Gore in the Debate

P

PKAY

New member
Since Legal and Political is down, I just thought it would be interesting to get some impressions of the Bush/Gore debate while we're waiting.

Gore came across to me as an overblown, pompous, gloating, bombastic, political windbag with an ego as big as a house and literally dripping with hubris. In an orchestrated panoply of cynical sighs and eye rolling reactions to Bush's remarks, Gore was nasty and intemperate. Sort of a modern day "Foghorn Leghorn" of Warner Bros. cartoon fame.

On the other hand, I found Bush to be quite "down home," perhaps to a fault; but gentlemanly nevertheless. He is a likable individual, an amiable former fighter pilot of executive timbre and genuine compassion. To me he was believable, credible.

If only for the Supreme Court appointments he makes I will cast my vote for him.

Incidentally, how did the lady who had to pick up cans to help pay for her prescriptions afford to own a Winnebago let alone fill it with gas and drive to MA?

------------------
Safe shooting - PKAY
 
Bush did well. Gore knows numbers and knows how to attack with them even if he is twisting them. Saying 95% of seniors get nothing under Bush is including the 66% that ALREADY have it. But Bush looked liked he belonged and Gore was Gore - so for me, a win for Bush - slightly.

Anyway, below is where my Political Science hackels get raised. Under Gore's reasoning the Government will define your rights as time goes by, not the Constitution.
The two quotes below are taken directly from the first of three presidential debates.....
Bush:
"And that's going to be a big difference between my opponent and me. I believe that -- I believe that the judges ought not to take the place of the legislative branch of government, that they're appointed for life and that they ought to look at the Constitution as sacred. They shouldn't misuse their bench. I don't believe in liberal, activist judges. I believe in -- I believe in strict constructionists. And those are the kind of judges I will appoint."

Gore:
"In my view, the Constitution ought to be interpreted as a document that grows with our country and our history."

From www.keepandbeararms.com
 
Notice Gore called the Constitution a "living document". That's leftist speak for a document that can be altered and mutated at will.

I liked how George W. referred to the basic differences in their ideology. One wanted the Federal Government to make all decisions for you.
One thought that you should manage your own affairs.

I noticed also that Gore down-played our need to rebuild our military while hinting at future Kosovos and Somolias. Typical Democrat logic.

If it were not for Bush's stumbling speech pattern, there would have been a clear victory on his part.

I was most impressed that Bush advocated the unlocking of our Alaskan oil fields.
Gore simply wanted to subsidize electric cars.

I actually feel a little better voting for Bush now.

A little better.

[This message has been edited by Shin-Tao (edited October 04, 2000).]
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PKAY:
...how did the lady who had to pick up cans to help pay for her prescriptions afford to own a Winnebago let alone fill it with gas and drive to MA?
[/quote]

She had a poodle too! :p

What puzzles me, is that someone purportedly "scored" the debate, algore-128, GWB-121. I'd say the numbers must reflect the bias of the scorekeeper. In other words, more media BS.
 
Several outcomes, IMO: (1) As a pure debater, Gore narrowly won on Wed night; that's got to be a disappointment for his camp, though, since he is supposed to be Mr. Super Debater, up against a guy who doesn't claim to be very good at this. (2) As time goes along, though, and people become aware of Gore's misstatements and lies, and as the media continue to focus on his sighing and generally obnoxious behavior, Gore could be the delayed loser; (3) In terms of who gained the most votes, Bush did. So, who is the more better off for having taken part in the debate? Bush, no question. But GW will need to be better in the next one, because Al will not make the same mistakes twice.
 
Perhaps a silly question, but I will ask it anyhow. Does anyone think it likely that there will be a question asked of the candidates re GUN CONTROL, and or their positions thereon, or perish the thought, something about CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS or GOVERNMENT/BUREAUCRATIC ABUSE OF POWER/AUTHORITY.

Getting back to reality, or at least somewhat closer to it, has anyone read Unintended Consequences, and would they care to offer their thoughts thereupon.
 
I agree on all points. I also agree that if Bush had not had the stumbling speech patter, he would have done much, much better. But I feel chances are Bush will do better and Gore has shot his wad.

Bush can further push the character issue. Gore may be his own man and he is. In fact he was the only one at the Budhist Temple. It wasn't Clinton. It was also Gore claiming no controling legal authority, not Clinton. He's is own man alright.

