Redstate

A talk radio host here in Boston, Jay Severin, just said if he were advising the Kerry campaign (Severin's a fairly hardcore libertarian/Republican,  FWIW), he would advise Kerry to break the agreed-upon rules and engage the president directly with aggressive rhetoric/questions.

I'm not sure it's bad advice, because, if you're John Kerry, you've got to figure it's now or never. If he doesn't do something to change the momentum of the campaign, my reading of the tea leaves says his chances of unseating George W. Bush will fade to nothing. Kerry can't count on the next debate, as the second debate is likely to be less impactful.

Anyway, I write this only because I think the president had better be prepared with some "oustside the rules" ammo of his own. He's facing a desperate candidate tonight.

Kerry advisers "demanded" that the debate lights be removed from the lecterns "because they are distracting," but the debate commission "refused."

"Go towards the light, Carol Ann!" running through my head? I need beer.

I wonder? It would sure give me more to blog about, over there on that other site I run.

Carl Cameron has been reporting that Kerry spent the day getting a manicure.  What a wuss.

Oh, and I agree Mike.  He will/should break the rules, but he will probably come across like a jerk when he does it.

You're a conservative.

For the next VRWC gala-square-dancing event.

How many Tet Offensive similes can we expect from M. Kerry tonight?

Greetings to the DCer's party.  

Lehrer's saying that can be no reactions, especially audible ones.  Of course this is in keeping with his own visage; hardly ever a change in expression.  :)

...as the Fox folks noted.  "And each candidate must respond in the form of a question."

Has Kerry answered it yet?

Interesting that Kerry comes out as strongly affirming his superiority on the homeland security front, without his customary rhetorical equivocation.

On the other hand, he did say that he wouldn't give any other country a veto on our security.  No word on whether the UN and various other alliances would get a veto.  'Cause we know the answer to that.

Ridiculous that he says the President hasn't reached out to Muslim nations, though.  If anything, he's coddled some of them -- Saudi Arabia and Pakistan -- too much.

...are with these people who have suffered a lot."  Will be interesting to see how comfortable Kerry is with religion.

It would appear that Bush is dodging the "Kerry=terrorist attack" question, and wandering a bit.

My comments on Bush should be taken with a grain of salt.  I am not among those who find him a compelling speaker, nor do I understand how he ever triumphs in a rhetorical matchup.  However, I am aware that great whopping numbers of my countrymen disagree.

So....that being said, his initial recitation of talking points strikes me as a little weak.  The response to the question on whether Kerry's ascent to the Presidency will endanger America was adroitly sidestepped, but sidestepped nonetheless.

The repetition of the 10 million registered voter figure for Afghanistan is a minor flub.

However, his defense of the Iraq war is spot on.  Well said, well done.  My Democrat wife avers that he's doing okay.  And she applauds his use of the word "vociferous."

Here we go. Drinking game: One shot of tequilla for every time Kerry uses a form of the word "strong."

...and Dubya didn't stumble over that.  >whew<  >grin<

How incredibly unwise to downplay the import of the Iraq war in the war on terror.

He's right about the Tora Bora battle.  But so very wrong to criticize the overall strategy of utilizing Afghans to sweep the Taliban away.

I suspect he's going to come across as rather arrogant....

"Where do you want me to begin?"

"His campaign has a word for that."

Too many rhetorical lessons learnt in kitchen squabbles with Teresa are showing through.

After 18 UN resolutions and a decade or so after Gulf War 1, what exactly does Kerry consider a "last resort"?

Good to hear Kerry has precise intelligence that bin Laden is in Afghanistan.  (Yeah right.)

I like Bush throwing Kerry's words in his face.

I hope Bush really takes Kerry to task for making up statistics.

He does best when he feels most strongly about it.

God, I have a perverse 90s flashback coming on. I may have to go vomit.

Kerry accuses the president of flip-flopping on going to the U.N. before the Iraq war, without using the word "flip-flop".

Color me amused...

Bush just delivered a nice riposte by throwing Kerry's words back into his face.  Well said.  On the other hand, Kerry's hits on the conditions in Afghanistan are quite apt.  And to see the President retreat into the official narrative of the Iraq war buildup is frankly disappointing.

Can't help.

Don't start making Tommy Franks sound like a Bush detractor.  Bad move.

Oh dear Lord. Please let me not toss the posting rules off a bridge.

