Ed Board has to admit, it was a little disappointed in thisyear’s first presidential debate.
Compared to past debates, i.e. Gore’s obnoxious sighingand the infamous “lockbox” redundancies, the twocandidates engaged in a simple discussion.
As Jim Geraghty observed from National Review Online, this year,”two guys who just see the world completely differently, gotup there, and each guy confidently made his case.”
Kerry’s political base should definitely be high-fivingone another after Kerry’s confident performance. Ed Boardsensed a general undercurrent of fear before the debate that Bushcould bag the election after Thursday’s debate. Now Kerrysupporters are rejuvenated and ready to fight.
The president’s supporters will probably be a little letdown. Geraghty’s report from NRO expressed it perfectly.”Every time Kerry opened his mouth, conservatives thought ofthe eight different responses and attacks that they wanted to see,and Bush mostly didn’t use them. [He] focused almost entirelyon principles… not policies.”
Kerry definitely gained points for style. His points on homelandsecurity forced Bush to fumble as the president responded firstwith costs, though Ed Board acknowledges that borders are never astrong point in general. But he seemed to stumble a bit in thediscussion against bunker-busting weapons. It’s a safe betthat most Americans think these weapons are a great idea thatshould be supported.
Bush’s response to the pointless question aboutKerry’s character — after all, who couldn’tpredict the immediate answer to that kind of question — waswell stated. His compliments to Kerry’s service and themention of the senator’s daughters seemed to put Kerry a tadoff-balance and allowed Bush to sneak in a small, predictable jabwith “I admire the fact that he spent 20 years in the Senatealthough I’m not so sure I admire his record.”
All-in-all, the candidates’ comments simply reiteratedmessages from each party’s convention. Bush stressessteadfastness and resolve, while Kerry emphasized the mistakes ofthe current administration and the need for a dramatic change.
Neither of the two did anything shocking or surprising, sincethe debate confirmed what most already knew about theirplatforms.
Both candidates had their material down and delivered it well.Hard right- and left-liners will summarily reject observations bythe media that either candidate won, and the public will be leftfacing the issues, one more time.
