![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I haven't watched any of the debates. I'll just get that out of the way up front. I'm not interested in blah-blah about how horrible a person this makes me, so keep it to yourselves.
That having been said, I've found it amusing to read other peoples' critiques of what went on during the debates. You know, who won them, how well each candidate came across, etc.
And what I'm completely unsurprised at is that those of you who already liked Bush before the debates think he won at least 2 of the 3 debates, that he came across as a "regular guy," that he acquitted himself well, that he is clearly the right man for another four years of the job, and that Kerry is none of those things, and may in fact be a liar, a cheater, and a card-carrying flip-flopper.
And another thing I'm completely unsurprised at is that those of you who already liked Kerry before the debates think he won at least 2 of the 3 debates, that he came across as "more presidential" than Bush, that he answered the questions well, that he is clearly the better man for the next four years, and that Bush is a blathering idiot, and may in fact be a criminal, a liar, and a card-carrying antichrist.
The third thing I'm not at all surprised at is that those of you who were convinced that neither candidate is worth the DNA he's blueprinted by are still convinced of this fact. Those of you who fall in this camp are most closely allied with my own views, and you seem to see (as I do) that neither side is capable of telling/representing the complete truth because it's all spin. The truth (if such a thing can even exist) lies somewhere between what Bush & Company are saying and what Kerry and Company are saying. Who you believe is telling the truth pretty much depends on your outlook.
I only wish some of you could read the reviews back-to-back like I have been. First a right-winger talking about how Bush clearly won the debate, with points listed to support both that thesis and the corresponding antithesis (that Kerry is an idiot), followed closely by a left-winger talking about how Kerry clearly won the debate, with points listed to support both that thesis and the corresponding antithesis (that Bush is an idiot). Occasionally followed by a centrist who says "They both suck." :)
It makes me chuckle.
That having been said, I've found it amusing to read other peoples' critiques of what went on during the debates. You know, who won them, how well each candidate came across, etc.
And what I'm completely unsurprised at is that those of you who already liked Bush before the debates think he won at least 2 of the 3 debates, that he came across as a "regular guy," that he acquitted himself well, that he is clearly the right man for another four years of the job, and that Kerry is none of those things, and may in fact be a liar, a cheater, and a card-carrying flip-flopper.
And another thing I'm completely unsurprised at is that those of you who already liked Kerry before the debates think he won at least 2 of the 3 debates, that he came across as "more presidential" than Bush, that he answered the questions well, that he is clearly the better man for the next four years, and that Bush is a blathering idiot, and may in fact be a criminal, a liar, and a card-carrying antichrist.
The third thing I'm not at all surprised at is that those of you who were convinced that neither candidate is worth the DNA he's blueprinted by are still convinced of this fact. Those of you who fall in this camp are most closely allied with my own views, and you seem to see (as I do) that neither side is capable of telling/representing the complete truth because it's all spin. The truth (if such a thing can even exist) lies somewhere between what Bush & Company are saying and what Kerry and Company are saying. Who you believe is telling the truth pretty much depends on your outlook.
I only wish some of you could read the reviews back-to-back like I have been. First a right-winger talking about how Bush clearly won the debate, with points listed to support both that thesis and the corresponding antithesis (that Kerry is an idiot), followed closely by a left-winger talking about how Kerry clearly won the debate, with points listed to support both that thesis and the corresponding antithesis (that Bush is an idiot). Occasionally followed by a centrist who says "They both suck." :)
It makes me chuckle.
Tags: