Wednesday, October 13, 2004

DEBATE MARK THREE: THE TETE-A-TETE IN TEMPE: Was sort of an even match, I thought. Can you declare Kerry the winner because Bush wasn't really able to do what he wanted to do? Because Bush was going for some kind of knock-out in the beginning there, looking for Kerry to give him an opportunity for some kind of devastating "There you go again" thing which Kerry never gave him. Bush's attempt to tag Kerry with "liberal senator from Massachusetts" weren't successful either. So Bush didn't do what he wanted to do and Kerry didn't screw up. The overall debates, in any case, would have to considered as a Kerry victory, since he has made up the Bush lead within that time.

Other things:

--Did Bush deny being for amnesty? I thought that was his immigration plan.

--The part where Bush was about to make a Dan Rather reference and then cut himself off was really weird.

--Number Three tonight was like a less animated verson of Number Two. They finally gave Bush the just-right porridge--eh? Know what I mean? You know? Eh? You know what I mean.

--One of the big unlanded punches was when Bush drawled out "one of those e-xag-ger-ations" to Kerry's claim that Bush said he didn't care where Osama was. Unlanded because he (Bush) actually did say that, and it was just rhetorically weird, because I think that was the first time they had tried to paint him with an "exaggerator" label. So it came out of nowhere.

--Kerry namedropped Mary Cheney out of nowhere, which got the talking heads and Julian Sanchez all riled up. Julian is right that it was sleazy, but it walks the fine line as far as being completely vile because all he did was mention her name. It's--a legal move. Put it that way.

My bias is showing, of course, forgiving Rovian tactics in the team I support. And so I end this post.

No comments: