At this last chance to explain his "plans" to a natiion-wide audience, Kerry did'nt. Secret methods and magic bean funding of them will not cut it with most voters. Bush wins--BIG.

Two comments: Is Kerry gay-baiting with yet another invocation of Mary Cheney's lesbianism? He and Edwards continue to point this out, as though to say "nyah, nyan, your daughter's GAY" why would they do this, if they didn't think it is something that will turn voters off? I certainly don't think Kedwards wants to point out how unlikely it is that Bush-Cheney are homophobic. Anyway, it appears that Kedwards approve of the right to privacy only inasmuch as it applies to the elimination of babies.
Second: am I the only one who caught Kerry blowing his own argument regarding the assault weapons ban out of the water? He told a story about hunting in Iowa, last year, law enforcement agent, drug bust, house, AK-47 on the bed...? The operative phrase in his little anecdote was LAST YEAR. WHILE THE BAN WAS STILL IN PLACE. PROOF THAT THE BAN WAS INEFFECTUAL. I was certain you of all people would catch that, Mitch.

My problem last night was that I was spending more time talking with the audience than listening to the debate. It was rewarding - but I don't think I actually caught and retained more than a third of the debate proper.

"Why Bush Won"?

Mitch says: "Bush sounded like a President. More importantly - and I bet the polls show this - Bush sounded like people think a President should sound.

And yet curiously, the polls show nothing of the kind:

CBS, undecideds: Kerry wins 39-25. Before the debate, 29% said Kerry had clear positions on the issues, after, that number doubled to 60%.

ABC: Kerry won 42%-41% in a poll that surveyed 8% more Republicans than Democrats. Independen voters thought Kerry won: 42-35

CNN/USA Today Gallup: Kerry wins 52-39. Among independents, Kerry won: 54-34.

Democracy Corps: Kerry wins 41-36

And the internals all show Kerry gains:

There was a net 8-point shift in favorability: positive responses rose 5 points to 48 percent; negative ones dropped 3 points to 42 percent. Bush gained only 2 points on favorability. Kerry’s gains reflected sharp rises on personal attributes, without a comparable gain for Bush.

· On strong convictions, Kerry rose 6 points to 63 percent.
· On honest and trustworthy, up 6 points to 57 percent.
· On gives me confidence, up 5 points to 52 percent.
· On likeable, up 5 points to 62 percent.
· On having clear plans, Kerry gained 6 points in comparison to Bush and ended up ahead (45 to 42 percent).

You lose your bet, Mitch.
/jc

Regarding Mary Cheney, mlp suggests that Kerry violated her privacy. Did Dick Cheney violate her privacy when he first brought her up at a rally in August?

"Lynne and I have a gay daughter, so it's an issue our family is very familiar with," Cheney said as his daughter Mary stood in the audience. He said he opposes the constitutional amendment to ban
same-sex marriage that Bush has endorsed.

8/25/04 USA TODAY A.04

mlp also argues that Kerry must have done it to turn voters off. Which voters? Democrats generally support gay rights and therefore would be inclinded to think more highly of Dick Cheney for embracing his daughter, as Edwards previously complimented Cheney for doing. So who are you suggesting would be turned off by knowing that Mary is gay? Presumably potential Bush GOP voters. So your argument is premised on the assumption that Bush voters discriminate against gays.

No one is suggesting that Kerry was implying that
there's anything wrong with being gay. If it's a jab at the GOP position gays, the structure of Kerry's argument must be this:

1) The GOP is anti-gay.
2) Mary Cheney is gay.
3) Mary Cheney is who God made her to be.
4) Therefore, the GOP's anti-gay position is anti-Mary Cheney and therefore a bad policy.

How is that out of bounds? How is that anti-Mary Cheney? It's PRO-Mary Cheney.

The only way mentioning Mary's sexual orientation, which she has always been open about, is wrong is if you assume that being gay is wrong. Kerry doesn't think being gay is wrong. If anyone is suggesting being gay is bad, it's Lynn and Dick Cheney.

And shame on them.
/jc

Slash, you (should) know as well as I do; overnight polls on debates are as worthless as Bill Clinton's promises.

I'm talking about longer-term polls.

I am still suprised to see that people have yet to realize Bush's main agenda regarding Social Security - namely, GETTING RID OF IT!

His half-baked Ayn Rand-ish ideas about privatization are all steps in the process of getting rid of Social Security, which I believe to be the first big step in the process of the removal of the Welfare State in general. His constant and irresponsible spending is intended - among other things - to bankrupt these social programs.

I consider myself Conservative, but I think this is very much a bad thing. Social programs are absolutely essential in a Capitalist society in order to keep a balance in the Market. Without Social services and Economic controls, unregulated Capitalism goes completely out of control and the entire Market destabilizes and crashes..... on a regular basis. We already learned our lesson with this stuff once - it was called The Great Depression. I find it very disturbing that Pres. Bush wants to put us back down that dark path.

