Tony Blogs the Debate
Tony Pierce is says I'm predictable as a Bush supporter (see comments and scroll). I guess that's true if I'm expected to notice what I believe is spin on something he's quoting to refute a point. Tony says Dick Cheney's assertion during the debate that he didn't 'suggest' a connection between Iraq and 9/11 is a lie. He quotes Cheney from an appearance last year on Meet the Press:
If we’re successful in Iraq, if we can stand up a good representative government in Iraq, that secures the region so that it never again becomes a threat to its neighbors or to the United States, so it’s not pursuing weapons of mass destruction, so that it’s not a safe haven for terrorists, now 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.
I responded in his comments:
You quote Dick as saying if we are successful in Iraq we will strike a "major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists," and 'terrorists' were responsible for 9/11. I'll concede the point. You may infer that he meant 'those particular terrorists' enjoying a 'haven' in Iraq were part of the plan, though he was talking about terrorists in general, "who have had us under assault for many years."Edwards was 'suggesting' last night that Dick claimed there was a verifiable link between 'those terrorists' and 9/11. I would 'suggest' that there is no verifiable refutation there was not. I'm pretty sure the terrorists are 'all' out to kill us.
The reason I think Cheney mopped the floor with Edwards is because Edwards seemed like 'talking points boy.' Undecideds have already heard the talking points. They were supposed to get meat, not thin gruel.
To which Tony said:
bush defenders are so predictable. when dems talk about issues theyre accused for sticking to "talking points".both gentlemen last night were heavy on issues/talking points.
but cheney flat out lied, hid, mumbled into his mic, and continued to have no plan for getting out of iraq.
sorry, you cannot claim victory of a debate when your guy refuses to admit that we are not winning this thing in iraq, and when he backs down from further discussing a constitutional amendment.
you cant "win" like that
I have nothing against talking points, and as Tony points out, Cheney had them also. It's that he didn't come across as having 'only' talking points, which to me, Edwards did. I think he was pretty slick in coming back to them repeatedly when Cheney or Ifill rattled him, but he repeated himself too often instead of moving the debate forward. For that tiny slice of Bush leaning undecideds that are looking for adult supervision at the White House, Cheney gave it to them. Bush has to follow up hard on this, and it's not apparent that he can do so.
I'm doing my best to not see the debates through the eyes of a partisan, but as to how an undecided voter may view them. I commented on Tony's Cheney quote because it was parsing, and not particularly relevant to the outcome of the debate except for partisans like us.
My take on the Bush/Kerry debate is that Kerry probably won his undecided leaners, and I said so. I alluded to it in my VP post below by saying that I hoped Bush was watching and learning from this debate. I didn't say it specifically at the time, but I don't think Bush got his leaners. I read a few right wing blogs that had Bush beating Kerry, or calling the debate a draw. But they, like Tony and me, are not the audience.
I don't think the main thrust of either the Kerry or Bush debate team is worrying about us decideds looking for reassurance that our side is still on point or the other side is still evil. It's fun, but not useful for moving or handicapping an otherwise pretty even race.
I highly recommend Tony's entertaining and excellent blog.