Bush can also sharpen his attack on Gore's spending. Either the American people get their money back, or Gore and big government spends it.

Do the two above things, perform well in the debates, and name Colin Powell to ticket, and Bush wins. If the country really is anti-Big government, he can REALLY hammer Gore as the tax-and-spend Democrat that he really is. At the end of the debate, Gore was with Jesse Jackson and Ted Kennedy - more pictures like that are needed ! ;-)

I'm also VERY disappointed Gun Control didn't come up. Gore is hiding big time. I want the gun owners in Penn, MI, Ohio, IN, Ill, KY, W. VA, and Missori to hear about photo IDs, finger prints, and having to renew licenses.

madison46
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Byron:
Several outcomes, IMO: (1) As a pure debater, Gore narrowly won on Wed night; that's got to be a disappointment for his camp, though, since he is supposed to be Mr. Super Debater, up against a guy who doesn't claim to be very good at this. (2) As time goes along, though, and people become aware of Gore's misstatements and lies, and as the media continue to focus on his sighing and generally obnoxious behavior, Gore could be the delayed loser; (3) In terms of who gained the most votes, Bush did. So, who is the more better off for having taken part in the debate? Bush, no question. But GW will need to be better in the next one, because Al will not make the same mistakes twice.[/quote]
 
If I had any doubts about voting for Bush, the debate erasd them. Specifically Gore's comments that the Constitution should be a "living document". It was designed to be changed by Amendment, not by judicial activism. I think Bush will score lots on that point. It highlighted a huge philosophical difference between the candidates.

I was kinda pleased that 2nd amendement was not raised in the debate. I didn't want to hear Gore offering PC "logic" on the evils, of guns, etc.
 
Two things:

Bush needs to PREPARE. He seemed very unprepared next to the Human Computer. Not just with the facts, but he should have known a "richest 1% of Americans" line was coming. If he had countered with a 30 sec. "Let me tell you how the math can make it LOOK that way." it would've sucked the wind right outta those sails. Every time Gore says "1%", Bush says "It's the Math Stupid." Point Bush

Second; If you forgot the word don't repeat it, part of the reason Bush looked like he was stubling is that he would say a sentance, forget a qualifying pro-noun, back up mid sentance and say it, then continue on with the sentance.
Ment to say: "I'll take Federal money and send it back.
Came out: " I'll take money, <<studder>> Federal Money, send it back to you."
Shoulda said: "I'll take money and send it back to you." Point Bush

This stuff should have been delt with by his debate coaches, I'll expect more come next time around.

On the other hand he kicked ass! Did a lot better than I thought he would, and I saw two votes come over to the Good Guys side.

Point Three: (ok I lied). Read "Earth in the Balance" Find two or three things that are in there, and BEAT GORE TO DEATH WITH THEM!!!
Address Gore's desire to get rid of internal combustion engines. Point Match Bush





------------------
"Take your weapon with reluctance. Draw it with dread. Grieve for those who fall to your bullets. But make every shot count."-Robert Shea
 
From where I sat Gore came across as harsh and argumentative. My wife thought he looked like Ronald Reagan doll with his hair, makeup, and gestures. Gore spent more time attacking Bush's plans and less time talking about his own, a clear sign his campaign is devoid of any real ideas. When he did talk about his programs he just spewed forth "fuzzy numbers" promising everything to everyone in typical Democrat fashion.

Bush seemed Presidential, likable, and real. Not a polished debater like the long time pro Gore, but he held his own, defended his turf, and scored more than a few points. If the election was held today I'd say 80% of the undecided voters that watched would vote for Bush.

One thing I thought was very telling about the two men is that in his closing statement Bush politely thanked Gore for the debate and Leher for moderating. Gore who had the last word said nothing to Bush (or Leher) in way of thanks. How rude! A very small thing that speaks volumes about the man's heart. -- Kernel

[This message has been edited by Kernel (edited October 04, 2000).]
 
Gore was so slimey he Oozed...
I can't believe people can't see that - Must be Democrats are rather stupid - or they only see what they want to see. Gore is evil and must be defeated.

My vote:
Bush
 
I was listening to talk radio on the way to work today and there was mention of that girl in Florida that had to stand in school.

