The first of three debates for the 2004 presidential election ignited, and flamed out last Thursday night, and the most common question was “who won?”
Kerry won, right?
The Massachusetts senator spoke the most daggers this side of Shakespeare’s Hamlet, and received 45% of the vote in an ABC News poll (compared to Bush, who garnered just 36% in the poll following).
What about a Bush victory?
The incumbent president acted as calm as he could in the face of his opponent’s allegations, and let his point sine through. One thing is without debate however. There was no shortage of media aftermath, complete with constant analysis and arguments over which candidate was the stronger of the two, or which candidate “won.”
ABC’s George Stephanopoulos reported that Kerry was the one who gave “substantively calm confident responses.”
Mark Halperin, the Political Director at ABC News, commented that Bush was the one who “looked angry.”
Stephanopoulos and correspondent Terry Moran both agreed that the Bush campaign machine came in cool and confident, but did not deliver the “knockout blow” they were looking for. Kerry is gaining ground on the president, which was the consensus at some outlets, even CBS. Imagine that.
Democratic senator Joseph Biden, speaking with anchorman Dan Rather, claimed that Kerry revealed his important points and outlooks involving homeland security and foreign policy. Republican senator John McCain was also welcomed by Rather, said that Bush has dealt with “grave responsibilities”, and the story he told involving the widow of a fallen soldier was a touching look into the president’s psyche.
Not all too different from the president’s motto of “compassionate conservatism,” during the 2000 election. Many media outlets came to the conclusion that the debate was actually a draw.
No comments:
Post a Comment