VP Debate

[sexual_chocolate]

Let debate!

[selkirk]

 

you're a liar

no you are, dipshit

no you're the dipshit

no you're the dipshit, fuzzbrain

who ya callin a fuzzbrain, fuckwad

you're the fuckwad

no you are

no you are

no you are

no you are

 

ad nauseum...

 

 

Reminds me of a Monty Python skit.

 

Reminds of CC.com..... do we really want these jokers running the country? A least Clinton was a smooth -hound.

[Alex]

glacier, those are some interesting numbers. For the most part, I thought it was pretty even, both candidates seemed to hold their own. So I am surprised to see the media call it for Edwards.

 

I've always liked Cheney's demeanor and 4 years ago, while I thought Bush was an idiot, I thought...oh well, at least he is surrounding himself with smart people. 4 years later I know alot more, and while I still like Cheney's demeanor I wouldnt want him to be the next president if someone happened to assasinate the chimp in the next 4 years.

 

Question for the mob: if you were Kerry, who would you have picked as your VP, if not Edwards?

[sexual_chocolate]

I think Edwards was an excellent choice.

[b-rock]

Just a thought on the 'online' polls that come out right after the debates - it's probably worth questioning their accuracy as many Democratic groups are organizing people to go to those sites to vote.

 

Seems like most media outlets are calling it a draw.

[eternalX]

It's interesting to see what everyone thought. I was surprised to hear that many people thought Cheney won. I listened to the debate on the radio so maybe that played a factor? I didn't see facial expressions or reactions, etc. Both my gf and I thought Edwards did better, especially towards the end. Cheney really didn't have anything to say about domestic issues and about 2/3 of the way through the debate i realized that he really didn't have much to say about anything. His biggest (and well done, i might add) offense was the voting record of Edwards, but it came so early on that I thought some people might forget about it, especially after the Halliburton stuff. I do think that Cheney is much better at telling a lie and making people believe it then Edwards. In the end I thought Edwards won. To the democrats, they are saying that is all they need. That John Edwards is suitable for the VP could make up somebody's mind.

 

I thought the gay reference by Edwards was not at all mean or sick. If you remember, the question from the moderator was about Cheney's daughter! Edwards backed Cheney basically.

[Mal_Con]

Just make sure to use the site suggested by Cheney to find the truth http://www.factcheck.com

[rbw1966]

I thought both candidates showed a lot of class in reference to Cheney's daughter.

 

I also felt it was a pretty close debate with neither side scoring any serious body blows.

[sexual_chocolate]

I too am surprised by the media poll numbers, not because I don't think Edwards trounced Cheney, but because I didn't think most others would have seen it that way.

 

Cheney's strategy seemed similar to Bush's, which was to repeat certain sound-bites over and over (Kerry is a flip-flopper, WE are principled and will not waiver); of course, this is a tactic that's similar to the Kerry/Edwards camp, but they have more substance to work with (such is the case when you have an administration that has presided over the country during the time of a recession, started an unpopular war, created record deficits, dismantled environmental protections, withdrawn from international treaties, began development of nuclear weapons, given unpopular tax cuts to the wealthy, supported dictatorships, trounced the constitution, etc.).

 

But on other crucial issues, both partied are the same:

 

1. pro death penalty

2. unquestioned support for Israel

3. massive military spending

4. pro NAFTA, WTO, world bank, IMF (as in "unflinching capitalists)

5. betrothed to major corporations

[glacier]

Agreed - the polls I pulled tended to be a bit skewed - overall, the country seems to be split over who could get to their computers and click fastest.

PHD

 

Watched a good portion of the debate on PBS last night, and since I was making dinner while most of the poo-flinging was going on, I could only listen, rather than watch. So what I heard, was Cheney not responding directly to Edward's comments, but going back to previous comments, or tangenting off after a brief steaksauce toward the question. Not so effective to convince me. There are lies and obfuscations on both sides, as the usual cascade of factcheck links, etc. show, but Edwards seemed to me to sound like he wa able to roll out many more specifics than Cheney.

 

When I did watch, Edwards, in trial-lawyer mode- was much more physically active and agressive, and looked up and forward, while Cheney was hunched and stared at the table while answering, like some kid in the principal's office. I thinks dwards entered the game with much more of a nothing-to-lose attitude, since he knew he was being punditted at teh underdog against an elder statesman. Although there should have been a drinking game for every time Edwards did that little thumb-point thing of his.

 

Also remember that Cheney picked himself for VP, since he was the head of the VP search comittee for GW - Bush did not pick his own VP. "Cheney said he can't find anyone better than him, so I'm cool with that." One pacemaker-assisted heartbeat from the presidency (not that he isn't the co-president already).

[Gary_Yngve]

I'm clearly biased on my interpretations of the debates.

 

But I was laughing my ass off during them.

 

Cheney: We never attacked Kerry's military record.

[No, they hired thugs to do that.]

