The OAO Vice Presidential Debate Thread

[GreatWhiteNope 0]

I've not seen a bigger thrashing in a debate in my life.

 

And that's the truth.

    -=Mike

There was one not even a week ago.

+1

[Guest Loss]

If anything, Dick Cheney was the crotchety old man that you secretly think is into Asian chicks and bukkake porn. He's the guy you'd talk to about bad service in the checkout line at Sears. John Edwards is the used car salesman who pats you on the back and treats you like he's your best friend, even when he barely knows you, and you secretly wonder if he wants to masturbate with you since that's what "college buddies" do when they can't sweet talk a chick into the sack that night.

[NYU 0]

I've not seen a bigger thrashing in a debate in my life.

 

And that's the truth.

    -=Mike

There was one not even a week ago.

Blah, blah, Bush had better content, blah, blah, Kerry had better presentation, blah.

 

I swear - I honestly do NOT see where this thrashing came from.

 

Honestly, no matter WHAT the debate looked like tonight - certain people like Mike, Barron, GreatOne - would not stray from the opinion that Cheney destroyed Edwards. Even if nothing of the sort happened, like tonight.

 

It's quite scary, actually.

[EricMM 0]

I'm totally informed.

 

Who the hell are you to call me uninformed.

 

Call INXS an uninformed liberal if you want.

 

He sounds like one.

 

It's NOT baseless OR irrelevant. I can't imagine Cheney kissing babies. I can imagine him eating them to prolong his infernal lifespan...

 

Bush won the first time around I think because he seemed to be natural when Gore was a robot up there. Now is Bush not only having to explain four years of general fuckups, but he just didn't look good. Cheney did look alright, but that doesn't mean he's been right at all . . .

[Guest MikeSC]

I've not seen a bigger thrashing in a debate in my life.

 

And that's the truth.

    -=Mike

There was one not even a week ago.

BWA HA HA HA!

And people say I'm blinded.

-=Mike

[EricMM 0]

Loss you can't tell me Cheney isn't the stereotypical old white man in the republican party.

 

Call Edwards a sneak if you feel like it, but he's not a symbol of all that wrong with America's history like Cheney is. He came close with his mentioning of his daughter. That was the best thing he did all debate.

 

It was also the most liberal time he had. Hmmmm...

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

It is scary. That's why I don't like the political discussion on this forum and tend to stay out of it - ANY point can be spun or lied about or ignored, so it's hard to tell what is the truth and what isn't. The greatest threat to democracy, ironically enough, is the abundance of information and the outlets to distribute it.

 

Lieberman is on Larry King Live and the man has the best pronounciation of Florida.

 

"Fluurda"

[Guest Loss]

Nah, Bush is more the type that's likely to hire Latinos to drywall his house because they work cheaper than coloreds. Cheney is the guy you work with that seems normal and occasionally hints at having a sick side.

[Guest MikeSC]

I've not seen a bigger thrashing in a debate in my life.

 

And that's the truth.

    -=Mike

There was one not even a week ago.

Blah, blah, Bush had better content, blah, blah, Kerry had better presentation, blah.

 

I swear - I honestly do NOT see where this thrashing came from.

 

Honestly, no matter WHAT the debate looked like tonight - certain people like Mike, Barron, GreatOne - would not stray from the opinion that Cheney destroyed Edwards. Even if nothing of the sort happened, like tonight.

 

It's quite scary, actually.

No, it's fact.

 

There is NOTHING the Dems can take away from this as a positive. Nothing whatsoever.

 

It's sad that you choose to not see reality, but oh well.

-=Mike

[bob_barron 0]

Yep. Keep thinking that.

 

I think last week's debate was a draw with Kerry coming out looking a little better even though he hasn't gained anything in the electoral vote since the debate.

 

I wasn't even going to watch the whole debate (Yankees v. Twins) but Cheney kept getting in such good barbs that I sat down and watched the whole thing. And John Edwards failed. Miserably.

