TitanTiger 20,506 Posted October 6, 2004 Share Posted October 6, 2004 ...delivered by the Vice President. I really expected Edwards to do much better than this. I was a little worried going in to be honest that his trial lawyer experience would make him more persuasive. He got schooled tonight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,125 Posted October 6, 2004 Share Posted October 6, 2004 John 'my little pony' Edwards was full of ' we'll do better by doing things better' , and short on substance. Typical , classic Liberal Dem performance. Cheney corrected him often, but Edwards tossed out so many inaccuracies, distortions and lies, it was hard for Cheney to keep up and still get his own message out to the American people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BamaGrad03 0 Posted October 6, 2004 Share Posted October 6, 2004 Yeah Dick mopped the floor with Edwards. I can't believe the media is spinning it as a draw. Edwards got burned so many times on his RECORD...not what he was saying. I heard a Kerry campaign person being interviewed after the debate saying "Cheney and Bush want to keep bringing up the PAST by discussing Kerry and Edwards' voting records...what we should be doing is focus on THE PRESENT based on what they are SAYING about what they will do" I think I peed a little I was laughing so hard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,969 Posted October 6, 2004 Share Posted October 6, 2004 I guess "butt kickings" are in the eye of the beholder. I think for the respective bases, each liked their guy. I think for undecideds, the foreign policy section was probably a draw. On domestic issues, for those for who such matters are paramount, Edwards won. I suspect Edwards scored well with persuadable women which Kerry needs to reestablish the typical Dem advantage. BG, sorry you peed yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AU Tailgating Rules 0 Posted October 6, 2004 Share Posted October 6, 2004 Dick Cheney = Auburn John Edwards = Tennessee Burnett (we stopped Auburn when it counted) = Dem spin meisters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TitanTiger 20,506 Posted October 6, 2004 Author Share Posted October 6, 2004 I'm sorry. I'm trying to be objective here. I admitted that Kerry got the best of Bush last week. It was decisively the other way tonight. It wasn't that Edwards did anything particularly bad...Cheney was just more prepared. He seemed to be ready for every shot Edwards took. He hammered him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,969 Posted October 6, 2004 Share Posted October 6, 2004 Cheney even lies about the most insignificant things. He's pathological. Cheney claimed that he had never met Edwards before. Addressing the National Prayer Breakast, Cheney said: "Thank you. Thank you very much. Congressman Watts, Senator Edwards, friends from across America and distinguished visitors to our country from all over the world, Lynne and I honored to be with you all this morning." [FDCH Political Transcripts, Cheney Remarks at the National Prayer Breakfast, 2/1/01] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BamaGrad03 0 Posted October 6, 2004 Share Posted October 6, 2004 Edwards thanked the students and administration at the university tonight...i guess he's met all of them too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,969 Posted October 6, 2004 Share Posted October 6, 2004 Edwards thanked the students and administration at the university tonight...i guess he's met all of them too 108587[/snapback] Glad to see you changed your diapers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BamaGrad03 0 Posted October 6, 2004 Share Posted October 6, 2004 I just saw a former democratic strategist who said Cheney clearly won the debate... honestly...as objective as I can be...Cheney won this debate decisively. Did you notice when asked about HOW SPECIFICALLY Edwards/Kerry would reduce the defecit...he answered (after attacking bush) that they would increase tax breaks for the middle class and "cut unneeded spending"....whoah...the first one - increasing tax breaks - increases the defecit. The second one, well, every politician whom has EVER spoken used that answer. Do we STILL know any specifics on ANY of Kerry's plans? Oh yeah..."were gonna do it better" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BamaGrad03 0 Posted October 6, 2004 Share Posted October 6, 2004 ****Newsflash**** CBS flash poll shows Edwards won the debate. Documents to be shown tomorrow.