I can't help but watching the debates and saying "Why bother?" all it proves is who is the better public speaker. They are just saying the same things that they have been saying on the campaign trail for months. You see them show emotion, so what, they are human beings to. I just think they are pointless, and Kerry's campaign pointing out that "No president has lost all 3 debates in history." yes up til now, all streaks must come to an end, just as the US had never lost a war until Vietnam, Nebraska had never allowed another team to score 70 points til last saturday, and until FDR no president had served more than two terms. Bush is gonna win, it will be close, not as close as 2000, but he will win, to switch presidents in the midst of a war is something that we just do not do. (Well, Nixon and Truman are exceptions, but in both cases the outcome was not in doubt when they took office.)

The debates probably SHOULDN'T matter, but they do. It provides a medium for seeing the candidates ability to think quickly on their feet and a very visible way to compare their policies and promises.

The only point I see in them is a live comparison of plans.

Originally Posted by Lupos

The only point I see in them is a live comparison of plans.

I all I have seen in the debates, for the most part, is Bush saying what he has done and what he plans to do, and Kerry saying that is not what he would have done and yet not going into detail about what he plans to do. Granted I am biases also, I was always a democrat growing up, I supported Clinton and Gore, and my state has 3 Democrats in the senate, but the biasness of the media has steared me away from the liberal left, and over to the conservative right, at least for the President, I feel that Democrats can better handle the economy while Republicans know how to handle the military.

Originally Posted by godofthunder9010

The debates probably SHOULDN'T matter, but they do. It provides a medium for seeing the candidates ability to think quickly on their feet and a very visible way to compare their policies and promises.

I agree. People will like a canidate by how he acts on TV. I found it quite interesting that a majority of the people who heard the debates on the radio said Bush won while the ones who saw it on TV said Kerry won.

Exactly the same thing happened in the Kennedy vs Nixon debate ... I believe that was the first televised debate tool. Those that heard it on the radio heavily favored Nixon. Those who saw it on TV favored Kennedy.

I personally think that Bush won, people were saying "but look at his face, he looked so discontented and angry whenever Kerry brought up something that would be a negative for Bush, Kerry on the other hand would laugh whenever Bush brought one of his many cons (Like getting three purple hearts in Vietnam, throwing them away, joining an anti-war hippie movement, and now banking on his purple hearts to carry him to the White House.) Laughing is what I do whenever I am in an argument/debate and someone brings up a point that I know is right and I am wrong. Kerry was doing a lot of laughing in the debates. And if Bush really did have a radio on him it was not being used, he ws doing a lot of ummm, well, perhaps. I think Bush won because he had experienced what happened and knew what he was talking about, where as Kerry seemed to be talking hypothetically, if I was president I would have done this, even though I supported Bush when he did what he did, the point is I am trying to deny that now.