[EricMM 0]

Cheney wouldn't even HIRE Latinos, let alone coloreds.

 

Mod: There's a rising level of AIDS in Black women ages 25-45 in this country...

 

Cheney: ... and?

 

 

*EDIT* No wait

 

Cheney: VICTORY IS MINE! /stewie

 

 

 

 

 

In some seriousness, Cheney, despite being a better speaker than Bush, would have better served Bush by stepping down in lieu of like Powell or hell anyone. Anyone not a rich white old man. Bush has that on lockdown.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

If I killed someone and I needed to go to one of the candidates for help, I'd go to Dick Cheney.

[Guest Loss]

Cheney wouldn't even HIRE Latinos, let alone coloreds.

Maybe, maybe not. I don't see him in that situation much. He seems more like the type that smiles because the 16-year old cashier at JCPenney flirts with him to get Saturday off, despite not asking for it in advance. His wife really hates that girl.

 

In some seriousness, Cheney, despite being a better speaker than Bush, would have better served Bush by stepping down in lieu of like Powell or hell anyone.  Anyone not a rich white old man.  Bush has that on lockdown.

 

I actually think Cheney is the perfect balancing of the ticket for Bush. He's far better at communicating the intents of the administration than his superior, and he's all business without being dry.

[EricMM 0]

Well no shit, Bush isn't doing himself any favors, to say the least.

 

If I had to pick a Republican candidate, I'd pick Cheney over Bush too. But variety is GOOD. Cheney combined with Bush provides very little of that.

[Styles 0]

Now THAT'S what the doctor ordered. Dick Cheney just saved Bush's ass; the President should be thanking God, every day, that he has Dick Cheneny on his ticket. I don't even know where to begin. To anyone like NY that says Im just biased, thats bullshit. I admited the 1st Presidential debate was a tie and Kerry came out looking better.

Cheney MURDERED Edwards tonight.

Edwards continued repeating Kerry's talking points, while Cheney got specific with the points Bush SHOULD have made on Thursday. He took Edwards record, or lack thereof and just brilliantly tore it apart in that sly style he has.

Edwards danced around with his typical BS laywer speak on issues like malpractice lawsuits, but consistently had his foreign policy claims and even some domestic claims shot down.

Edward's comment about Cheney's daughter, while appearing to be endearing was totally out of line. Cheney did not bring it up, so it was not Edwards place to bring up Cheney's family's personal business. You don't see Cheney bringing up the Senator's dead son and how courageous he is for that do you? Cheney handled it brilliantly with class by thanking him and then dropping the subject.

Loss- Edwards came off as a slimy car salesman, because he IS, a slimy trial lawyer, at least. He might seem "personal" but hes made a career out of bullshitting with people's emotions. Cheney pulls no punches. He's what you see is what you get.

The digs about Edwards facts being wrong, his poor attendance record, the Howard Dean comment, all of it was excellent and totally threw the usually cool and collected Edwards off balance. Conversely he dodged the Haliburton flames beautifully.

His closing statement was SUCH fluff about his father learning to read or whatever. That has no bearing on why we should trust you with the Vice Presidency. I loved Cheney's line about how he came from humble beginnings too, but doesn't feel the need to brag about it all the time. Awesome.

I bow to the greatness of Dick Cheney tonight and would gladly vote for the man as President. Of course, Cheney clarified that he had no further political aspirations beyond helping President Bush run the country. John Edwards is auditioning for Iowa in 2008. Dick Cheney is the man. Edwards has just outlived his usefullness. He was not ready, he was in over his head and he has no chance. Now it's up for Bush to pick up the ball and actually run with it in the next 2 debates. Whether he can do that or not, will be very interesting to watch.

[NYU 0]

I've not seen a bigger thrashing in a debate in my life.

 

And that's the truth.

     -=Mike

There was one not even a week ago.

Blah, blah, Bush had better content, blah, blah, Kerry had better presentation, blah.

 

I swear - I honestly do NOT see where this thrashing came from.

 

Honestly, no matter WHAT the debate looked like tonight - certain people like Mike, Barron, GreatOne - would not stray from the opinion that Cheney destroyed Edwards. Even if nothing of the sort happened, like tonight.

 

It's quite scary, actually.

No, it's fact.

 

There is NOTHING the Dems can take away from this as a positive. Nothing whatsoever.

 

It's sad that you choose to not see reality, but oh well.

-=Mike

Cheney failed at addressing the issue of Halliburton. Instead, he directed people to a website. First, how many of our undecided voters are actually going to go to a website to read up on this? Second, Cheney gave out an invalid address! www.factcheck.com? For anyone that actually DID want to read up on the issue, Cheney screwed that up as well. Halliburton is one of the major drawbacks of the Bush/Cheney team, and Cheney completely stumbled over himself trying to fix the issue. Looks like a victory.

 

Cheney did not know how to address the issue of gay marriage, while Edwards at least had an opinion about it. While John went into a discussion about wondering why a consitutional amendment was needed, showing his convictions by saying that while he doesn't agree with gay marriage - he still thinks these couples should still have rights.....the issue went to Cheney, and all he could do was thank Edwards for saying kind words about his daughter. The man looked incredibly weak on one of the most controversial domestic issues in this country today.

 

The Health care issue was one that Cheney was supposed to have pounced on top of Edwards about. Yet, Edwards kept battling back to his own points, to the point where he left an impression on the American audience by actually going back on the issue and elaborating further. Not only did he manage to properly combat Cheney trying to trap him on health care, but he looked all the better for it.

 

John's closing statement was actually powerful as well. While Cheney had a cold, unemotional conclusion to the debate tonight, Edwards actually began with his own anecdote about his family and was able to evolve that into a speech about how Kerry/Edwards would be the right choice on the ballot, and why Bush/Cheney would be detrimental to the country. Edwards' closing statement actually helped him at the end of the debate, while Cheney's had nearly no effect whatsoever.

 

Here are a few positives to come out for the Democrats tonight in the debates. Good God, how was I able to come up with positives for the Dems tonight? This was an absolute thrashing!

 

Bullshit, it was. This was only a "thrashing" because you prayed, hope against hope, that it would be.

 

And when it wasn't, you tried to maintain that opinion anyway. As did several others in this thread as well.

[Styles 0]

In some seriousness, Cheney, despite being a better speaker than Bush, would have better served Bush by stepping down in lieu of like Powell or hell anyone. Anyone not a rich white old man. Bush has that on lockdown.

Out of respect for his wife's wishes, Colin Powell has said he will not run for President or Vice President. Cheney is an invaluable adviser and spokesman for Bush.

[Guest SteveyP93]

AMikeSC and the truth is like oil and water.

[Rob E Dangerously 0]

You mean you haven't heard of oilwater?

 

it's big in Oklahoma.. like the derrecks (sp?)

[bob_barron 0]

So are SteveyP93 and an intelligent point.

[Guest MikeSC]

Edwards had talking points. Nothing more. His closing statement was amongst the worst in recent years. Cheney undressed his points and mentioned his obvious flaws. Edwards made no case that he deserved to be VP.

-=Mike

[bob_barron 0]

Cheney failed at addressing the issue of Halliburton. Instead, he directed people to a website. First, how many of our undecided voters are actually going to go to a website to read up on this? Second, Cheney gave out an invalid address! www.factcheck.com? For anyone that actually DID want to read up on the issue, Cheney screwed that up as well. Halliburton is one of the major drawbacks of the Bush/Cheney team, and Cheney completely stumbled over himself trying to fix the issue. Looks like a victory.

 

Cheney said that Haliburton was bullshit, and gave out an address where you could view that everything Kerry/Edwards say on it is crap.