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AU Tailgating Rules 0 Posted October 6, 2004 Share Posted October 6, 2004 Hey TT, can you please explain to me why Edwards could not get re elected in N.C. or help Kerry carry N.C. in the national election? He's not even a re-electable senator much less a good VP candidate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,969 Posted October 6, 2004 Share Posted October 6, 2004 I just saw a former democratic strategist who said Cheney clearly won the debate...honestly...as objective as I can be...Cheney won this debate decisively. Did you notice when asked about HOW SPECIFICALLY Edwards/Kerry would reduce the defecit...he answered (after attacking bush) that they would increase tax breaks for the middle class and "cut unneeded spending"....whoah...the first one - increasing tax breaks - increases the defecit. The second one, well, every politician whom has EVER spoken used that answer. Do we STILL know any specifics on ANY of Kerry's plans? Oh yeah..."were gonna do it better" 108589[/snapback] Which former Dem? Caddell? Do we know Bush's plans yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,969 Posted October 6, 2004 Share Posted October 6, 2004 Hey TT, can you please explain to me why Edwards could not get re elected in N.C. or help Kerry carry N.C. in the national election?He's not even a re-electable senator much less a good VP candidate. 108591[/snapback] We'll never know, but I believe that had he campaigned for re-election, he would have beat Burr by at least 5 points. Polls taken before any campaign takes place are close to utterly meaningless. The man's a campaigner. If Kerry loses, don't be surprised to see Edwards be Governor one day in NC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AU Tailgating Rules 0 Posted October 6, 2004 Share Posted October 6, 2004 Again TT why can't Edwards deliver N.C. ? Could it be that most people don't buy the dem B.S. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BamaGrad03 0 Posted October 6, 2004 Share Posted October 6, 2004 Bush probably had this crazy plan to keep terrorists from attacking america after 9/11 Id love to hear you argue how he's failed in that respect. You can't do better than zero attacks on american soil mr kerry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TitanTiger 20,506 Posted October 6, 2004 Author Share Posted October 6, 2004 Cheney even lies about the most insignificant things. He's pathological. Cheney claimed that he had never met Edwards before.Addressing the National Prayer Breakast, Cheney said: "Thank you. Thank you very much. Congressman Watts, Senator Edwards, friends from across America and distinguished visitors to our country from all over the world, Lynne and I honored to be with you all this morning." [FDCH Political Transcripts, Cheney Remarks at the National Prayer Breakfast, 2/1/01] 108584[/snapback] 1. So, because he saw him in the room and acknowledged him, that means they'd actually met? 2. In the context of Edwards abysmal attendance record over the last year (missing 33 of 36 votes), does a prayer breakfast really blunt this point effectively in your mind? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,969 Posted October 6, 2004 Share Posted October 6, 2004 Cheney even lies about the most insignificant things. He's pathological. Cheney claimed that he had never met Edwards before.Addressing the National Prayer Breakast, Cheney said: "Thank you. Thank you very much. Congressman Watts, Senator Edwards, friends from across America and distinguished visitors to our country from all over the world, Lynne and I honored to be with you all this morning." [FDCH Political Transcripts, Cheney Remarks at the National Prayer Breakfast, 2/1/01] 108584[/snapback] 1. So, because he saw him in the room and acknowledged him, that means they'd actually met? 2. In the context of Edwards abysmal attendance record over the last year (missing 33 of 36 votes), does a prayer breakfast really blunt this point effectively in your mind? 108600[/snapback] How often do you seriously think "Undisclosed location" "presides" over the Senate? Besides, the only times he talks to Dems is when he tells them to F#@k-off. He had a planned zinger and he didn't mind lying to deliver it. Bush has spent little time in Washington during the campaign. He spent little time in Austin last election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,969 Posted October 6, 2004 Share Posted October 6, 2004 Again TT why can't Edwards deliver N.C. ? Could it be that most people don't buy the dem B.S. 108598[/snapback] Jesse Helms was God in NC. You probably loved him, too. NC is a tough state for forward thinking people, although there have been notable statesman from the Tar Heel state. In July, NC was within 4-5 points. I suspect if they put the resources and time into NC they might surprise some folks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TitanTiger 20,506 Posted October 6, 2004 Author Share Posted October 6, 2004 Thank you for not answering the question. In doing so, you answered it by default. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TitanTiger 20,506 Posted October 6, 2004 Author Share Posted October 6, 2004 BTW, included in Cheney's diatribe on Kerry and Edwards' attendance marks was a similar shot at Kerry for slipshod attendance and voting. Factcheck.org did some checking on Bush's charges about Kerry's similarly scant attendance for the last eight years on the Senate Intelligence Committee. Turns out, Bush was dead on: http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=241 So, has Senator Kerry been campaigning for eight years? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,969 Posted October 6, 2004 Share Posted October 6, 2004 Thank you for not answering the question. In doing so, you answered it by default. 108604[/snapback] I answered your question. You didn't like my answer. There's a difference. If you want to see what not answering a question looks like, check out this thread: http://www.aunation.net/forums/index.php?s...opic=10730&st=0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,125 Posted October 6, 2004 Share Posted October 6, 2004 Cheney even lies about the most insignificant things. He's pathological. Cheney claimed that he had never met Edwards before.Addressing the National Prayer Breakast, Cheney said: "Thank you. Thank you very much. Congressman Watts, Senator Edwards, friends from across America and distinguished visitors to our country from all over the world, Lynne and I honored to be with you all this morning." [FDCH Political Transcripts, Cheney Remarks at the National Prayer Breakfast, 2/1/01] 108584[/snapback] When speaking of pathological liars, you can only be speaking of Kerry. Trying to spin that Cheney is a 'liar' for having once uttered the name of Sen. Edwards some how constitutes him MEETING the Pretty Pony from Carolina, is laughable. By your " reasoning ", I've met everybody in Jordan-Hare whose ever watched a game on Saturday when I was in the stadium w/ them. Cheney scored a MAJOR hit in the debate w/ that line. Everyone in the room could feel it, and it showed on T.V. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DKW 86 7,433 Posted October 6, 2004 Share Posted October 6, 2004 I just saw a former democratic strategist who said Cheney clearly won the debate...honestly...as objective as I can be...Cheney won this debate decisively. Did you notice when asked about HOW SPECIFICALLY Edwards/Kerry would reduce the defecit...he answered (after attacking bush) that they would increase tax breaks for the middle class and "cut unneeded spending"....whoah...the first one - increasing tax breaks - increases the defecit. The second one, well, every politician whom has EVER spoken used that answer. Do we STILL know any specifics on ANY of Kerry's plans? Oh yeah..."were gonna do it better" 108589[/snapback] Which former Dem? Caddell? Do we know Bush's plans yet? 108593[/snapback] Man, put down that crack pipe....He was so unpopular in NC, he knew he stood no chance of winning re-election. Even the most hardcore Dems admit he was totally unpopular and was a sure loss. His seat is one that th Reepublicans can count on as an almost sure add in November. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LegalEagle 22 Posted October 6, 2004 Share Posted October 6, 2004 Well, that just goes to show that people see and hear what they want to see and hear. Without going back to the Presidential debate thread, I'd guess that many of those who thought Cheney knocked Edwards out last night opined that Bush whacked Kerry. What I learned last night is that the VP candidates are much more solid than the Presidential candidates. I am now thinking that those who suggested that Cheney is the Wizzard of Oz who runs the show for Bush may be right. The main thing that makes me question that Cheney is calling the shots for Bush is that Bush made so many bonehead decisions. Surely Cheney would know better. I saw the debate as a good debate and a draw. Later, should anyone look at some of the points Edwards made, he could be slightly ahead. One example - Cheney talked about how good things are in Afganistan. Among other things Edwards said that Afganistan is now producing 75% of the world's opium and much of the country is controled by drug lords and war lords. Now, let's see, doesn't Bush have a war on drugs going on? The mental picture of our armed forces driving by acres upon acres of opium poppies without any action makes me wonder how we are prosecuting our war on drugs. Maybe Bush is fighting a "sensitive war" on drugs. P.S. - Please do not waste your time in replying to this post by saying that I am an idiot, moron or trial lawyer. Those points have already been established abundantly. *grin* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.