Well?

I listened to it on the radio, and I thought it came out about even.

2 and 0 baby!



Instant polls show Edwards wins vice presidential debate

www.chinaview.cn 2004-10-06 11:57:53



WASHINGTON, Oct. 5 (Xinhuanet) -- Instant polls by several news websites showed Democratic Senator Edwards was the winner of Tuesday night's US vice presidential debate.



About one hour after the debate was over, the Democratic vice presidential nominee was regarded in an instant survey by CBSNEWS.com as the winner by 77 percent of respondents, while only 21 percent chose Vice President Dick Cheney as the winner.



A poll by MSNBC.com also found Edwards the winner, leading Cheney 69 percent to 31 percent.



A QuickVote by CNN.com showed Edwards was viewed as the winner by 78 percent of more than 13,000 voters, against 18 percent for Cheney, with 5 percent saying that the two were evenly matched.

First, let me say I am vehemently anti-Bush, and I have respect for Kerry and Edwards, and feel that they can do a much better job representing and leading our country. That said, I don't think there was a winner in this debate, because half the time neither one was listening to/answering the questions.



I have to admit I turned it off with about 20 minutes left. I couldn't watch it. I was frustrated with both candidates for ignoring the questions again and again. When Edwards not only did not remember that he was not supposed to mention Kerry or Bush, kept referring to "we" even after he realized his mistake, and then didn't even answer the question, which was " Mr. Vice President, picking up on that, you both just sang the praises of the tops of your ticket. Without mentioning them by name at all, explain to us why you are different from your opponent, starting with you, Mr. Vice President."



Then the next Q about flip-flops? Moderator gives Edwards perfect platform to say the "You can be consistently wrong thing" and instead he and Cheney just get into who flops more than who. I have grown so tired of this argument. Anyway, enough now.



Overall, I thought both candidates spoke well. Cheny found different ways of saying the same thing, which Bush's is incapable of doing. Edwards had a lot of info to back up his claims, and managed to be more specific on some things. However, I think his adrenaline was pumping too much so that he couldn't hear the questions, and well, I found myself wondering if Cheney had a pulse, was still with us, even gave a damn. He was a little to calm and cool.

Okay, this is politics in the new millennium. During the debate, Cheney claimed that Halliburton allegations were false and told everyone to go to factcheck.com.



He meant factcheck.org, of course, but that isn't what he said, and Fox News linked it as factcheck.com.



The domain name factcheck.com is owned by George Soros and redirects to his website, http://www.georgesoros.com.



Someone on Cheney's team is gettin' fired in the morning! LOL! I'd say that, solely for this massive gaffe, Edwards won. Also, I could not believe that Cheney actually referred to our role in El Salvador as a success. I don't care what is going on there now, because the U.S. history of foreign policy as it regards El Salvador is totally embarrassing.

Oh man, that is the funniest thing I've heard all election season!

I wanted to watch but the power was out all over campus. I was so disappointed.

Be glad you couldn't see it. It sounds much better in transcript (which you can read on .CNN.com among other places.)

thanks, azul! now I won't be totally out of the loop!

Edwards!

I'm not sure. Probably Edwards. Cheney spoke MUCH MUCH better than Bush though.(although there wasn't much elsewhere to go but up ).

Agreed. I called it a draw. I kept wanting the moderater to slap them both upside the head and say "listen to me!" like an old, crabby school teacher.



Cheney could sit there like a rock and only say 10 words and still debate better than W though.

Downtown was all jacked up traffic-wise still from this. They have some streets closed. Ugh. Hope it's not like this on the way home.

It was painful to watch. I had fairly high expectations for John Edwards and boy was I let down. Like someone else said, neither one of them answered any of the questions, and both just repeated themselves over and over. It completely sucked. But as a Kerry-Edwards supporter, I like to think that the people I'm voting for are above childish, irrelevant finger pointing. I had to get up and leave when Edwards started saying "he (Cheney) voted to move jobs overseas, he voted against meals on wheels," etc., when he had been asked about Israel or whatever it was. It was embarrassing. Downright Bush-esque.