 

I don't even know if he gave out the wrong one but I'm sure anything like that will be immeadiately be corrected by the fact checkers on the post-news coverage.

 

But if Cheney getting a website wrong is his biggest screw up then yea- Cheney kicked his ass.

 

Cheney did not know how to address the issue of gay marriage, while Edwards at least had an opinion about it. While John went into a discussion about wondering why a consitutional amendment was needed, showing his convictions by saying that while he doesn't agree with gay marriage - he still thinks these couples should still have rights.....the issue went to Cheney, and all he could do was thank Edwards for saying kind words about his daughter. The man looked incredibly weak on one of the most controversial domestic issues in this country today.

 

Edwards has nothing to say on gay marriage. His stance on the issue is one of the dumbest sleaziest things I've ever heard. His stance on the issue is his and Kerry's pathetic attempts to pander to every possible group and not offend anyone.

 

It should be noted that Cheney has broke ranks with his party on the issue of gay marriage.

 

Why did Edwards have to bring his daughter into it? What did that even accomplish?

 

The Health care issue was one that Cheney was supposed to have pounced on top of Edwards about. Yet, Edwards kept battling back to his own points, to the point where he left an impression on the American audience by actually going back on the issue and elaborating further. Not only did he manage to properly combat Cheney trying to trap him on health care, but he looked all the better for it.

 

Edwards got in a couple good barbs but I really don't see where or why Cheney was supposed to kick his ass there. Care to provide source.

 

Edwards knew his health care and it was kind of pathetic. It's the one thing he kept going back to on many issues where health care wasn't even part of the discussion.

 

Cheney kept reeling out the facts while Edwards tried the Al Gore personal story approach. It didn't work in 2000.

 

John's closing statement was actually powerful as well. While Cheney had a cold, unemotional conclusion to the debate tonight, Edwards actually began with his own anecdote about his family and was able to evolve that into a speech about how Kerry/Edwards would be the right choice on the ballot, and why Bush/Cheney would be detrimental to the country. Edwards' closing statement actually helped him at the end of the debate, while Cheney's had nearly no effect whatsoever.

 

I don't give a fuck that John Edwards' father watched TV to learn to read.

 

Why should you do?

 

Why does this make him qualified to be President if God forbid something happened?

 

Why does this make him qualified to be Vice President?

 

Why does this make him qualified to be anything?

 

It's not important and it's just pandering to the lowest common denominator.

 

If you think that was powerful then you're one of the morons Edwards was pandering to.

 

Cheney spoke in a calm deliberate manner. He explained what was important and why his team was the best to run with these issues.

 

John Edwards talked about TV.

 

Here are a few positives to come out for the Democrats tonight in the debates. Good God, how was I able to come up with positives for the Dems tonight? This was an absolute thrashing!

 

Bullshit, it was. This was only a "thrashing" because you prayed, hope against hope, that it would be.

 

And when it wasn't, you tried to maintain that opinion anyway. As did several others in this thread as well.

 

You're wrong. You're flat out 100% wrong.

 

Cheney schooled Edwards tonight. He looked calm and comfortable while Edwards often looked nervous and was sweating. At times Cheney looked like he was bored since it was oging so well.

 

Cheney just attacked Edwards on almost everything. He used Kerry and Edwards' own record against him while Edwards went on the defensive all night.

 

I'm sorry your boy didn't win. Last week my guy didn't do to well either.

 

At least except it and move on. Edwards got beat.

[Rob E Dangerously 0]

Not that it matters, but since i've done volunteer work for the Kerry/Edwards campaign, I decline to really make much of a comment on this debate.

 

More than likely, Cheney won.

 

But the "Don't vote for A (Pres candidate) since B (VP) is bad" thing doesn't work either. Edwards has steps to take on foreign policy.

 

Fun fact: Cheney met Edwards at a Prayer breakfast. I guess Senator Edwards didn't make a lasting impression on the Vice President. Or Cheney was exaggerating.

