That's down from the 350 times wrongly claimed by Republicans, but it's still a stretch. Those 98 votes include times when Kerry voted for lower taxes — but not as low as Republicans wanted. And times when many procedural votes were cast on a single tax increase or package.
Whatever the relationship between Al Qaeda and Iraq over the years, another question touched on by the debaters was whether Saddam's Iraq had anything to do with the Sept. 11 attacks specifically. There is no evidence of that.
The vice president stated flatly that he has never suggested a connection between Iraq and Sept. 11.
But he did say in 2003 that if efforts to establish democracy in Iraq succeeded, "we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11."
Touching on one of the Democratic ticket's favorite themes, Edwards declared the Bush administration is "for outsourcing jobs," taking out of context comments from Labor Secretary Elaine Chao (search) and a report by a council of economists who advise the president. Bush and Cheney have not said they support the practice of U.S companies sending jobs from the United States to cheaper labor in other countries.
The Council of Economic Advisers said job outsourcing is part of a healthy dynamic in which free trade in return benefits Americans. And Chao said last month that the concerns about job losses ignore that foreign-owned companies are creating many jobs in the United States at the same time.
Chao said employers have eliminated about 300,000 jobs in the United States in favor of cheaper labor elsewhere, but about 9 million Americans currently work for U.S. subsidiaries of foreign-owned companies.
Also in the debate:
—Edwards said that while U.S. troops were fighting in Iraq, the Bush administration "lobbied the Congress to cut their combat pay. This is the height of hypocrisy."
It's also arguable. When the government faced prospects that increased allowances for the troops would expire as stipulated by Congress, the Pentagon said it would make up any shortfall through incentive pay or similar means.
—Cheney took Kerry out of context in quoting him as saying that he favored a global test before he would deploy U.S. troops to pre-empt an attack on the United States.
Kerry said in his debate that he would not cede to anyone the right to move pre-emptively against a threat but that he would do so in a way that proved to Americans and the world that he had taken the action for a legitimate reason.
He also asserted, "They sent 40,000 American troops into Iraq without the body armor they needed," a comment that might suggest they had no body armor at all, when in fact they did.
Gen. Peter Pace, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs, said 40,000 troops did not have the brand new, improved armor but, "every soldier and Marine on the ground over had body armor."
Cheney accused Kerry of voting for taxes 98 times. That's down from the 350 times wrongly claimed by Republicans, but it's still a stretch. Those 98 votes include times when Kerry voted for lower taxes — but not as low as Republicans wanted. And times when many procedural votes were cast on a single tax increase or package.
Whatever the relationship between Al Qaeda and Iraq over the years, another question touched on by the debaters was whether Saddam's Iraq had anything to do with the Sept. 11 attacks specifically. There is no evidence of that.
The vice president stated flatly that he has never suggested a connection between Iraq and Sept. 11.
But he did say in 2003 that if efforts to establish democracy in Iraq succeeded, "we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11."
Touching on one of the Democratic ticket's favorite themes, Edwards declared the Bush administration is "for outsourcing jobs," taking out of context comments from Labor Secretary Elaine Chao (search) and a report by a council of economists who advise the president. Bush and Cheney have not said they support the practice of U.S companies sending jobs from the United States to cheaper labor in other countries.
The Council of Economic Advisers said job outsourcing is part of a healthy dynamic in which free trade in return benefits Americans. And Chao said last month that the concerns about job losses ignore that foreign-owned companies are creating many jobs in the United States at the same time.
Chao said employers have eliminated about 300,000 jobs in the United States in favor of cheaper labor elsewhere, but about 9 million Americans currently work for U.S. subsidiaries of foreign-owned companies.
Also in the debate:
—Edwards said that while U.S. troops were fighting in Iraq, the Bush administration "lobbied the Congress to cut their combat pay. This is the height of hypocrisy."
It's also arguable. When the government faced prospects that increased allowances for the troops would expire as stipulated by Congress, the Pentagon said it would make up any shortfall through incentive pay or similar means.
—Cheney took Kerry out of context in quoting him as saying that he favored a global test before he would deploy U.S. troops to pre-empt an attack on the United States.
Kerry said in his debate that he would not cede to anyone the right to move pre-emptively against a threat but that he would do so in a way that proved to Americans and the world that he had taken the action for a legitimate reason.
Watching and listening to Edwards was painful - he looked like a little kid who had to keep "going back to the previous point". He looks like he'd make a good little politician when he grows up but; like Luke in Episode 5, Vader made him look silly. LOL
I wonder though....how many people would support a trial lawyer who made tens of millions suing doctors and jacking their liability insurance to the point they can't practise?
GWB is not a genius, but at least he's not a pussy. The man wakes up every morning and without much thought decides- today, we take the fight to them. American voters would rather vote for a fool, who isn't a coward then a genius who looks unsteady (check on Adelai Stevens...and anybody who ran vs Reagan).
If the John-Johns want to be in office - saying that you're going to make changes, without revealing how; just won't do it.
It is far easier to criticize when you have NO culpability to anyone. (See Cdn Liberal electoral promises). In this case actions, poor as they may seem; speak louder than words.
I wonder though....how many people would support a trial lawyer who made tens of millions suing doctors and jacking their liability insurance to the point they can't practise?
GWB is not a genius, but at least he's not a pussy. The man wakes up every morning and without much thought decides- today, we take the fight to them. American voters would rather vote for a fool, who isn't a coward then a genius who looks unsteady (check on Adelai Stevens...and anybody who ran vs Reagan).
If the John-Johns want to be in office - saying that you're going to make changes, without revealing how; just won't do it.
It is far easier to criticize when you have NO culpability to anyone. (See Cdn Liberal electoral promises). In this case actions, poor as they may seem; speak louder than words.
Ok BBK
Let's start a poll here and see how many people are undecided? Are you game?
While I agree with you on the unknown of the "virgin voters" I don't agree that there is soo many undecided.Unless you want to categorize the app.50% of non voters as undecided.
These people are either not interested in the process or feel that they have no real choice. Or they are happy with their lives and don't see a reason for change. Who knows?
Since not voting is not an option for me. I have followed the process for quiet a while, and have made up my mind.
If someone is commited to the voting process, and plans on voting. He/she would have followed events for a while now, adn probably knows by now, who He/she is going to vote for.
I agree with you that the vote will not be as close as the media makes it out to be, but of course I hope it will go against Kerry.
Let's start a poll here and see how many people are undecided? Are you game?
While I agree with you on the unknown of the "virgin voters" I don't agree that there is soo many undecided.Unless you want to categorize the app.50% of non voters as undecided.
These people are either not interested in the process or feel that they have no real choice. Or they are happy with their lives and don't see a reason for change. Who knows?
Since not voting is not an option for me. I have followed the process for quiet a while, and have made up my mind.
If someone is commited to the voting process, and plans on voting. He/she would have followed events for a while now, adn probably knows by now, who He/she is going to vote for.
I agree with you that the vote will not be as close as the media makes it out to be, but of course I hope it will go against Kerry.
