**OFFICIAL** Edwards/Cheney Debate Thread

[Carazariah]

"I couldn't figure out why that happened initially. And then I looked and figured out that what was happening was Howard Dean was making major progress in the Democratic primaries, running away with the primaries based on an anti-war record. So they, in effect, decided they would cast an anti-war vote and they voted against the troops.

Now if they couldn't stand up to the pressures that Howard Dean represented, how can we expect them to stand up to Al Qaida?"

Dick Cheney 10/5/2004 VP Debate

I think that about sums up the Foreign policy Debate

 

[JHoNNy1OoO]

Originally posted by: Carazariah
"I couldn't figure out why that happened initially. And then I looked and figured out that what was happening was Howard Dean was making major progress in the Democratic primaries, running away with the primaries based on an anti-war record. So they, in effect, decided they would cast an anti-war vote and they voted against the troops.

Now if they couldn't stand up to the pressures that Howard Dean represented, how can we expect them to stand up to Al Qaida?"

Dick Cheney 10/5/2004 VP Debate

I think that about sums up the Foreign policy Debate

LMAO! Because you say so? They made the $87 billion vote not be anti-war but to try and be fiscally responsible. Which is something this administration has not been. Of course ignore the fact that their were 2 $87 billion votes, one being fiscally responsible and the other just being a free loan. They happen to disagree with the free loan and agree with the fiscally responsible one. The horror! They must want our troops dead and without body armor even though the bill had about .01% to do with body armor. :roll:

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: BBond
One big difference, no one is trying to pass laws against obese people having the same rights as everyone else.

For now....remember Obesity has been officially classified the second largest leading cause of preventable death and illness in the US, it is only a matter of time before legislation is passed to remedy this problem...

 

[jackschmittusa]

Regrettably, I would have to call this one for Cheney. I really don't think the accuracy of the facts presented carries much weight with the majority of viewers, because, unlike most of us here, they will not bother to check on them. Sad, but true.

In the Bush/Kerry debate, much was made of the fact that Kerry looked more statesman-like, more presidential, and I certainly agree. In this debate, not only did Edwards seem over exuberant, but, ironically, the somber, sour look of Cheney (which is often viewed negatively) seemed to magnify it. The contrast was significant.

Mentioning Kerry's name when he was not supposed to once was bad, but twice made it look like his mouth was working faster than his brain. It gave the appearance of canned/rehearsed answers rather than spontaneous thought.

Cheney was less than perfect as well, but I think his gaffs appeared small, and Edwards seemed glaring.

Just my opinion as an old debater.

 

[cKGunslinger]

I'd call the debate a close tie, with Cheney a bit ahead (but probably because I relate more to him than Edwards, not for any "real" reason.)

That said, I believe I'd vote for a *Cheney/Edwards 2004* ticket. They were both very impressive and could probably work well together, complementing each other's shortcomings. Each one is superior to his running-mate in almost every way.

 

[xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx]

Originally posted by: Carazariah
"I couldn't figure out why that happened initially. And then I looked and figured out that what was happening was Howard Dean was making major progress in the Democratic primaries, running away with the primaries based on an anti-war record. So they, in effect, decided they would cast an anti-war vote and they voted against the troops.

Now if they couldn't stand up to the pressures that Howard Dean represented, how can we expect them to stand up to Al Qaida?"

Dick Cheney 10/5/2004 VP Debate

I think that about sums up the Foreign policy Debate

:thumbsup:

 

[mdrollas]

Originally posted by: daveshel

Originally posted by: Sudheer Anne
Worse, after watching this debate people may ask themselves why Cheney isn't commander-in-chief instead of Bush.

I was thinking about this while watching. I think it is at least partially due to his mean look. Smiling prick at the top of the ticket works better than mean prick.

LOL don't you guys know, he is the real president LOL

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: Infohawk
Yeah that was sooo low. I mean all businesses and people use whatever classifications they can to get the best deals. And we know Sleez-ey Chen-ey supports these types of "loopholes." And we're supposed to believe that Edwards is bad because he uses the available tax infrastructure to his advantage? Proposterous.

actually yes, here he and his running mate complain that people like them don't pay enough and yet they go out of their way to save themselves hundreds of thousands of dollars....seems hypocritical, why bother setting up the shelter and instead just pay your fair share...

What a biased opinion, LMAO. Don't do as we do, pay more then you leagally owe so we can sit back and laugh at you. If this is the best defense you "tightie righties" can come up with your desperation to smear the opposition shows how low you will stoop.

If you can't come up with a better defense then that maybe you should just move on to another topic.

I'm more concerned with our Congress giving tax breaks to companies that outsource or move their headquarters overseas:

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...0551&enterthread=y

 

[ockky]

Originally posted by: Gnurb
Cheney ate Edwards alive. And I'm as liberal as they come.

I'm the same as you Gnurb, and I agree 100%. I've never liked Cheney in all the years he's been VP, but after last night, I have to give him major props; and if he were running instead of bush, i just might have voted for him; that being said, i still want bush out of office

I just hope that at some point environmental issues are going to be raised.

 

[wiin]

Posted by Conjur:

I'm more concerned with our Congress giving tax breaks to companies that outsource or move their headquarters overseas:

Is this something new conjur? Kerry's campaign/suppporters keep saying that the Bush administration is doing this. Do you have proof that this is what the Bush Administration
is doing? This situation was not present before Bush became president? Is the president runnning these companies with subsidiaries in countries other than the USA? And what do you say about companies like Hyundai, Toyota and Honda? They have manufacturing plants here in the great USA.

 

[brigden]

Many of you missed the point of the poll results: More undecided voters preferred Edwards. That's a big deal to both parties.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: brigden
Many of you missed the point of the poll results: More undecided voters preferred Edwards. That's a big deal to both parties.