[teke184 0]

Terry McJackass is on Fox claiming that Edwards clearly won tonight and that all the online polls are showing it.

 

 

I'm going to love it when the DNC not only loses the Presidental election but also gains no seats in the House and probably loses seats in the Senate.

[Rob E Dangerously 0]

Terry McJackass is on Fox claiming that Edwards clearly won tonight and that all the online polls are showing it.

I think "Headmaster of Spin" is one subtitle for the chairmen of both parties.

 

You gotta put a positive face on a situation no matter what. Even if it may seem delusional.

 

 

Clearly, Edwards is ignoring Cheney in the pictures

[Justice 0]

Terry McJackass is on Fox claiming that Edwards clearly won tonight and that all the online polls are showing it.

I think "Headmaster of Spin" is one subtitle for the chairmen of both parties.

 

You gotta put a positive face on a situation no matter what. Even if it may seem delusional.

 

 

Clearly, Edwards is ignoring Cheney in this picture

Why the fuck are they sitting me next to some pissant junior Senator. God damn, I'm gonna have the planner's head for this one...

[Rob E Dangerously 0]

Judge, they're clearly standing. Ya know.

 

It looks like Edwards is eyeing Cheney's meal too

[NYU 0]

Bob, you're in over your head here.

 

Cheney said that Haliburton was bullshit, and gave out an address where you could view that everything Kerry/Edwards say on it is crap.

 

He needed to do much more in his time allowed than say "Everything that man said next to me is wrong" without elaboration. He had a chance to delve further into the topic with the next question, but instead chose to go after John's voting records.

 

I don't even know if he gave out the wrong one but I'm sure anything like that will be immeadiately be corrected by the fact checkers on the post-news coverage.

 

Ah, but he did give out the wrong one. And now he needs to rely on the post-news coverage to help him out of a hole? First off, there probably isn't a wide percentage of people who, after watching the debate, were willing to go to that website. Second, if they wanted to - and were unable to access it - you now expect them to reasonably sit in front of the television and wait for Tom Brokaw to give them the right web address?

 

Cheney screwed up majorly here if he was looking to fight against the Halliburton charges.

 

But if Cheney getting a website wrong is his biggest screw up then yea- Cheney kicked his ass.

 

No, no. Edwards did good in other aspects as well.

 

Edwards has nothing to say on gay marriage. His stance on the issue is one of the dumbest sleaziest things I've ever heard. His stance on the issue is his and Kerry's pathetic attempts to pander to every possible group and not offend anyone.

 

His opinion couldn't be an opinion that a good percentage of Americans also share? That, while granting a gay couple complete marriage rights may be unnecessary, they should still be given SOME rights, without a consitutional amendment to completely stand in the way? Just because Edwards gave the politically-correct answer doesn't mean he doesn't believe in it, and it's quite foolish of you to even suggest that. Kerry and Edwards picked what many feel is the right stance on the issue! What the hell are you even arguing here?

 

It should be noted that Cheney has broke ranks with his party on the issue of gay marriage.

 

Hooray. Now if that had an actual effect on its status in the country, then things might look a little better. But the way it stands now, that means absolutely nothing.

 

Why did Edwards have to bring his daughter into it? What did that even accomplish?

 

The hypocrisy of the Bush administration. How Dick Cheney has a gay daughter, yet will stand by and allow Bush to block certain rights that gays have in this country. Edwards didn't mention her name in a sleazy way - he mentioned her name in order to prove a point. It accomplished something. It left Cheney without any platform to stand on when it came to hurting civil rights for homosexuals in this country. It left him without anything to say to combat John's charges. It did a pretty damn good job of that.

 

Edwards got in a couple good barbs but I really don't see where or why Cheney was supposed to kick his ass there. Care to provide source.

 

Ask Mike and GreatOne. They were just salivating over this topic.

