Oct 6th, 2004, 10:24 AM
I agree with Preech that Edwards didn't answer questions, but while I fund it annoying, I think it was deliberate. He didn't obfyuscate, he just had an agenda which was to lay out the genral Democratic picture, make the differences with the Republicans as clear as possible, and if the question weren't taking him in the right direction, ignore the questions. Personally I disliked that. I didn't think he was hiding anything, I just think a lot more could have been gained from more actual debate.
Chenney didn't avoid the questions as much, but he did refuse rebuttal on more than one occasion. I guess this was supposed to look like he'd already scored the point, but again, it deprives the voters of a chance to profit from actul debate. Chenney also played a debaters trick I hate, not answering questions by saying, you're wrong, the info is out there, look it up. He also gave the wrong URL for his proof, but that's just funny, especially as George Souros immediately boght the incorrect URL chenney gave out. By the way, the correct URL doesn't back him up on the speciffic charges Edwards made. It's like saying "I don't have to answer that question, anyone can read the front page of todays paper." It seems to score a point until you go to the paper and the article doesn't answer the question. Moreover, you're supposed to refute your opponents arguments, not just say they've been refuted elsewhere. Chenny's knows that, just as he knows he was pulling a cheap trick.
I thought Chenney scored in that he didn't appear as mean as he sometimes does. I think Edwards scored in that a man with a very short resume stood up effectively to a lifelong professional pol. It looked pretty even to me, which is a big loss for W who needed the older, seasoned Cheney to crush Edwards.
Since Chenney is as much the president as W. if not more, I think Republicans lost a big chance, particularly as this debate will now fade into obscurity over the course of the next two presidential debates.
|
Hybrid Mode