 

Cheney: I've never seen Edwards until today.

[see picture elsewhere on this thread]

 

Edwards: 90% of coalition casualties are Americans.

Cheney: Why are you demeaning the Iraqi participation?

[wtf? Complete non-sequitur by Cheney.]

 

Edwards: The so-called coalition today is nothing compared to the coalition of the 1990 war.

Cheney: There were 36 countries in the coalition back then, and 34 now.

[No France, Germany, Russia? Who does the USA have on their side? Vanuatu? Oh I forgot, Poland, who's going through NATO hazing rituals right now.]

 

Cheney bashes Edward's record.

Edwards bashes Cheney's record harder.

Cheney says, "I think the facts stand for themselves."

 

Edwards bashes Cheney and Haliburton.

Cheney says he needs more than 30 sec.

Gwen says that's all you got.

Cheney mumbles some crap about how all the charges are unfounded.

 

Edwards praises Cheney's acceptance of his daughter's lifestyle and accuses Bush of polarizing this country on the gay marriage issue to win votes and to smokescreen other issues where the administration is struggling.

Cheney thanks Edwards for the kind remarks to his family but otherwise has NO rebuttal.

[chucK]

At first I thought, who cares about what you think about the VP choices. The important thing is that they get out the message. Both seemed to do a good job of hammering home their parties' respective stances:

Edwards: Bush screwed up in Iraq. We're going to clink our ruby slippers together and get other nations interested in getting their young people killed in our fucking stupid war.

Cheney: Kerry is a girly man.

 

But...then I thought about it and with the country so bitterly divided, with people road raging others because of their bumper stickers, it wouldn't surprise me if either of the prez's had an attempt or two on their lives (domestic terrorism! ). Plus, Cheney's co-president already.

 

So anyway, what a choice!

 

A guy who definitely knows his way around Washington and politics, but is evil incarnate, versus a guy who, though he is 51, looks like he's about 10 years old, and has minimimal experience. Oh crap!

 

Still, if you take "we got new ideas, here they are" versus "four more years of the same" at face value, it's a pretty easy decision.

 

 

With respect to factcheck.com versus factcheck.org(the org one is the non-partisan link). factcheck.org seems to be down right now!!! Some evil Rovian plot?

 

You can check out factcheck.org by looking it up on google and looking at the cached version. You'll find that it states Cheney does not profit from Haliburton, but it doesn't discuss all Edwards's other allegations such as Haliburton getting a sweet deal for a company currently under investigation. You'll also see that the majority of articles are articles debunking deceptive Republican attack ads. You gotta wonder if maybe Cheney got that URL wrong on purpose.

[sexual_chocolate]

Cheney: I've never seen Edwards until today.

[see picture elsewhere on this thread]

 

Edwards: 90% of coalition casualties are Americans.

Cheney: Why are you demeaning the Iraqi participation?

[wtf? Complete non-sequitur by Cheney.]

 

 

Edwards praises Cheney's acceptance of his daughter's lifestyle and accuses Bush of polarizing this country on the gay marriage issue to win votes and to smokescreen other issues where the administration is struggling.

Cheney thanks Edwards for the kind remarks to his family but otherwise has NO rebuttal.

 

Cheney might say he never MET Edwards, which is different than SEEING him?!?!?

 

And with the coalition losses: If you think of the "Iraqi" military as being a part of the coalition (perhaps a bit disingenius), then indeed the US casualty percentage goes way down. nice spin though, huh?

 

 

WRT gay marriage: I'd think, considering their background, that both Bush and Cheney aren't too hip to the idea of gay marriage simply due to ideology and acculturation, not simply because of politics.

[chucK]

With respect to the gay marriage thing, the Dems are playing hardball there. Obviously, Edwards was basically saying:

 

HEY AMERICA LISTEN UP! CHENEY HAS A GAY DAUGHTER!!!!!!!

 

If it were in a bar, Cheney probably should have punched out Edwards for bringing his daughter into their dispute, or did whatever was possible for a guy with a heart condition; however, in the debates he couldn't act all Bob Dolian crazy, so he just had to suck it up and move on to the next topic.

 

Slimy as fuck, but you gotta believe this will help the dems in homophobeland.

 

BTW this is #6 in SC's list of how the candidates are the same

 

#6. Both candidates have stated that they do not support gay marriage.

[willstrickland]

Cheney might say he never MET Edwards, which is different than SEEING him?!?!?

 

C'mon dude, maybe you need more examples:

 

1. Tim Russert confirmed today that they met backstage at his show, "met, shook hands, and exchanged pleasantries".

 

2. Cheney met him again at the swearing in of new Senators when new NC Senator Liz Dole was sworn in. There is footage of this as well.

 

Cheney's strategy was to tell so many lies that Edwards couldn't possibly refute them all...and it worked.

 

Cheney used the line "Now, in my capacity as vice president, I am the president of Senate, the presiding officer. I'm up in the Senate most Tuesdays when they're in session."