@#&$%@#&@#$

Yes, because the Executive is inferior to the Legislative. Brilliant.

Now the President is delivering perhaps one of the most cogent defenses of the Iraq war -- and warning on the consequences of failure -- I've yet heard from him.

Admittedly, that's not saying much.  But there it is.  Good for him.

Ah....Kerry just avers that the President invaded Iraq.  Not his country.  The President.  "Bush's War," anyone?  David Frum wrote a few days back that the Kerry campaign has been picking up a lot of very bad ideas from the lefty blogs -- this is one of them.  By all means, rhetorically disassociate from your nation at war.  See how that nation likes it on election day, eh?

Yeah, except for voting to give them the armor, bullets and rations to keep them alive. Scumbag.

Interestingly, the President rebuts that Kerry needs to quit with the quasi-defeatist rhetoric.

Kerry backpedals a bit, and reminds America that his campaign theme is entirely post facto.  Nice.

"But I don't believe THIS President can...."

More Teresa kitchen debate rules!

Or is Kerry doing a lot of weird smiling today? Is it the teeth?

If I don't care about the peace? Ok, so I care a little bit. But frankly, I think Conan said it best, "Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women."

That's victory.

When Kerry goes into another list of things that have been done, but he says haven't been done, Bush should say, "Maybe if you ever bothered to show up in the Senate you'd realize these things have been done."

"Why is the President spending money to win the war instead of funding this domestic laundry list?"

And he even uses the phrase "America First."  How apt.

No one in middle America is impressed by the references to post-Soviet nukes when they're worried about al Qaeda.

In response, shame on the President for using the throwaway phrase "Anyway."  Shame, shame.  Debate coaches everywhere cringe.  His countering laundry list is quite convincing.

You know what?  Kerry has so much contempt for this President, it is bleeding through.  Not good news for him.

Kerry's keeping the factcheckers at georgewbush.com busy tonight.  

You'd think Kerry prepped for the debate by reading through Democratic Underground.

But once he gets going -- partisan moment here -- gets quite good. Not great -- he's rarely great -- but very good. His speech gets more fluent. Facts fly off his tongue better. He remembers his key themes.

Kerry really acts distainful of the President.  Do people really want to live with him for four years?

Love how Bush keeps hammering home that the Iraqis are on their way to running their own country.  

Just let Iraq's primary export to to pot while we keep an eye on the foreign office.  Sheesh.

Hot diggetty damn! Several direct and indirect Vietnam references! Take a shot!

My wife viscerally dislikes Kerry.  She's yelling at the TV.

She's cheering now over Bush's slam on the $87 billion.

Good news -- "I don't want to bring the troops home for the sake of bringing them home -- I want to do so because they've achieved the objective."

You'll wait a long time before John Kerry says those words.  And so Bush hits him on the July Kerry promise to bring home the troops in his first six months.  Bravo.  Possibly the most dangerous aspect of Kerry's promised foreign policy.

Nice laundry list on the benefits of a free Iraq.

Kerry responds by parroting the 2000 GOP convo "help is on the way" line.  Will be understood by few.  Now he avers that the troops look to him as a savior figure -- well, perhaps.  Who can say?

Again, Kerry criticizes the decision to enter Iraq.  But this election can't affect what's done -- it's about what will be done.  And John Kerry is avoiding that latter issue as best he can.

Well, okay -- he says he'll hold an Iraqi future summit.  The very one that the French said they want the insurgents to attend, eh?

And now Kerry is griping at the President over the "rules changes."  My wife the Democrat exclaims at her erstwhile candidate: "What a d---!"

You know. Cruddy oblique reference for all that.

Vietnam, Baby!  That's what it's all about!

"I know what its like to be in combat"

His WHOLE 4 months in country... he's gonna ride that horse into the ground...

"....that I stood up" against the war in Vietnam.

Oh, cripes.  Now the war in Iraq was not a mistake, in Kerry's eyes.  So we can disregard all previous rhetoric on the subject?

Kerry is attacking the President for not adhering to the laundry list of an opposition Senator from Massachusetts in setting his foreign policy.  Er.  Okay.  

He defended his anti-Vietnam protests.  He will now go down in flames.

That, and he keeps citing discredited sources and urban legends.

John Kerry - The Urban Legends Candidate

Kerry: "I made a mistake in how I talk about the war. The President made a mistake in invading Iraq."

