Comments on: Let’s Call It A Tie

By: mona

mona — Wed, 06 Oct 2004 23:58:44 +0000

FactCheck.com – Check it out if you haven’t already… Cheney screwed up (he meant to refer to FactCheck.org on the Haliburton issue) and the people who own factcheck.com decided to redirect hits to http://www.georgesoros.com, where the headline reads “Why we must not re-elect president Bush”. Awesome.

By: Bill Arnold

Bill Arnold — Wed, 06 Oct 2004 17:24:20 +0000

The gay marriage segment was IMO where Cheney came closest to redeeming himself. This is a man who’s words need to be parsed as carefully as Bill Clinton’s to divine their truth value, and he was rather clearly conflicted. Declining to use his time after Edward’s nice comments about his daughter showed some style; it was clear to me that he pretty much agreed with the Edwards/Kerry position but loyalty restrained him from saying so.

By: eRobin

eRobin — Wed, 06 Oct 2004 15:52:56 +0000

You don’t nail the Cheney. That’s what Team BushCo was hoping for. Just like we were hoping that Cheney would snarl and foam at the mouth. It wasn’t going to happen. Edwards doesn’t win by nailing people. He stayed within the bounds of the debate and he made his points. They will resonate with the people who matter because they aren’t interested in nailing the other guy. That puts them off.

As for gay rights and Cheney’s heartbreak. I’d feel worse for the old man if he didn’t sell his daughter down the river in support of a an administration whose policies include endless war and the destruction of the middle class and organized labor.

By: Mr Furious

Mr Furious — Wed, 06 Oct 2004 14:33:41 +0000

I agree with you Greg and Kyle. Edwards let Cheney off the hook repeatedly. He had his moments, but I have to say I was pretty disappointed. It seems as if the spin is calling it close, and plenty of people are happy with his perfomance, but I really don’t think he was very strong.

By: Betty

Betty — Wed, 06 Oct 2004 12:28:26 +0000

Never met Edwards? Never said there was any connection to Iraq and 911? Never meant that a vote for Kerry means America will have an increased chance of terrorist attacks? Anyone can justify their actions by bending and stretching the truth. We have an administration not of resolve, but of alibis. Where does the buck stop in the Bush White House. They say they are have strong resolve. But resolve for what? Resolve to cover their decisions, resolve to keep the GOP in power, resolve to serve the interests of big business, HMO’s and insurance companies. When the subject of Ohio came up, I wished Edwards was going to say that Ohio has gone down hill dramatically in the last 4 years not only because of GOP White House, Senate & Congress, but also because we have a GOP governor, senate and house. The GOP loves to run on guns, gays, and god issues, because their record of service to the American people is so pitifully poor.

By: E-Rock

E-Rock — Wed, 06 Oct 2004 12:08:52 +0000

I only watched the first half of the debate, and there was no doubt in my mind that he performed a million times better than John Kerry. Why? He was able to whittle down every position he and Kerry have taken into easy-to-understand bullet points. Kerry lacks that ability. Here’s something to chew on, though. Claire, a yellow dog Democrat, admitted last night that she thought that she agreed with Cheney in regards to the Kerry/Edwards position on Iraq. They were for it when it was politically expedient and against it when it became vital to their campaigns. That suggests to me that the Democrats are going to have a difficult time overcoming the idea that Kerry is a panderer. I would agree with her.

Is there any doubt, though, that last night’s debate was much better than last week’s?

By: The Moderate Voice

The Moderate Voice — Wed, 06 Oct 2004 08:27:39 +0000

The Veep Debate: A Classic Draw?

A see-saw Vice Presidential debate featured Vice President Dick Cheney and John Edwards showing off some of their best — and least-best stuff — and it ended in a draw. (See below on polls which don’t agree. But then we

By: Kyle

Kyle — Wed, 06 Oct 2004 08:03:42 +0000

Also, it pains me that during the gay marriage portion of the debate, I agreed with Cheney far more than I agreed with Edwards. Cheney was actually honest when answering and dared to go against the administration party line by stating that he thought gay marriage should be a states’ rights issue. While Edwards also came out in favor of states’ rights, his unprompted “but marriage should only be between a man and a woman” response (which he repeated twice) was so muddled that I could barely stand it, especially since I know that deep down, Edwards supports gay marriage, but considers it political suicide to say so. Wonkette was right on the money when she summarized Edwards’ answer as “We shouldn’t be talking about this. We ought to be talking about… something I am less conflicted over.”

By: Kyle

Kyle — Wed, 06 Oct 2004 07:48:04 +0000

Edwards frustrated me. He had eight hundred opportunities to nail Cheney and never did. Unlike Kerry last week, I felt like Edwards was parroting memorized lines, and he wasn’t able to capitalize on anything new that Cheney gave him (and there was a lot). When Cheney claimed that he’d never implied a link between Al Qaeda and Saddam, WHY didn’t Edwards cite the numerous times he did? Hell, even I could name instances off the top of my head. When Cheney said that the administration never let up in their pursuit of Osama, WHY didn’t Edwards quote Bush saying, “I don’t know where Osama is and I really don’t care”? The Tora Bora thing is well and good, but that Bush quote seems like such a devastating smoking gun and it boggles my mind that it has not been used in these debates (much as it boggles my mind that it was virtually ignored by the country and the media when Bush originally said it).

I am surprised at how little of an asset Edwards has been as a veep candidate (at least on a televised scale). He has not served the campaign very well in most of his television appearances, and I thought that was basically the point. I know a lot of people who were big Edwards fans in the primaries, but I talked to one tonight and he was disappointed too.

By: Assamite

Assamite — Wed, 06 Oct 2004 06:41:29 +0000

I think the only reason it wasn’t an Edwards “victory” was that Cheney refused to EAT HIS OWN LIES when Edwards threw them back to him. Instead, he “kept his cool” (which is one way to put it), and continued to stand by his lies. He’s trying to put Edwards in the position of the “wild accuser,” no matter how true Johnny’s words are.

What will matter is that the people will hear the truth from Edwards juxtaposed next to Cheney’s distortions – I can’t believe he won’t just use the L-word – and judge for themselves. Plus, this is also setting the stage for Friday’s town-hall debate.

So I wouldn’t call it a tie that fast.