Jump to content

Going First: Edwards Cleans Cheney's Clock


Guest ncm2169
This topic is 6635 days old and is no longer open for new replies.  Replies are automatically disabled after two years of inactivity.  Please create a new topic instead of posting here.  

Recommended Posts

LOL. Now we disagree again (respectfully of course). =oP

 

I thought they were fairly closely matched. If I had to give an edge in debate skill, I'd give it to Cheney - I think he won, but only slightly. (And I'm a Kerry/Edwards supporter).

 

I just think Cheney has more experience and came off surer-footed. He also was MUCH better-prepared than Bush was for defending and expressing his opinions. So was Edwards, but he made a few verbal errors.

 

If I had to make a prediction, I'd guess Bush will get a very slight bounce in the polls (but I doubt enough to put him ahead of Kerry at the moment).

 

But, the remaining two debates are Kerry vs. Bush, and I would imagine Kerry will continue to clean Bush's clock. (Then again, you were less impressed by that debate, so I guess it depends on the viewer's opinion).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RE: Going First: Edwards Cleans Cheney's Cock

 

ncm, you and I really see things differently. I thought Kerry was great last week, but tonight Cheney clearly outperformed the obvious rookie Edwards.

 

Cheney showed real toughness, even if I hate what he is for. Edwards was just too slick...and, for a trial lawyer, not so impressive as his reputation led me to believe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ncm2169

FWIW (not much), where I come from in this discussion is not as a committed Democrat, which I am. My observations are as someone who's been politically active (and more ;-) ) for a long time. If these "debates" were scored even by high school debate "rules/skills", my judgment as to who "won" would be different. I just try to figure out the Voting Public's reaction when I make these judgments here. Last week I was off the mark ... GOOD for me! Tonite, I hope to hell I'm right. :7

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Checking in from the Heart of America I, too, thought it was pretty even. (So did my parents, aged 92 and 82). However, I think that means that Edwards won. Cheney has one of the longest political resumés in America, yet he didn't knock Edwards out of the ring, not even closely. And that's what the Republicans were hoping for: that Edwards' relative inexperience would be patently obvious. It wasn't. Edwards was articulate, informed, on point, and in command of his facts. He also looked extremely good and energetic, and Cheney looked weary and old. That may influence some voters.

 

Cheney also seemed weak on domestic issues, while Edwards was up to snuff on both the foreign affairs and domestic sides. Edwards was never ruffled or unprepared. That'll sink in, eventually, on the general public. The young whippersnapper held his own with Darth Vader.

 

What DID disappoint me was that Edwards was inaccurate about the legal treatment of marriage in the U.S. I'm comfortable with the fact that, while not supporting "marriage" for people of the same sex, Kerry and Edwards support civil unions and oppose the Federal Marriage Amendment. However he was wrong, in trying to defend his position, when he said at least twice that for 200 years one state has not had to recognize another's marriages. Obviously, that's not true. If it were, straight couples would have to get married in each of the 50 states for their marriages to be recognized nationally. The Constitution requires each state and the Federal government to recognize the official acts of each other. That's why straight people don't have to marry 50 times. The Constitution leaves the administration of marriage to the states, which is why there are differences in things like age limits, residency requirements, the need for blood tests, etc. But state laws on marriage can't violate the U.S. Constitution, which is why the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the Virginia anti-miscegantion statute in the Loving case and required Virginia to recognize the out-of-state marriage of the Lovings, a mixed race couple who moved to Virginia. The Loving case is the precedent that the Supreme Court won't be able to get around when the issue of same-sex marriage finally comes before it. So on this, Edwards was wrong: the Constitution requires each state and the Federal government to recognize the legal marriages of the other states. That's why the right-wing wants to pass the anti-marriage amendment. Edwards would have been better off to say he and Kerry oppose that amendment not only because it would be divisive and discriminatory, but also because it would take away the right the states have had, since the inception of the Republic, to regulate marriage themselves.

 

On the whole, though, Edwards acquitted himself very well, and came across as a convincing and qualified candidate for the Vice-Presidency.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest zipperzone

>He also looked extremely good and energetic, and

>Cheney looked weary and old. That may influence some voters.

 

As well it should. He did look old and weary. And if I was an American citizen, I wouldn't feel comfortable with gour more years of a VP who has his history of heart problems, regardless of what his doctors say.

 

I thought that Cheney was totally ineffective in defending himself against Edwards' accusations about the the financial priviledge that Cheney ex-employer Halliburton had been able to negotiate for themselves. He looked like shit in that area!

 

I also thought Cheney looked like he could have cheerfully strangled Edwards when he solicitiously praised Cheney for loving his gay daughter. Cheney side stepped this issue by thanking him and saying nothing further.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>I also thought Cheney looked like he could have cheerfully

>strangled Edwards when he solicitiously praised Cheney for

>loving his gay daughter.

 

Exactly! My favorite moment of the debate -- Edwards picking that one to wave back and forth before the faces of the rabid right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

In order to post in the Political Issues forum, all members are required to acknowledge that their post is in compliance with our Community Guidelines.  In addition, you acknowledge that it meets the following requirements: 

  • No personal attacks: Attack the issue not the person
  • No hijacking: Stay on the subject of the thread 

  • No bullying, hate speech or offensive terms/expressions

In addition, if the moderators feel someone is reporting content simply because if it’s political stance (such as but not limited to reporting it as off topic but not other off topic replies by those that agree with your stance), the reporting person may receive a warning as well.

Content that does not comply with the above requirements will be removed.  Multiple violations may result in a loss of access to this forum.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...