What kind of defense of his own position is that.  He already has the Anybody But Bush crowd.  The middle needs more than that, doesn't it?  Who prepped the Senator?

Ba-da-bing!  Good that Bush got in the idea that we aren't alone in this.

(But, OK, Dubya.  We get the problem with "wrong war, wrong place, wrong time".  Spend your time better.)

But is it me, or is Kerry really only talking to his base?

Methinks George Walker Bush is getting his dander up.

"What's the message going to be -- Please join us in Iraq for a grand diversion?"

Oh, lovely.  This is far better than I expected.  This soliloquy is cleaning Kerry's clock.  I'll be fascinated to see how he recovers.

....And Kerry does not recover.  He gets his facts wrong -- Poland was involved in the initial invasion.  Bush waxes him on it -- now there's c.30 nations involved.

Oh, this is brutal.  Bravo, Bush.

Sheesh, color me unimpressed.  Did Michael Moore coach Kerry?

Mrs. Alexander shouts out:

TURN OVER AUTHORITY TO THE UN?  ARE YOU NUTS?

We both think that the President needs to calm down... He can't let JK get to him

Worst thing he could do is lose his temper...

Statesmanlike Summits: because that's what made the Jimmy Carter presidency so successful.

Look, it's clear to everyone Iraq is the issue - The ONE issue - That the Kerry campaign is staking this election on.  This is their shot.  Maybe their last and only shot.

And what is that message?  We don't have enough allies.  We don't have enough summits.  We don't have enough UN oversight.

That's exactly what's going to win the Heartland.

Geez, sorry Jim, that we couldn't make it last longer.  Sorry to get the job done so quickly.

EES

Kerry has said in the past that even knowing there were no WMDs, he'd have gone into Iraq.  Now he says he wouldn't have.

Bush just positioned himself as the optimistic candidate, and wholly tied it to his position on Iraq.  It's going to be near-impossible for Kerry to counter this here.

I am still in awe of the previous exchange.  Where did this George W. Bush come from?  Cripes.  Wheel him out more often.

Kerry tries to explain his prior denigration of our coalition partners in Iraq.  The crux of his complaint?  The United States is the largest partner.  

Doubtless this is his critique of the Second World War Western Allies, Korea, Gulf War One and Vietnam too.

How many times has he repeated that lie?

"rushed to war" and "without planning".

this is getting old.

Did I just hear him say he'd basically nuke North Korea? Because if the answer is, "Yes," I might have to change my vote.

No, wait, he was pedalling generalities.

Kerry just admitted that, in fact, he has been a Senator for the last 20 years.  Is this the first time he's admitted it?  :)

90% of Kerry's comments state "90% of the casualties and 90% of the cost"

Rick Reilly states in this weeks issue of SI that "49.2% of all statistics are misleading."

I say 70% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

EES

True, he did do that freelance trip to see North Vietnamese negotiators in Paris.  Oh, and the one to seek accomodation with Daniel Ortega.  QED.

And he just invoked Reagan.  Amazing.  Shameless.  The very President Kerry relentlessly opposed at every turn.

Bush responds by again pointing out that Kerry has in the past agreed with all the positions he now critiques.  And had access to the same intelligence.  Yep.

If 1000 deaths is too much, would 500 be too much?  200?  100?  50?  1?  Shall we just disband our military and be done with it?

>eye roll<

Here is the exact page.

A difficult question for Bush.  He blinks back tears.  And he has an anecdote ready.  The cynic in me groans.

But you know what?  He takes personal responsibility for the consequences of his decisions.  And he's straight up in averring that it's worth it.  My inner cynic retreats a bit.

Kerry responds by not responding.  He says one shouldn't confuse the war with warriors -- surely a surprise to any reader of his 1971 Senate testimony.  He repeats his talking points on the mythic world community saving America in Iraq.  But he won't say whether it's worth it.

I look forward to participating more tonight and in the future.

I think at some point, reiterating "wrong war", et. al. is going to sound way too overdone.  (To me, it already is. >sigh<)

And that counts.

What that plan is, God knows. And whether it's a good one, only God knows.

But he's got a plan.

Credit to Kerry for the comments on closing the borders and not backing down on Fallujah.

Maybe buy it, even.  Now Kerry says he has a plan, etc.