But I haven't changed my mind. Bush will get pummelled at the remaining two debates.

The results of this poll will just reflect the party lines of those voting and from experience we already know that most of the people on these boards support the dumocrats... so it's pretty easy to figure out what the results of the poll will be. Most vegetarians support the dumocrat party, unfortunately...

I think Edwards won but not by much. Cheney is a much better debater than Bush. Last time was the first time I heard him talk and he did well. They both had some good dirt on each other. It was fun to watch because they weren't even trying to be polite, unlike Kerry and Bush.

Haha.... "dumocrats"..... what grade are you in, RightWingFanatic?

RWF, I think people on this board are pretty nice to you even if they don't agree with your politics. If I'm wrong about that, I apologize. I don't know what went on before I joined up. But, in all the threads I've read, people have not insulted you even though you are obviously in the minority. Why, then, would you resort to silly puns like dumocrat? I think it is a bit rude...

rij73..... RWF has to lump people into one of two groups; Democrats or Republicans. She can't handle anything else; to her it is one or the other (thus the beauty, in her eyes, of the two-party system; it's nice and black and white). Since she is on the Republican side, all those on the Democrat side must be wrong and up for ridicule.

She's a repucklican.

hahahaha...dumecrats. RedWings must be a repucklican!

I love John Edwards too much to be objective, so I can't say. I think they both did well.

I thought the debate was great. My bf and I watched the entire thing while eating far too much of my mom's wonderful lasagna and garlic bread...(then we washed the dishes )

Wow Edwards looks young. Damn.

MOD POST



Let's stay on track here, please...

Agreed. i was hoping for more from Edwards. Cheney said lie after lie and I wanted Edwards to pummel him, but he often stuck to his script. (frustruating!!)



Kerry will destroy bush in the next two debates.



I was laughing so hard at the factcheck.com thing. :-) I heard it on airamerica this morning.

Yeah, I wasn't overly impressed with either one. Edwards came off as scripted and phony to me, and I cringed when he kept breaking the rules and saying Kerry's name and then laughing goofily after he did it. And Cheney came off as he usually does to me--a crabby, bored old man making excuses for his and Bush's bad decisions. It was interesting to me that Cheney had nothing to say when Edwards brought up Cheney's daughter and gay marriage. Pretty lame. None of this changed my mind about anything. I can't stand Bush's record and policies, so I'll vote against him even though I'm somewhat underwhelmed by the Kerry/Edwards ticket.

This "dumocrat" has now put you on his ignore list. Bye, bye!

I did the same Gothic.



And Dick kinda screwed up the web address. It's www.factcheck.org (not .com).

dumocrats.. hahahah so funny.

Wow. Can you believe so many people were checking this site?



From cnn.com

"The company decided to redirect traffic to the Soros site after it became inundated with hits -- about 100 a second after the debate, John Berryhill, a Philadelphia lawyer for FactCheck.com, said Wednesday.



"This was to relieve stress on the service and to express a political point of view," said Berryhill, who spoke with the site's administrators shortly after the debate ended."

Did this statement seem like a low/untrue blow to anyone else?



From the transcript




I'll be the first to admit, I think the number of Iraqis, most specifically civilian Iraquis, who have lost their lives in/during this war is often forgotten. But to for Cheney to imply that Edwards thinks Iraqi deaths don't count? That is low, and he knows it is bull-****. Notice that Cheney had no numbers on the Iraqui casuality count. Probably because he isn't paying attention.



To my understanding, the Kerry 90% statistic is talking about people who were in the coaltion to begin with/or soon after. Yes, we are partnering with Iraq now, but they obviously weren't part of the coaltion when we were waging war against them! It's just so low and unnecessary.



Let's not forget all the innocent Iraqis that have died in this war. But let's also not just bring this up in a low blow during a political debate.