Who Won the Presidential Foreign Policy Debate?

Now that you've either heard the debate or at least clips of it, what do you think? Who do you think was the stronger man in the foreign policy debate?

I like listening to Kerry speak because he's so articulate. A lot of people in the media seem to feel he's a little over-wordy, but I appreciate a more nuanced discussion. I thought he did a great job in the debate last night after he got his footing. It felt like he warmed up after the first 25 minutes or so.

This debate I thought was very revealing in both the substance of the two candidates political ideologies and the depth of their understanding (or ability to communicate that understanding). Kerry was much much better in both, in my opinion. I don't think his positions are necessarily all that nuanced. I think he simply has a better understanding of the complexities of foreign policy.

I really (REALLY) appreciate a candidate who doesn't dumb down their communication with voters. This is a very refreshing change from the California recall election where the all-mighty sound byte ruled. There should be a continuing dialogue between citizens and their representatives and not just a barrage of sound bytes right before an election. That will not get us a balanced budget (as we are finding out...). What's missing in the nation (and in Campbell) is a dialectic on the issues between those of differing opinions. What we seem to get is polarized and largely uninformative rhetoric from opposing groups.

I'm not a democrat - I'm independent. If I was a democrat, I might have just posted that although W looked like curious George he sure as shootin' sounded like Elmer Fudd.

Some pundits were commenting on the debates and one interesting fact that came up was that people who got to watch the debate on a split screen had a far lower impression of Bush than the ones who got to watch on the normal camera shots. Bush's body language hurt his performance even more.

I saw some flaws in the way both candidates handled the questions. Bush seemed to almost give the same answer each time it was his turn. "You can't be president sending mixed messages and you have to fulfull your duty and be good to your word." (Note: "Uhhhhh's" were edited out of my paraphrase). Kerry had a few lapses of going around in circular arguments, but did pretty good overall. He was definitely much stronger in his body language and tone of voice.

I thought the way Kerry answered Leher's question about "Are our troops now dying for a mistke?" was particularly interesting. He was obviously expecting that to come up because he started answering with an emphatically forceful "No!" even before Leher could finish asking the question.

I'd definitely give it to Kerry. He came across as very well-informed and articulate, and seemed less "stiff" than he usually does in regular campaign speeches. Early on he weakened his body language to the home viewer by looking at Lehrer directly instead of looking in the camera, but he got better about this as the debate went on.

Bush seemed to get on the defense early and stayed there. Most of his answers were subtle variations of "Hey, we're doing our best and we had to make some tough decisions." I did see the debate with a split screen, and his "off-camera" body language was very damaging. He almost seemed to be pouting much of the time. He also seemed fidgety and often on the edge of crankiness. It looked like there was almost nowhere in the world he would have rather been less than in that room.

This post has been edited by 23fnord on Oct 3 2004, 12:01 PM

I found something kinda funny on the FOX News website about the debate. It's one of their commentators (John Gibson) about Bush's facial expressions during the debate.

This election year is starting to get even weirder...

There's something unexplainable pushing up through Bush's back in the first debate. Body armor? Wireless radio? Heart monitor? Let the conspiracy theories begin...

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/09/politics...gn/09bulge.html

Lots of misc. screen captures of the "bulge"
http://cryptome.org/bush-bulge.htm#28

I agree that if Rove had been coaching Bush he probably would have done better!

But, I find it really odd that the Bush administration won't comment on what that was, because it's pretty clear it was something. If they had been able to identify it immediately and admit what it was, I think everyone would hav been a lot less suspicious....