The moderator asks for a specific plan from Kerry.  Kerry begins by stating that his plan will only work if his plan works.  Genius.  He's also upset that the American occupation safeguarded the single most important economic asset in Iraq.  Color me convinced.

He sounds like he's griping about imperialism.  Go figure, I guess.

A specific plan, this ain't.

Bush responds by again citing examples of Kerry's insults to allies -- in this case, Iyad Allawi.  "When we give our word, we keep our word."  Yeah.

for the Allawi comments.  

Bush is laying brick to head when it comes to Kerry's dissing of the Iraqi Prime Minister.

Kerry: "couldn't agree more that the Iraqi people want to be free."

Actually, does it seem like Kerry is agreeing a lot with Bush - when it comes to the split screen?

Wow. Bush's rejoinder - terrorists are only coming over the border in Iraq BECAUSE it's a central front on the war on terror? Perfect.

I agree with two earlier posts...  It was BOTH Michael Moore and the geniuses at Democratic Underground.

Its the only logical answer...

He is talking to his base - not the swing voters.

I can't believe the President just got JK to agree with him.

"If this is mastery - I'm a doughnut" - Krempasky

Bush speaking, Kerry staring at his podium and smirking.  What a picture.

Yes!  Thanks for mentioning that, Dubya.  How many more chances before a "last resort" indeed.

"Ludicrous" indeed!  

And now the president is guilty of "outsourcing" our military operations?

Amazing.

And a host of other teen coming-of-age movies where the main character not only does something so embarassing that it makes you cringe - you can see it coming. (think the webcast seen)

John Kerry is doing badly. I think he's scored a couple points here and here, but I'm quite happy to say that Bush is surprisingly well.

...while we wait for the UN to recognize it.  This is something Kerry leans on for comfort?

He begins by responding that Iraq didn't hit us on 9/11.  A good, strong line of attack.

And then he squanders it by railing about Tora Bora.  Which, hey, I sort of agree with, but just makes Kerry look peevish and pedantic.

Boy, he sure gets it wrong when he cites the Northern Alliance as having fought against us.  Lordy.

But then a hammer blow -- 35-40 nations having greater WMD capability than Iraq in 2003.  First really good Kerry shot of the night.

Factual error on Kerry's part when he claims Presidential inaction on Darfur.  In fact, the President is the first world leader to ever invoke the 1948 Genocide Convention against a genocide in progress -- in Darfur.  Shame.

Kinda weird bringing up Darfur in the context of slamming Bush for not bowing down to the UN.

he'd ask if Kerry wants to invade Iran and N. Korea with those troops we'd have had if they weren't in Iran

Kerry is arguing that we shouldn't have brought foreign troops to help us in Afghanistan.  Kerry is also arguing that we should have brought foreign troops to help us in Iraq.

in Iraq

A DeGaulle anecdote? Puhlease.

A "global test"?

I wish Bush would just hum a few bars of JibJab..."You're a UN p&ssy..."

Straight ahead, Mr. Bush.

In other words, "Bush didn't buy off the others with KYOTO."

Very good statement by Bush.  Solid hit on Kerry.

That's the perfect description of the choice between these men.  One wants to be popular with the global clique.  The other wants to continue to be President and do what he promised he'd to.

Um, did Kerry just try to rewrite his entire history in the Cold War?

So how does Kerry figure that Iran and NK became more dangerous because of the Iraq war?

You're skirting the posting rules. How many beers have you had?

Are you wearing the shirt again?

Dear God!  Kerry wants both bilateral talks and multilateral talks.  What an idiot!

Uh...

Can anyone name them?  I just don't believe it.

Fact check, please!

This Korea answer is a snoozer.  And his delivery is terrible.  "They'll be doing an injustice to China as well."  Very unconvincing.

I do like the "Iranian moolahs," though

This question on Iran is actually the second most important foreign policy question of the night.  Getting less attention than it deserves.

Kerry criticizes the President for letting the Europeans take the lead against Iranian nukes.  Well, yeah -- they have diplomatic relations with Iran.  Free fact, Kerry -- it's the Europeans who oppose sanctions against Iran, not the United States.

And now he complains that the Administration does not curb the villainy of Kim Jong Il.  Kerry wants to have both bilateral and multilateral talks on North Korea.  Bush hits back: one will invalidate the other.  Right.

Not plutonium.

Good grief - Bush just corrected Kerry on a factual matter - a distinction?! His ego must be swimming in the toilet.