:thumbsup:

That's what I heard too. I guess they caught one of those many Cheney lies.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx

Originally posted by: Carazariah
"I couldn't figure out why that happened initially. And then I looked and figured out that what was happening was Howard Dean was making major progress in the Democratic primaries, running away with the primaries based on an anti-war record. So they, in effect, decided they would cast an anti-war vote and they voted against the troops.

Now if they couldn't stand up to the pressures that Howard Dean represented, how can we expect them to stand up to Al Qaida?"

Dick Cheney 10/5/2004 VP Debate

I think that about sums up the Foreign policy Debate

:thumbsup:

So very true.

CsG

 

[CaptnKirk]

Found this to be an interesting development,
Maybe people really are taking an intrest in the alternatives to the Bush Doctrine
That's a lot of people that had the opportunity to see Cheney lie through his teeth - again.

How many will remember that after Bush & Cheney chant their Mantra to their Conservative Base.

 

[chowderhead]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx

Originally posted by: Carazariah
"I couldn't figure out why that happened initially. And then I looked and figured out that what was happening was Howard Dean was making major progress in the Democratic primaries, running away with the primaries based on an anti-war record. So they, in effect, decided they would cast an anti-war vote and they voted against the troops.

Now if they couldn't stand up to the pressures that Howard Dean represented, how can we expect them to stand up to Al Qaida?"

Dick Cheney 10/5/2004 VP Debate

I think that about sums up the Foreign policy Debate

:thumbsup:

So very true.

CsG

Why did the GWB administration play politics with the 87 billion bill by killing the bipartisan version that was fully paid for with its threats of veto? The bipartisan version was the one that Kerry and Edwards supported. This administraton chose instead to saddle this debt on me and my generation.
Why did they oppose homeland security department? They flipped only when Congress was going to pass the measure regardless.
Why did the administration oppose the creation of the 9-11 commission and had to be dragged kicking and screaming to cooperate?
Lastly. and most important to me, please read my sig and try and defend the statement GWB made in March of 2002 when asked about the threat Osama Bin Laden still posed. You can read the WH transcripts by clicking on the link.
This administration has been a disaster.

 

[manifesto]

Wow is this true? I havent been following the news these past few days due to over load at work. So undecided voters went to edwards?! This is a big plus. what source may I ask that u got this from so I can check it out myself?

 

[DoubleL]

Well I think Cheney put Edwards on defence from the start and it was over. All Edwards could do then was say well we have a plan for that and well let me go back to what the vice said. Last time I looked it was Cheney 77% to Edwards 23%

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: DoubleL
Well I think Cheney put Edwards on defence from the start and it was over. All Edwards could do then was say well we have a plan for that and well let me go back to what the vice said. Last time I looked it was Cheney 77% to Edwards 23%

Which poll was that?

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: wiin
Posted by Conjur:

I'm more concerned with our Congress giving tax breaks to companies that outsource or move their headquarters overseas:

Is this something new conjur? Kerry's campaign/suppporters keep saying that the Bush administration is doing this. Do you have proof that this is what the Bush Administration
is doing? This situation was not present before Bush became president? Is the president runnning these companies with subsidiaries in countries other than the USA? And what do you say about companies like Hyundai, Toyota and Honda? They have manufacturing plants here in the great USA.

It's a matter of being able to correct a wrong and this administration (and the current Republican-controlled Congress) is doing nothing to correct it.

 

[cumhail]

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28

Originally posted by: DoubleL
Well I think Cheney put Edwards on defence from the start and it was over. All Edwards could do then was say well we have a plan for that and well let me go back to what the vice said. Last time I looked it was Cheney 77% to Edwards 23%

Which poll was that?

I'm sure it was on Newsmax or some such completely unbiased, moderate site with info and site visitors who are all completely fair and balanced. :roll:

cumhail

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx

Originally posted by: Carazariah
"I couldn't figure out why that happened initially. And then I looked and figured out that what was happening was Howard Dean was making major progress in the Democratic primaries, running away with the primaries based on an anti-war record. So they, in effect, decided they would cast an anti-war vote and they voted against the troops.

Now if they couldn't stand up to the pressures that Howard Dean represented, how can we expect them to stand up to Al Qaida?"

Dick Cheney 10/5/2004 VP Debate

I think that about sums up the Foreign policy Debate

:thumbsup:

So very true.

CsG

So very sad is what it is.

Sad that the three of you fail to realize that Kerry voted FOR the original version of that bill. The version of the bill that demanded Iraq repay the costs of reconstruction to the tune of $20 billion. That version was going to be VETOED by President Bush. How is it anti-war of Kerry to vote FOR a bill funding equipment for our troops and reconstruction in Iraq?

 

[xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx]

Originally posted by: DoubleL
Well I think Cheney put Edwards on defence from the start and it was over. All Edwards could do then was say well we have a plan for that and well let me go back to what the vice said.

Yea, count the number of times Edwards said "speed up." Their plan is simply this:

We'll do what they are doing...just better and faster. What a joke.

 

[Pliablemoose]

Did anyone count how many time Edwards said "John Kerry"?

I was really starting to get irritated.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
Did anyone count how many time Edwards said "John Kerry"?

I was really starting to get irritated.

Can you blame people for not following idiotic rules like that? Only a chimp would think up such garbage.

I mean this is a presential campaign and you can't name the candidate. RIDICULOUS-- just like all of Rove's sick ideas.

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx

Originally posted by: DoubleL
Well I think Cheney put Edwards on defence from the start and it was over. All Edwards could do then was say well we have a plan for that and well let me go back to what the vice said.

Yea, count the number of times Edwards said "speed up." Their plan is simply this:

We'll do what they are doing...just better and faster. What a joke.

If it works for Corporate America, it'll work in politics.