 

BULLSHIT! Complete bullshit. I looked at the presiding officer list for the Tues Senate sessions since B/C took office. And how many did Cheny preside over?

 

In 2001 - NONE (although ironically enough, Edwards presided on one of those dates)

 

In 2002 - Once

In 2003 - Once

In 2004 - NONE

 

The only Tues Senate sessions he presided over in this entire term was 11/12/02, and 1/07/03. Fucker can sit there an lie and everyone just takes good 'ol Uncle Dick at his word. The American people got served.

 

Edited: I missed one, 1/7/03...a shocking ommission of 50% since he only presided over two sessions.

Edited October 6, 2004 by willstrickland

[Alpinfox]

I don't see why whether Cheney remembers meeting Edwards before or not is a big deal.

 

Cheney is an evil fucker who has lied about a lot of IMPORTANT things and conspired to start the Iraq war for corporate profit. I think that's a little bit more important than whatever he says about meeting someone at sometime in the past.

 

His lying about presiding over the Senate meetings is good stuff. Nice research Will. I hope he gets nailed on that.

[willstrickland]

Chuck, On the gay daughter issue:

 

Edwards did not raise that issue, the MODERATOR asked that question. So would Cheney have punched Gwen Iffil? Probably so, the evil bastard, but the exertion would probably cause his stent to collapse or his pacemaker to shock him like cattle prod.

[RuMR]

hahahaha...you are in rare form will

[SnowByrd]

Why, actually, I DID vote for John Kerry....right before I voted against him.

 

Niiiiiiiice. Cracked, you're not such an ASS afterall. Kerry reminds me of a Scooby Doo villian...something about the long jaw and all. Edwards is NOT goodlooking and kisses Kerry's ass. He looks like Plasticman. He looks GAY! Did you watch his expressions? Okay, I watched Queer Eye before...and it was like Deja Vu! He So looks like Carson! Does he actually have any original thoughts? Reminds me of some people on this site.

 

If the dems win this one, this country is going to turn into a big scarey chaotic cartoon.

 

I am a non partisan, by the way.

 

This is the stupidest thing I have read on cc.com in quite some time.... Congratulations, moron.

 

Careful there b-rock...don't snap my line or steal the bait just yet. Leave some for the rest. I'm using barbless hooks, by the way.

 

No, Rudy, I'm not 12.

 

Point in reference though...Edwards didn't think through his answers very well and it was easy to tell he was struggling. I'm disappointed. He needs to work on his debate skills and stop quoting old square jaw all the time. The VP debate is to find out where the VP candidates stand on issues and let them present their sides, not to run a campaign ad. I still don't know where Edwards stands on issues...do you?

[chucK]

The MODERATOR only tangentially identified her, speaking to Cheney of "[his] family's experience ".

 

Cheney then tiptoed around it with generalities.

 

Edwards specifically highlighted "GAY DAUGHTER".

 

Check out the transcripts

[cracked]

Quit sniffing glue, SnowByrd. Pretending that you're trolling after someone calls you on your bullshit is weak.

 

I watched most of the debate, and I saw it as a clear win for Cheney. Even many rabid liberals say that Edwards didn't do a great job. I'll be curious to view the polls in a few days.

[chucK]

The VP debate is to find out where the VP candidates stand on issues and let them present their sides, not to run a campaign ad.

 

Perhaps not moronic this time, but quite naive. Is this one a "troll" too?

[SnowByrd]

The VP debate is to find out where the VP candidates stand on issues and let them present their sides, not to run a campaign ad.

 

Perhaps not moronic this time, but quite naive. Is this one a "troll" too?

 

Keep going....I'm listening....

[Squid]

I'll be curious to view the polls in a few days.

 

I'm curious as well. Will this continue the momentum Kerry gained in the last debate, or will it swing back to Bush/Cheney?

 

It sounds like it was not so clearly lopsided to push opinion either way- probably the biggest impact will be on the debating strategies for this Friday.

 

Any bets on what those strategies will be?

 

My guess is that Kerry pretty much remains a brainiac talking head, and Bush will try to disarm the 'it's hard work' whine of the last debate with an aw-shucks, I'm just one-of-the-guys type comment.

[willstrickland]

The MODERATOR only tangentially identified her, speaking to Cheney of "[his] family's experience ".

 

Cheney then tiptoed around it with generalities.

 

Edwards specifically highlighted "GAY DAUGHTER".

 

Check out the transcripts

 

c'mon now Chuck, I've read the transcripts. As if everyone didn't know what Iffil was getting at? I can't really picture ol Gwen saying "So Mr. Vice President, everyone in the country now thinks you're a hypocrite for supporting this constituional amendment banning gay marriage when in fact your own flesh and blood, your daughter Mary, is a carpet muncher, who incidentally is in the audience tonight with her butch lesbian partner, Ms. Poe. How do you respond to that Mr. Vice President?"