 

Edwards knew his health care and it was kind of pathetic. It's the one thing he kept going back to on many issues where health care wasn't even part of the discussion.

 

Untrue. He only went back on it a few times to fight against the image that Cheney was trying to paint of him - someone that just wouldn't know WHAT to do with Health Care. Edwards wanted to prove him wrong, which is why he wished to go back and correct his statement. In actuality, this was another weakness of the Bush administration, and Cheney wanted to go back to highlight it.

 

Besides, if he did this a "pathetic" amount of times, then what would you consider Cheney's constant off-topic attacks on Edwards' voting records to be about? Those not only didn't answer ANY questions that the moderator was laying out, but he went back on those far more than Edwards mentioned health care.

 

Cheney kept reeling out the facts while Edwards tried the Al Gore personal story approach. It didn't work in 2000.

 

Oh, but Edwards DID have facts - and Edwards DID have points. Go back and rewind your VCR if you don't believe me.

 

I don't give a fuck that John Edwards' father watched TV to learn to read.

 

Why should you do?

 

Why does this make him qualified to be President if God forbid something happened?

 

Why does this make him qualified to be Vice President?

 

Why does this make him qualified to be anything?

 

It's not important and it's just pandering to the lowest common denominator.

 

If you think that was powerful then you're one of the morons Edwards was pandering to.

 

Cheney spoke in a calm deliberate manner. He explained what was important and why his team was the best to run with these issues.

 

John Edwards talked about TV.

 

Ugh, you clearly didn't understand the point of his closing statements. The beginning anecdote of the statement was to address the ideals on which this country was built upon. How his father could sit in front of the television to learn mathematics and better improve his status in the country. How America actually gave him the opportunity to help fix his OWN education, and how certain people like John's father did their best to seize this chance. He then related this to the America of today, and how the two timeframes of the United States don't correlate nearly enough. How, under the administration of Bush and Cheney, this chance to improve status has disappeared. How - with taxes, outsourcing of jobs, the falling economy - these ideals are starting to falter. He then closed it out by saying that, if John Kerry and John Edwards were elected, they would try to change this worrying trend, and bring the country back to where they were before.

 

This speech had a great flow. This speech had emotion. And, most importantly - this speech had a POINT!

 

Cheney spoke in a cold, somber tone during his final presentation. He didn't offer anything new to the public, he didn't try to reach out to them on a face-to-face basis - he suffered under the same weaknesses he almost always falls under. His closing statements appeared flat because they just weren't powerful enough to convince people that Bush and Cheney would be the absolute BEST choice for the next four years.

 

Either you didn't understand the point of John Edwards' speech, or you just tried hard not to.

 

You're wrong. You're flat out 100% wrong.

 

I don't believe I am.

 

Cheney schooled Edwards tonight. He looked calm and comfortable while Edwards often looked nervous and was sweating. At times Cheney looked like he was bored since it was oging so well.

 

Could it have anything to do with the idea that Cheney is used to this high-profile attention by now, while this was the first MAJOR, MAJOR debate that John Edwards has ever been involved in? Could it have anything to do with Edwards being a human being like all of us, and getting nervous just because he was doing something that he was admittedly inexperienced at, while Cheney clearly knew what he was doing?

 

I think it was. It certainly didn't like Edwards was flustered for any points. It certainly looked like John knew what to say to combat Cheney's points when it came to the subject of domestic issues.

 

He may have butterflies in his stomach. That definitely doesn't mean he didn't know what he was talking about. He certainly did.

 

Cheney just attacked Edwards on almost everything. He used Kerry and Edwards' own record against him while Edwards went on the defensive all night.

 

As I've said, Cheney DID go off-topic to attack Edwards on his voting records. Edwards, defending himself, went back and unleashed a nice string of criticisms on Dick's voting record as well.

 

And if you want to talk about on the defensive - rewatch Cheney throughout the entire domestic issues debate. Not only did he have to backtrack several times and cover valid points that Edwards kept bringing up, but he often found himself unable to find the words to debate against certain topics.