Hobbes stated that one of the most fundamental functions of the State is the protection of the Citizens. I am upset to see this principal being ignored by a thoughtless administration and unrecognized by an ignorant public.

And also, Slash, consider this excerpt from a Reuters article (keep in mind that the people polled were "undecided"):

"Zogby said only 11 percent of those undecided voters felt Bush deserved to be re-elected and 40 percent thought it was time for someone new. Nearly half of the undecideds were uncertain whether Bush should get another term."

Soooooo, 40 percent of "UNDECIDED" voters have apparently. . . get ready. . . DECIDED it's time for someone new. In other words, they're about as undecided as Michael Moore is thin and kempt. So, no, I don't put much faith in the polls.

But then, I'm undecided. :)

Wish I could have joined the crowd at the Hilton, but I had just flown in from Hong Kong and ended up sleeping through the debate on the couch. (Hubby recorded it for me so maybe I can stay awake to watch it tonight.)

I can tell you that the debates were aired on CNN International in both Hong Kong and China.

I hear Pres. Bush was coked up during the debate. His behavior seemed indicative of such.

Alex,

Shouldn't you be over at Atrios, pitcher of Koolaid in hand? I was going to give you a serious answer to your first question, 'til I read the second one...

Ryan: Welcome to debates with Slash, whose selectivity on facts is second to none.

Speaking of which, Slash, here's another view:

"Now here's a strange twist on the debate. Bush was the winner in a focus group of uncommitted voters conducted by pollster Frank Luntz last night. The 23 voters thought Kerry, not Bush, won the debate. But they split 17 to 5 in favor of Bush on whom they now plan to vote for (one will vote Libertarian). "They still don't trust what John Kerry is saying," Luntz said, though they thought he said it well."

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/778kctvv.asp?pg=2

Hey, I deserve a decent answer to my first question. I am to be diminished for having a sense of humor? You think I'm some Lefty looking for trouble? Perhaps you may notice I have not made a single positive comment about Kerry..... and I hate Michael Moore.

Gimme a chance, I'm worth having a dialogue with.

- Alex

Slash:

Re the 'bet' - I guess I DO win after all, huh?

Re Mary Cheney: Candidates' children who are not participating in a campaign are *off limits*. Attacking Chelsea Clinton was held in VERY bad form among Republicans during the Clinton years (yeah, sure, Slash, I'm sure you have every copy of every exception to that stashed on your hard drive somewhere). Going after the Bush Twins and the Kerry Brood *might* be OK to an extent now, since they're actively campaigning, but using the opposing candidates' children against *everyone's* will - Mary, Lynn and Dick - is totally trailer park. As is defending it. When and if Mary Cheney comes out and says "Support Kerry!", it might be another thing, but she hasn't. Using her as campaign fodder is low rent.

Didn't President Bush do a good job communicating in the debate, despite his supposed reputation for being inarticulate? It was John Kerry who was often inarticulate. We still come away from this debate knowing who has the clear vision, and who can explain it in a way that people can understand? John Kerry either lacks the ability to articulate his plans and vision, or else he lacks the plans and vision.

Re: Mary Cheney.

Mitch, you said: "Candidates' children who are not participating in a campaign are *off limits*. . . . Going after the Bush Twins and the Kerry Brood *might* be OK to an extent now, since they're actively campaigning."

Mary Cheney IS actively campaigning.

"Mary Cheney [is] director of vice presidential operations for the Bush campaign."

8/25/04 USA TODAY A.04

She is also a board member of the Republican Unity Coalition, a GOP gay-rights group:

"Mary Cheney is openly gay - she was a liaison to the gay community for the Coors Brewing Co. and a board member of the gay- rights Republican Unity Coalition."

3/25/04 Boston Herald 048

And Dick Cheney first injected her name into the campaign regarding gay issues when he cited her regarding his position on same-sex marriage.

So can I now assume you agree that nothing Kerry said in *support* of her rights was out of bounds?
/jc

Oh for God's sakes, Slash, give it a rest.

As soon as any question was asked concerning gay rights/marriage, Kerry was prepared to pounce with "Mary Cheney is a lesbian". He then presumed to speak FOR her (... I'm sure if you were to ask Mary Cheney, she'd say...). Based on what, exactly, makes John Kerry qualified to speak for Ms. Cheney regarding this or any topic?

Kerry has made public that he recently learned he has Jewish ancestry. He introduced that fact into the public discourse.

So I guess it would be "fair game" for President Bush, during the question concerning faith/religion, to respond with something like "I will fight for religious freedom, just as I'm sure John Kerry's Jewish grandparents did".

If the Kerry campaign were to complain, would that make them anti-Semites?