Debate Poll

---

Posted by marymoon

I think it's cool that everyone has differing opinions. Of course I want my candidate to win, but I've never been afraid of disagreeing with anyone

---

i never said that we have to have the same ideas/opinions. and i know that you are not afraid to disagree with someone, but who said i was??

---

Posted by marymoon

If I can keep insulting your DH, for sure. yeah, I'm definitely going to come if my back will cooperate!

---

What happened to your back?

I have an injury from a car accident, so I'm not getting around really well lately, and my lately I mean a few months SO we'll see!

---

Posted by marymoon

I have an injury from a car accident, so I'm not getting around really well lately, and my lately I mean a few months SO we'll see!

---

Oh, feel better!

---

Posted by Sassyz75

---

Posted by eogara

---

Posted by Sassyz75

And although I think ... McCain would make a better President

---

OMG WE AGREE ON SOMETHING!!!!!!!!!!

---

McCain has the right mix of fiscal conservatism and liberal social policy I like to back in a candidate.

As I mentioned, I voted for Bush first time around- but I think I've been duped by him.. and that makes me mad... I am also still mad at him for his treatment of McCain in the 2000 election.

I hope Karl Rove rots in hell.

---

McCain, who I have great respect for, does not have anything close to a liberal social policy. Going over his voting record, he's more conservative than Bush. The fact that he doesnt speak of his religion and faith makes him appear less of an idealogue than Bush. I admire McCain and think he's hilarious (particularly when he's on the Daily Show) but he's a very conservative politician.

I thought John Kerry far and away won the debate last night. Yes, I'm a big Kerry supporter, but I admit that up until now, he's run a terrible campaign. Last night he was solid, eloquent, focused and spoke clearly to the public. Bush was bumbling, unorganized, couldnt answer a question, and was too emotional.

My favorite moment of the debate was when Bush said that 'the enemy attacked us - we responded.' and Kerry pointed out that it was Osama Bin Laden who attacked us, not Hussein, and Bush responds with somewhat of a petulant shriek, 'I knew that! I knew that!'.

Neither Bush or Kerry jump out at me as a great President for America at this point.

But....I agree with Bush on more things than I do Kerry. Just my personal opinion that Bush is the better of 2 'not-so-good's'.

We'll see and remember....
IF YOU DON'T VOTE...YOU CAN'T COMPLAIN!!!!

---

We'll see and remember....
IF YOU DON'T VOTE...YOU CAN'T COMPLAIN!!!!

---

Well Said

---

Posted by don424

if iraq didn't matter, there wouldn't be so much resistance

i see michael moore has melded your mind

---

I have never seen 1 Michael Moore movie.. I only like mindless entertainment..... like Swim Fan

---

Posted by Sassyz75

---

Posted by don424

if iraq didn't matter, there wouldn't be so much resistance

i see michael moore has melded your mind

---

I have never seen 1 Michael Moore movie.. I only like mindless entertainment..... like Swim Fan

---

great flick swim fan

I think the debate was a draw. However, since Kerry's campaign has been doing pretty badly as of late, especially since the RNC, I think he definitely got the 'bounce' from this one.

President Bush did land some impressive blows, though. He reminded Americans of several critical points:

- Seventy-five percent of al Qaeda leaders have been brought to justice;
- Saddam Hussein and most of his senior leaders have been brought to justice;
-the A. Q. Khan nuclear-proliferation network has been broken up; and
- Libya has given up its weapons of mass destruction.

The president also hammered Kerry relentlessly on three devastating flip-flops:

-Before the Iraq war, Kerry said Saddam Hussein was a 'grave threat' who possessed weapons of mass destruction. He had access to the same intelligence the president had. But now he acts as though Saddam was never a serious threat to the American people.
- Kerry voted for war with Iraq, but now calls the war a 'massive diversion' and 'the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time.'
-Kerry says he could build a stronger, larger alliance, but he constantly denigrates our current coalition of 30 allies (for example, calling them a coalition of the 'coerced and bribed') and he questioned the integrity and judgment of Iraqi President Allawi during Allawi's recent visit to express his gratitude to the American people. (The president was particularly effective in explaining the damage Kerry was doing by attacking our allies — conduct unbecoming of one who wants to be a wartime president.)

None of these, however, were knockout blows, and the president pulled some punches that would have been enormously effective. Only once, for example, did he point out that Kerry voted for the war in Iraq but against the $87 billion to fund the troops. And only once did the president refer to Kerry's approach as a September 10 mentality.

The pres noted that 'Saddam Hussein had no intention of disarming. 'Why should he? He had 16 other resolutions and nothing took place. As a matter of fact, my opponent talks about inspectors. The facts are that he was systematically deceiving the inspectors. That wasn't going to work. That's kind of a pre-September 10th mentality, the hope that somehow resolutions and failed inspections would make this world a more peaceful place.' Why did he say it only once?

I believe the difference between Bush's forward-thinking, post-September 11 mindset and Kerry's September 10 mindset is the most important divide in this campaign. The president should have been relentless about it, and he should hammer it home from now to the election.

The American people viscerally understand that the world changed radically on September 11. They understand that we can no longer wait for perfect intelligence but must rather connect the dots as best we can. They understand that our president has to use his best judgment to determine whether we can wait for sanctions, international pressure, or any other means short of war to pan out or strike first without hesitation, albeit with heavy hearts.

What's so dangerous is that Kerry is stuck in the past. He opposed the Vietnam War and is obsessed with reliving that fight. He never understood the global Communist threat. He voted against most of the major weapons systems that Reagan and Bush 41 pushed for to win the Cold War and keep us safe. He voted to cut intelligence funding in the 80s and 90s. He voted against going to war against Iraq in 1991. He never fully understood the threat Saddam Hussein posed to the U.S., the Middle East, Israel, and the free world. We know enough about his past to know that he is highly unlikely to understand the threats we will face in the future.

Kerry doesn't it get. He has a September 10 mentality (or a 'pre-September 10 mentality,' as the president put it). Ok...so, my candidate is not perfect :)

---

Posted by Bride626

- Seventy-five percent of al Qaeda leaders have been brought to justice;

---

I am just wondering if anyone can prove this statistic? I have read that this statement has been thrown around by the Bush Administration, but there is nothing to back it up. With all the hours of untranslated tapes the FBI still has, how do we even know who 75% of Al Qaeda leaders even are?

ETA: I answered my own question. According to Factcheck.org:
Al Qaeda

The President said twice that '75 percent' of al Qaeda leaders have been 'brought to justice.' But as The Associated Press reported Oct. 1, Bush was referring to the deaths or arrests of 75 percent of bin Laden's network at the time of the September 11 attacks -- not those who are running the terrorist organization today. The AP also reported that the CIA said earlier in the year two-thirds of those leaders are gone; at his acceptance speech in September, Bush increased his count to three-fourths based on unreleased intelligence data.

Furthermore, the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies reported May 25 that the occupation of Iraq has helped al Qaeda recruit more members. The institute quoted 'conservative' intelligence estimates as saying that al Qaeda has 18,000 potential operatives and is present in more

Al qaeda isn't like the PTA it isnt that easy to trrack down members and tell who they are. I don't think we have NAY idea of what's relly out there