I watched both debates. Edwards seems to be the most charismatic of the candidates. Dean was doing well before the debates in some of the polling, but has no presence whatsoever on the stage. Gephardt is taking a fired up approach and has been doing better than I thought he would. Kerry does fine, but he and Lieberman just pander everyone to death.
I did not see the second debate, but watched parts of the first one in New Mexico where the candidates tried to express themselve in Spanish promising open borders, amnesty, health insurance, and other goodies to every illegal immigrant out there.
Where are all the liberals that keep posting on the religon forums? I really want to hear who their answer to Bush is and then have them defend that person issue by issue. I'll tell you what though, if the voter turnout is as bad during the election as it is on this thread Bush is going to win by a landslide! Yeah Baby! I can't wait.
that was terrible. what a bunch of shit. politics at its worst. i like dean, gephardt, and kerry. kucinich is a good guy, but he's a little weird and an unknown (compared to dean, who's been out there making headlines for some time). frankly, i haven't really looked into the issue too much. i'm more inclined to wait and see who will actually get the nomination before really considering the issue. any of those 3 would do a decent job, since, as we've seen, apparently any idiot can be president. it would be hard to fuck things up more than wonderboy has already. like i mentioned earlier, should one of them manage to find a VP who's a military guy from a successful ibanking background who actually understands economics and simple math, the country would benefit greatly. actually, any hardcore economist or successful business leader would be a fine choice, since the country apparently doesn't give a shit about military service considering dubya and cheney are both chickenhawks... no more failures and amateurs in the white house. how can you expect a leadership to successfully lead the economy upwards when bush had a terrible record in managing his own company prior to being elected?? and how can anyone say with a straight face that this man has any integrity when 1)he is a liar who keeps the "good book" by his side to legitimize himself; and 2)he puts FIVE men indicted by congress for iran contra into his cabinet???????????????????? HOW??? i just don't get it. i really don't. how can anyone listen to dubya without vomiting?? PS -- oh yeah, and how about dubya's little insider trading adventure with harken??? http://foi.missouri.edu/enronandetal/bushharken/ http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=bush+harken
Yeah, but Bush's hair is better, so he'd win the women's vote if they went "head to head". Edwards is the best of the bunch so far.
Ok, so you like Dean, Gephardt and Kerry. Let's debate the issues. Tell me why you like these three. What are they going to do for this country? Tell me what issues you think they have over Bush. Let's see if there is any substance behind this.
After watching the Democrat candidates and hearing their positions on the issues, I have two important questions: How does John Edwards get his hair to be so lustrous? Is John F. Kerry trying to show his lifelong devotion to the Beatles or is his hair merely a pathetic attempt to mimic John F. Kennedy? I feel the election may well turn on these two issues. Dean and Lieberman are obviously doomed by their boring cuts. Gephardt's hair appears to be an obvious compromise that is not working for him. You can't appeal to union goons and soccer moms. As with many issues, Al Sharpton raises troubling questions. His hair looks natty enough now, but what if he was convinced by Don King to change hair styles while in office? As for Kucinich, the country is obviously not ready for whatever is covering his head. Bush will obviously be at a serious disadvantage against the lustrous Edwards, but at least the country has been spared the spectacle of the ever changing Clinton tint jobs.