 

Cheney did quite poorly in many subjects during the domestic debate. For some reason, I'm not shocked you don't see that.

 

I'm sorry your boy didn't win. Last week my guy didn't do to well either.

 

Thank you for apologizing about my boy not winning. Luckily, he tied.

 

At least except it and move on. Edwards got beat.

 

Perhaps we'll have to agree to disagree.

[Guest SteveyP93]

Edwards won by a landsliiiiide.

[Guest MikeSC]

Bob, you're in over your head here.

 

Cheney said that Haliburton was bullshit, and gave out an address where you could view that everything Kerry/Edwards say on it is crap.

 

He needed to do much more in his time allowed than say "Everything that man said next to me is wrong" without elaboration. He had a chance to delve further into the topic with the next question, but instead chose to go after John's voting records.

He was supposed to go into depth --- FOR THIRTY SECONDS?

 

Umm, are you being serious?

I don't even know if he gave out the wrong one but I'm sure anything like that will be immeadiately be corrected by the fact checkers on the post-news coverage.

 

Ah, but he did give out the wrong one. And now he needs to rely on the post-news coverage to help him out of a hole? First off, there probably isn't a wide percentage of people who, after watching the debate, were willing to go to that website. Second, if they wanted to - and were unable to access it - you now expect them to reasonably sit in front of the television and wait for Tom Brokaw to give them the right web address?

It's as weak as expecting them to go to Kerry's site to have his ENTIRE FOREIGN POLICY PLAN revealed.

 

The Dems have LIED. Repeatedly. If you have no problems with it, good for you.

Cheney screwed up majorly here if he was looking to fight against the Halliburton charges.

He had 30 seconds to answer it.

But if Cheney getting a website wrong is his biggest screw up then yea- Cheney kicked his ass.

 

No, no. Edwards did good in other aspects as well.

Such as?

 

Explaining his tax code maneuvers to avoid paying Medicare taxes?

 

His OBVIOUS lack of knowledge of something as basic as the Full Faith and Credit Clause?

 

His inability to answer to ANY worthwhile ability, the question of how he is qualified.

 

His bringing up Dick Cheney's daughter for no worthwhile reason (for those who like to pretend that Dick is a bad guy, John was FAR worse).

 

His obvious lack of familiarity with the true casualty numbers in Iraq?

 

Edwards looked like a man over his head.

Edwards has nothing to say on gay marriage. His stance on the issue is one of the dumbest sleaziest things I've ever heard. His stance on the issue is his and Kerry's pathetic attempts to pander to every possible group and not offend anyone.

 

His opinion couldn't be an opinion that a good percentage of Americans also share? That, while granting a gay couple complete marriage rights may be unnecessary, they should still be given SOME rights, without a consitutional amendment to completely stand in the way? Just because Edwards gave the politically-correct answer doesn't mean he doesn't believe in it, and it's quite foolish of you to even suggest that. Kerry and Edwards picked what many feel is the right stance on the issue! What the hell are you even arguing here?

Edwards doesn't even know that a state has to recognize a marriage from another state. I don't want so profoundly uneducated a lawyer to have power in this country.

Why did Edwards have to bring his daughter into it? What did that even accomplish?

The hypocrisy of the Bush administration. How Dick Cheney has a gay daughter, yet will stand by and allow Bush to block certain rights that gays have in this country.

Or the curse of a VICE PRESIDENT NOT BEING ABLE TO CONTROL THE POLICIES OF AN ADMINISTRATION.

 

Bringing up his daughter was low as hell. Edwards and his cow of a wife should be ashamd.

Edwards didn't mention her name in a sleazy way - he mentioned her name in order to prove a point. It accomplished something. It left Cheney without any platform to stand on when it came to hurting civil rights for homosexuals in this country. It left him without anything to say to combat John's charges. It did a pretty damn good job of that.

