If you think Bush’s vision of a broader war, employing a more vigorous offensive, with a particularly American vision is the right way to go, you’ll support Bush. If you think that the war should be more narrowly focused on Al Qaeda, that we should rely more on defensive measures than offensive ones, and that we should act within a global consensus, you’ll support Kerry

Yes, Bush hit his points on things I already understood about him. Yet, every opening Kerry gave went unexploited.

Bush caught the ‘Global test’ comment and mentioned it. But, to win a debate, you have to HAMMER your opponents gaffes. One mention and that was it.

Bush noted that Kerry has spurned our allies in Iraq. WHY was that an important point? Bush had to say that, on day one of a Kerry presidency, America would, essentially, stand alone. Every ally who stands with us would be looking for the way out because KERRY is looking for the way out, not for a victory and a free Iraq. The first 3 dozen phone calls of a Kerry presidency would be to former allies he had grossly miscast as negligible, coerced, bought, etc.

And it was painful for me to watch Bush speak. He was more comfortable talking to Oreilly. Tonite he seemed to run out of things to say, often. And his long hesitations were particularly awkward.

He didn’t answer Kerry’s stab on missing Osama in Afghanistan well. Frankly, I don’t think he can. At that time, I, too, felt a great letdown when Osama got away.

He let Kerry get away with calling for multilateralism in Iraq and unilateralism in N. Korea. He had a great chance to show Kerry’s opportunistic hypocrisy and muffed it. Where’s the killer instinct?

Finally, Bush convinced me on one thing. At the very end, as he summed up, he called upon God’s blessing for the country. For some reason it struck me that I hadn’t heard Kerry mention God. So, I checked the transcripts and saw that Kerry HAD said God Bless America. My interpretation? George really meant it and that came through. Kerry was marking the final box on his debate checklist. And that seemed pretty profound to me because, you see, while I respect folks in the religious mold, I’m not one of them. Just another case of George meaning what he says, I think.

I know that we all wish Bush were the kind of speaker that Reagan was, but that’s not going to happen; he’s certainly gotten better over time.

There’s a part of me that almost suspects him of turning in a “C+” or “B-” performance on purpose, because of his history of getting people to underestimate him. After all, if Kerry gets cocky, he’ll make a lot of mistakes. (As it is, he gave Karl Rove plenty of fodder. Dismantle a weapons program? At a time like this? Are you crazy, Senator?)

But why cant politicans just shut up. Both ruined good points/counterpoints by filling up the remaining alloted time with inane babble.

But average Americans don’t vote from watching the debates. They vote from the gut and what reaction thirty second sound bites gives them.

Expect a Kerry bounce so the election isn’t boring, followed by Bush soundbites clinching the deal outside of the October suprise scenario.

Well, he had something to say about each issue - whether his solution made any sense outside of a fairy tale or Hollyweird movie is definitely not supported by any known history.