He points out that Bush is multilateral in the case of Korea, while Kerry is unilateral.

According to Kerry, it's W's fault that NK violated the agreement.  Why don't I believe him?

The Europeans refuse to contemplate sanctions under any conditions, chief.  They don't want to lose the Iranian oil.  That's why we do it alone.

This is so disingenuous, I'm going to use that strong language you hear kids in the schoolyard fling about: liar.

Agreeing with W., AGAIN!  Split screen shows the flip-flop... God I hope the public's "eye" is open to this.

EES

So Kerry wants to send troops to Darfur to liberate people there, but liberating Iraq was wrong?  Hmm.

That's probably true; all the western European countries, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan etc have the know-how and industrial base to do it.

Does Kerry really want to bring up Clinton's failure in Rwanda?

That said, the correct response is, Mr. Kerry, we tried to go to the U.N. and the African Union. It didn't help. Can we send troops now?

Absolutely absurd.  We have plenty of resources to hit the Sudanese if we choose -- and to mount a logistical relief operation.  Now, we haven't done it yet, which is a pity, but Kerry doesn't complain about that.  To state that we cannot stop genocide because of Iraq is deeply dishonest.

Meanwhile, Kerry, who brays about overstretch in Iraq, also declares he won't use his notional two new divisions in the war.  So what use is that to the nation, eh?

Bush hammers back on the fact that Clinton imposed the Iranian sanctions.  Well said.

Democrats cannot answer a character question well.  Bush hit that one out of the ballpark.

Standard-issue magnanimity on the personal qualities of the opposing candidates.

Okay, it is sort of nice to see them bantering a bit.

Then Kerry launches into a character attack by stating that he's not going to launch a character attack.  Well, that's classy.

Um, drop this line, John. No one believes it. Find a different tack.

and something about always being consistent.

Wonder how many other viewers started howling with laughter over that.

That is not the greatest concern.  Terrorism is the greatest concern.

There are positions, there are actions & reactions, there are changing circumstances, but your core values can't be determined by focus groups and polling.  Like the "popularity vs. doing the right thing" dichotomy, it's the core values of the guys that you're voting for.  Question is (and I don't know if it has been answered tonight): What are Kerry's core values?  Best answer I've heard so far from him is, "Whatever George W. Bush didn't do."

but what is disingenuous is that many of those aren't hostile to the US

Doesn't Kerry trust America with WMDs?  Are we on moral par with countries like Iran and N. Korea?

pre and post 9/11, he just scored a solid hit.

(Actually, he probably scored a hit even if the allegation is false).

I can not honestly say that I would not be nervous speaking before this crowd answering open-ended questions, but 75 minutes into the ordeal, I would hope that my hands have stopped shaking.

Nervous?  Scared?  Defeated!

EES

It's nuclear proliferation.  And John Kerry has written a book on the subject.  Buy it now at Amazon.com or wherever wonk tomes are sold.

Okay, the point is a serious one, for sure.  I'm not sure the factoid about pre- and post-9/11 fissile materials seizures is a useful one.  

Ahh, Kerry invokes the specter of 1980s-era anti-nuclear sentiment.  I'm just waiting for the President to hit back on this point.

....And in response, the President stumbles a bit.  This can't be allowed to pass -- "We busted the AQ Khan network."  I call that one -- it too is something quite near a lie.  Yeah, they unmasked AQ Khan: but then they allowed the Pakistani government to pretend he was a rogue, Khan was not interrogated, and he now enjoys a comfy retirement in Islamabad.  A shameful moment.  I'm actually appalled.

Wait, but didn't Kerry say we should bring in our allies in Iraq?  Why not in N. Korea?

I think Bush scored a solid hit by slamming Kerry on bilateral talks with NK.

It's almost over.

or is Kerry at every significant event in history?

I'm listening to Kerry touch on his involvement with the Cold War, and suggest he was a stalwart Cold Warrior.

One word: Ortega.

I'm getting bored by these guys.

Tentative conclusion: a draw.  Both Bush and Kerry did OK.

Not possible.  Russia doesn't have the infrastructure and ability to destroy them in 4 years.  No matter how much money we throw at Nunn-Luger.

Completely out to lunch.

