« Doesn't run in the family | Main | Another one two »

October 09, 2004

Sort-of

CNN.com - Poll: Bush, Kerry even in 2nd debate - Oct 9, 2004

Yeah, except more Republicans are at home on Friday night or something, so their snap poll had 38 percent Republicans and only 32 percent Democrats. Of course, Gallup's been oversampling Republicans all year, so why stop now? At any event, now it can be spun as a Bush victory because he didn't soil himself.

Posted by Mac Thomason at October 9, 2004 01:49 AM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.bravesbeat.com/mt-tb.cgi/7126

Comments

I remember thinking about the VP debate, "As long as Cheney doesn't actually use the phrase 'whipper-snappers,' and as long as Edwards doesn't come into the debate with a ribbon and a giant lollypop, it's going to be a draw."

Posted by: Andrew at October 9, 2004 10:21 AM

best line "need some wood"? hahah

To see a funny video about college kids who are addicted to using google, check out
http://www.collegeiseasy.net

if you like the daily show, its up ur alley

-Troy

Posted by: Troy at October 9, 2004 12:52 PM

Kerry won the second prez debate handily. Dubya came off as an angry, grimacing, winking jerk.
Furthermore, Dubya's worst moment was when he interrupted the moderator and angrily blurted out his opinions about Tony Blair.

Kerry was right. Countries ARE leaving the coalition. Britain is scaling back its troops.

Posted by: Steve Plonk at October 9, 2004 02:29 PM

I was wondering what the hell happened when Bush brought up the Dred Scott case in talking about what kind of Supreme Court justices he would appoint. I was like, WTF, is he going to bring up the constitutionality of the acquisition of the Louisiana Purchase in the next debate? Where did this come from?

Then paperwight of fairshot.org chimed in on another blog I read, bopnews.com. He claims that it's wingnut code for anti-abortion. In other words, abortion = slavery, anti-abortion activists = abolitionists, Scott v. Sanford = Roe v. Wade. So Bush was sending code to the fundies about how he won't appoint justices who would uphold Roe v. Wade. It's insane, but on a political level, I see how it makes sense. And I can't even imagine any other explanation for Bush bringing up Dred Scott in that scenario.

Posted by: Haggai at October 9, 2004 03:30 PM

Kerry clearly won the second debate, but because Bush didn't blow it as badly as the first one, the media will be portraying Bush as doing much better. Bush clearly still has anger management problems and can't admit mistakes, and he still came off as a major-league whiner, whereas Kerry was calm and presidential. On content as opposed to style, Kerry was still good and Bush still stunk.

Posted by: Karen v.H. at October 10, 2004 12:04 PM

Post a comment




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)