Except, in spite of your demagoguery, that is not reality.

Edwards got in a couple good barbs but I really don't see where or why Cheney was supposed to kick his ass there. Care to provide source.

Ask Mike and GreatOne. They were just salivating over this topic.

Cheney beat the high holy hell out of him. Watching the Dems meltdown to defend his performance is laughable.

Edwards knew his health care and it was kind of pathetic. It's the one thing he kept going back to on many issues where health care wasn't even part of the discussion.

Untrue. He only went back on it a few times to fight against the image that Cheney was trying to paint of him - someone that just wouldn't know WHAT to do with Health Care.

No, it's true. Edwards kept trying to describe a horrible policy that he couldn't BEGIN to make sense of.

Besides, if he did this a "pathetic" amount of times, then what would you consider Cheney's constant off-topic attacks on Edwards' voting records to be about?

What, Edwards record is off-limits? I know you'd LIKE that --- but not quite.

Those not only didn't answer ANY questions that the moderator was laying out, but he went back on those far more than Edwards mentioned health care.

If Edwards and Kerry's own RECORDS go against their rhetoric --- which do you believe?

Cheney kept reeling out the facts while Edwards tried the Al Gore personal story approach. It didn't work in 2000.

Oh, but Edwards DID have facts - and Edwards DID have points. Go back and rewind your VCR if you don't believe me.

No, he REALLY didn't. Edwards had talking points and when they were debunked, he KEPT going back to them. Edwards was told what to say, has NO knowledge of his own (he has less depth than Dan Quayle, for Christ's sake), and was unable to get off of his talking points for any reason.

This speech had a great flow. This speech had emotion. And, most importantly - this speech had a POINT!

It was Carter-esque in its ineptitude. His "America's light is flickering" line is the single worst line in a speech this year.

Cheney spoke in a cold, somber tone during his final presentation. He didn't offer anything new to the public, he didn't try to reach out to them on a face-to-face basis - he suffered under the same weaknesses he almost always falls under. His closing statements appeared flat because they just weren't powerful enough to convince people that Bush and Cheney would be the absolute BEST choice for the next four years.

He actually provided a point and made his case. Edwards would have been well-advised to do the same.

Cheney schooled Edwards tonight. He looked calm and comfortable while Edwards often looked nervous and was sweating. At times Cheney looked like he was bored since it was oging so well.

 

Could it have anything to do with the idea that Cheney is used to this high-profile attention by now, while this was the first MAJOR, MAJOR debate that John Edwards has ever been involved in?

OR, in simple terms, Edwards lost in the same way Bush lost --- except he lost with substance as well.

I think it was. It certainly didn't like Edwards was flustered for any points. It certainly looked like John knew what to say to combat Cheney's points when it came to the subject of domestic issues.

Edwards had talking points. Nothing more, nothing less. Cheney had facts and figures and EVEN WHEN PROVEN WRONG, Edwards kept going back to the same incorrect figures.

Cheney just attacked Edwards on almost everything. He used Kerry and Edwards' own record against him while Edwards went on the defensive all night.

As I've said, Cheney DID go off-topic to attack Edwards on his voting records.

Like it or not, Edwards' record IS the key topic of discussion. He HAS to show he deserved to be VP --- which he still has yet to do --- and his record is the major component.

And if you want to talk about on the defensive - rewatch Cheney throughout the entire domestic issues debate. Not only did he have to backtrack several times and cover valid points that Edwards kept bringing up, but he often found himself unable to find the words to debate against certain topics.

 

Cheney did quite poorly in many subjects during the domestic debate. For some reason, I'm not shocked you don't see that.

I'm not shocked you see what did not happen.

I'm sorry your boy didn't win. Last week my guy didn't do to well either.

 

Thank you for apologizing about my boy not winning. Luckily, he tied.

Considering how blinded you are --- that's a loss for Edwards.

-=Mike