latest debate notes....right this way...
first of all, dean did it again. He said, quote: "in some ways, the terrorists have already won."
Ouch!!! SO not presidential!!! lf he were still the frontrunner that would certainly have been the headline. at this point, i wonder whether anyone will even make a fuss about it.
overall, everyone continued to give Kerry an easy time. I mean, i support the guy, but jeez, he's just walking away with this thing and no one's trying to stop him! perhaps they're betting that with repeated exposure Kerry will appear so pompous, phony, and stiff that people won't want to vote for him. He was a little bit of all those things, but not enough to drive anyone into Dean's arms.
Clark was mixed -- had a few strong lines and a few duds. Certainly much better than in New Hampshire.
Edwards keeps plugging away with the same message, over and over. He's clearly the smartest on his feet -- like Clinton, he's thinking on multiple levels at once (so's Dean), but Edwards has even more discipline about what he actually says.
Sharpton was great. Kucinich was Kucinichy (no me gusta but if you like him you would have liked him in the debate).
Leiberman is insanely upbeat. He seems like he's having the time of his life. It's as if he's decided that running and losing is much, much better than not running, so he's going to stick around and keep talking about how great he is, whether voters care or not.
All in all this debate was great for Kerry. Edwards is too committed to not going negative, and Dean is too concerned about looking angry, to beat up on him; Clark doesn't have the chops to do it; and every time one of the others talks it just helps Kerry run out the clock.
Off topic -- i'm still staggered by the reports that Dean spent TEN MILLION DOLLARS in Iowa to place 3rd with 18 percent (winning, what, about 20,000 votes? that would be about $500 each). Why would anyone give him _another_ ten million dollars? Meanwhile, if you'd given Kerry any money, you'd have to feel pretty great about giving him more.
if you want to give my pac, MEPAC, money, im sure that would make you feel really great, not this pathetic "pretty great" that the democrats offer. in fact, for a special low rate of $10 i will personally call you each and every day and tell you how great you are.
Did you happen to catch the entry of "Giordano's Law" into the blogosphere at The Blogging of The President weblog ? I quote:
The Internet is growing up...
Techno-enthusiasm is a dead meme.
It doesn't matter who gets here first.
What matters, instead, is who connects...
Dean spent twice as much money in New Hampshire as Kerry.
|
- big jimmy 1-30-2004 4:27 am
first of all, dean did it again. He said, quote: "in some ways, the terrorists have already won." Ouch!!! SO not presidential!!! lf he were still the frontrunner that would certainly have been the headline. at this point, i wonder whether anyone will even make a fuss about it.
overall, everyone continued to give Kerry an easy time. I mean, i support the guy, but jeez, he's just walking away with this thing and no one's trying to stop him! perhaps they're betting that with repeated exposure Kerry will appear so pompous, phony, and stiff that people won't want to vote for him. He was a little bit of all those things, but not enough to drive anyone into Dean's arms.
Clark was mixed -- had a few strong lines and a few duds. Certainly much better than in New Hampshire.
Edwards keeps plugging away with the same message, over and over. He's clearly the smartest on his feet -- like Clinton, he's thinking on multiple levels at once (so's Dean), but Edwards has even more discipline about what he actually says.
Sharpton was great. Kucinich was Kucinichy (no me gusta but if you like him you would have liked him in the debate).
Leiberman is insanely upbeat. He seems like he's having the time of his life. It's as if he's decided that running and losing is much, much better than not running, so he's going to stick around and keep talking about how great he is, whether voters care or not.
All in all this debate was great for Kerry. Edwards is too committed to not going negative, and Dean is too concerned about looking angry, to beat up on him; Clark doesn't have the chops to do it; and every time one of the others talks it just helps Kerry run out the clock.
Off topic -- i'm still staggered by the reports that Dean spent TEN MILLION DOLLARS in Iowa to place 3rd with 18 percent (winning, what, about 20,000 votes? that would be about $500 each). Why would anyone give him _another_ ten million dollars? Meanwhile, if you'd given Kerry any money, you'd have to feel pretty great about giving him more.
- big jimmy 1-30-2004 4:38 am [add a comment]
if you want to give my pac, MEPAC, money, im sure that would make you feel really great, not this pathetic "pretty great" that the democrats offer. in fact, for a special low rate of $10 i will personally call you each and every day and tell you how great you are.
- dave 1-30-2004 7:20 am [add a comment]
i like it!
if you were a real politician, and i gave you $10, you'd call each and every day to ask for $10 more. ; )
- big jimmy 1-30-2004 8:52 am [add a comment]
Did you happen to catch the entry of "Giordano's Law" into the blogosphere at The Blogging of The President weblog ? I quote:
The Internet is growing up...
Techno-enthusiasm is a dead meme.
It doesn't matter who gets here first.
What matters, instead, is who connects...
Dean spent twice as much money in New Hampshire as Kerry.
- Buckwheat Spengler (guest) 1-31-2004 6:41 pm [add a comment]