Bush gives a fairly good answer on this.  Russia as a good ally in the war on terror (eh, maybe inasmuch as they didn't throw a fit when we went into central Asia); but worries about Putin's autocracy.  Well, okay -- it's sort of pedestrian.

Kerry responds by reminiscing about being at Lubyanka Square.  Hey, I've been there too -- I even got into a shoving match with a plainsclothesman there.  Ah, the memories.  Kerry then switches back to the issue of talks on Korea, and rants a bit about the truth.

Bush responds: "Oh, I'm a pretty calm guy."  You can hear the crowd laugh a bit.  He's connecting.

Kerry ripostes by reminding folks what he thinks of the leadup to war in Iraq.

• Mentions Vietnam, but not his Senate record...again.  
• Wants to strengthen the military...that Clinton eviscerated.

... largely lifted from his convention speech.  A dud then, more so now.  So which is it, Senator Kerry, were you defending your country in Vietnam, or were you there fighting an illegal war and committing war crimes left and right?  It can't be both.

Kerry reminds us that he defended this country in Vietnam.  But if Vietnam was a defense of America, then it wasn't a mistake, was it?  Otherwise, nothing new here.

Bush inserts a passage into his closer about the continuance of an all-volunteer force.  Interesting, that.  Again, other than that, nothing new here.

Can you believe the President had to say it...

Free Afhanistan & Iraq are the biggest assets from the War on Terror.  Great item to continue to bring up.

I suspect Bush +1, rather than, say, Bush +10.

kudos to Kerry for putting on a happy face while criticizing the prez an toning down the rhetoric

Kerry: a pack of lies, a lot of criticism (some fair, but mostly not), lots of whining, and a lot of promises, many of which about things the US president simply don't have power over, e.g. russian nukes.

Bush: vision and facts.

Pervert.

Bush won.

No, I'm not saying that because he's my guy.  He simply came across as more of the common man, and frankly, much stronger and more direct.  I'll have more on this later.

But yes, Bush won.

Agreed on every point except the conclusion.  I still think it was a draw; people just tuning in won't know Kerry was lying through his teeth in half his attacks on Bush, and the MSM certainly won't call Kerry on his lies.

I missed a significant part of the debate (got it on tape though), so maybe I don't have a great perspective to speak from. I kept wondering if I were an average Joe, would I be swayed by some of the clever "factual" manipulations of Kerry. I think Kerry speaks well to a clueless somebody. The parts I saw were very even, maybe leaning a little to Kerry because Bush let him off on a number of things. I'll defer to people who saw the whole thing at this point until I see the entire thing later myself.

That's pretty much my own take on this -- if it sounded good, I give Kerry debate points for it, even if I know it's a lie.  Bush could and should have slammed Kerry for those lies, but didn't.  

for the numbers.

I don't know, I am uncomfortable afterwards. Maybe it was just that it seemed sooooo loooong. Maybe its that I've never enjoyed these Presidential debates.

Kerry is a legislator and lawyer and the format was ideal --- just like pontificating from behind his desk in the Senate. Bush is a businessman and leader and I don't think this format works well for him.

Kerry did better than I wanted him to, and Bush did not do as well as I had hoped he would. Although hindsight is 20/20 I think Bush would have done much better by essentailly ignoring Kerry and talking to the American public. As it is I think he got baited and spent too much time 'dignifying' Kerry --- but I have the advantage that I was sitting at home in front of the TV and not standing for re-election :-)

I have a sense of a draw, which is actually a win for Kerry. The race narrows and the next two debates are on Kerry's strong suit. I hope I'm wrong, I really wanted Bush to twack Kerry in November but I think it will be a close thing. (Unless there really is an 'October Surprise' like WMD showing up like the Rose Law Firm billing records :-)

Which is exactly why we should have attacked FRANCE.

when Kerry said he went to Russia to the KGB office under "Treblinka" Square and saw all those reams of papers with names on them.  Confusing a Nazi death camp with Lubyanka Square.  Amazing.

Both FNC and CNN have it in their transcripts so I know I wasn't hallucinating.

Kerry sounded better, flat out. Sure, 95% of what he had to say was utter bull flop, but he said it well.

Bush certainly came across as better grounded in reality, and I think a lot of folks will respond well to that. All the same, I think that Kerry probably sounded plausible if you haven't been paying attention, and weren't listening too closely tonight (after all, if you've been ignoring the campaigns all year, why stop for the debates?). I'd say it's pretty even.