A few thoughts on the debate quick. Visually, I thought Fox’s dual screen was a little odd, since this presents a “composition” and “balance” problem, inviting juxtaposition. Sen Kerry is taller that W by about 4 or 5 inches. So, in the side by side W had to be raised a little so that his lectern was a few inches higher than Kerry’s.
The farce was uninteresting substantively, in my mind, although I guess one could argue that each segment could be taken as a lesson on “delivery.” Kerry, however, came off visually as poised, controlled, and calm and reflective. W on the other hand came off visually as angry, frazzled, fumblesome, staring, and inept in his obvious repetition of arbitrary loaded phrases.
“. . . group of folks . . .” Wow.
6 Comments
I think that, as we’ve learned in many art and literature studies, two people can look at the same image, “read” the same text, and yet interpret them in completely conflicting ways.
Kerry never lost his cool. He answered Bush’s attacks with his own thoughtful commentary on the failures of the Bush Administration.
Kerry came off like the wise father and Bush was the fumbling inexperienced son…
Brilliant that Kerry used Bush’s father’s words against him…that even the elder Bush realized the quagmire Iraq would become….
Bush kept repeating himself..falling back on simple bumper sticker phrases..like “Wrong war at the wrong time and the wrong place”..He also kept asserting that Kerry would not support or does not support the troops and so on… Bush was really did not have any well thought out answers..
Even if you are a diehard conservative..you have to acknowledge that Reagan did a better job lo’ those many years ago…Bush comes off as a novice…
Kerry was masterful. My advice is to stay on target..Let Bush hang himself with his “Uh ums” and other fumblings… I thought this debate was going to be absurd, but now I have hope for Kerry. :)
Most Graciously,
Maureen
*A Mayde in her own little woode…
In your comments about W you forgot to mention how he often would childishly start his rebuttal before Kerry was even done speaking not even waiting for permission from the mediator. This is proof that he wasn’t even listening to Kerry because he was too busy scrambling in his own head for something to say.
Other times, he never even really answered the question posed to him, but turned it into a “let me pat myself on the back” speech. When faced with the question (which I can’t quote exactly) If John Kerry wins this election do you believe he will be effective at preventing another terrorist attack in on the U.S.?…pat, I’m gonna win this election…pat, Look at everything I’ve done…pat, I’m so great and you know it…pat, pat, pat.
My husband Joe and I had some great belly laughs when W blinked so many times at Jim Lehr we thought we saw his neurons busting before our very eyes.
Both candidates took notes, although W looked more like he was doodling. I wonder if it was an unflattering caricature of Kerry to help boost his ego.
Can you guess what side I’m on?
From the comments here, K, I can read exactly where people stand.
Thanks everyone.
Katharine, indeed Bush came off as arrogant when he said he would win the election..Hmm, but then he did win it the last time without a majority of the popular vote, so maybe he knows something we don’t….
Jon Stewart’s take on the note taking was a clip of a notepad and “Kerry” writing “I’m so kicking his ass”. I laughed out loud at that one.
The 3rd debate should be interesting.