Talk about lying thru his teeth! School has been in session for over a month, you would think the Gore camp would have made sure of this instead of running with it. It was the first day of school and in the picture Gore was talking about the girl was INDEED having to stand. HOWEVER, the reason why there was not enough room for a desk is because the school had yet to get all the new equipment properly setup and taken out of that room that they were using to hold that equipment. Second day of school the equipment was moved out and she had a place to sit. Infact the radio station I was listening too had the principle at this school telling all this!

Also did anyone notice that Gore had his finger pounding the podeum, "I will do this""Everything in my power" BLAH BLAH BLAH. Gore the bleeding heart!

------------------
Try to take away my gun...and you will see my 2nd Amendment Right in ACTION!!! -Me

FOR THE CHILDREN!!!!
 
The lady that picked up cans 7 days a week was asked to fly to MA to be with Gore at the debate. She would not fly. I think the RV was furnished because of this. I want to know the details about how an elderly lady that seems to be so alert and in good shape needs to pick up cans. She is drawing SS and is a retired auto worker. I have been told be several friends that she has a wealthy son who has offered to help but she will not take his finacial help. I don't know where they learned of this so I don't know if this is true.
 
I also heard that the poor "can lady" has a wealthy son. It was dug up by her local news paper.

Isn't it noble that see refuses help from her millionaire son to buy her drugs but she has no problem expecting you and me to buy them for her!
 
The can lady picks up cans as a hobby, and to help keep the environment recycling. It sort of reminds me of the movie where Steve Martin plays a tent-scam preacher (What was the name of that movie?). Maybe she was there for a different reason. She does not need the money, and if she did, her rich son is happy to help her as needed.
 
Use the force Bush. Use the force.

Bush must slay the two headed monster Al Klinton. Al Klinton ignored a lot of the moderator's questions and rambled on and on. He promised the world everything. The part that really irked me was how he tried to claim credit for the flood aid in TX. He also had the nerve to say "It'll be my highest priority." when it came to the campaign finance bill. WTF? He has like 99999999 "highest priorities" now.

The man is a liar. He's been caught numerous times. Yet the press still adores him. I guess like people and groups get along very well.
 
Having watched the debates and also being a political scientist, here are some points.

I am Biased, there is nothing short of putting a gun to the back of my head that would make me vote for Gore.

I agree with what has been said here, and think that while Gore may have slightly won this battle he has hurt himself in the war. if you were to score the debate on a technical level then Gore wins. However the sheeple do not understand this and this is where I think Gore lost. Think about it, Gores convention speech was supposed to erase the notion of him as a condescending, rude, overbearing, number crunching, generally irratating human being. He succeeded then, but this debate may have undermined his new image. I think the American people are relunctant to have to look at this guy for 4 maybe 8 years. He is kind of like the boring accountant, who thinks he knows it all. You may not mind if he is behind the scenes, but if you have to deal with him everyday it's a diffirent story.

I also wish Bush would take one of these openings. Get Michael Deaver, or one of Reagan's people to help out. Then again, I think that was Reagan's gift alone. Reagan would have buried Gore at least 10 times last night. Bush must attack the 1% comment by Gore, and when he drops fake numbers he has to drill him to the floor. I think the American people are waiting for it.

As to Gore looking like Reagan, it was uncanny. Same makeup, same posture, as well as moves.

The good news is that all the media have been talking about are the lies that Gore told. If there had been a lot of fireworks, they would not be talking about it.
 
The Gore Line
10/4/00

Gore Serves Up Fresh Whoppers in First Debate

From the first words he uttered in last night's debate, Al Gore's tendency
to embellish, exaggerate, and fabricate was on full display. The man who
told seniors a phony story about his dog served up a new set of whoppers -
recalling Bill Bradley's question to Gore in their primary debates: "Why
should we believe you would tell the truth as president, if you don't tell
the truth as a candidate?"

The Flaming Whopper: When Governor Bush complimented the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) for its handling of the fires that swept through
Parker County, Texas in June 1998, Gore eagerly responded: "I accompanied
[FEMA Director] James Lee Witt down to Texas when those fires broke out."
But Gore never traveled to Texas with James Lee Witt. Gore did travel to
Texas in late June, after the fires broke out - but he was there for a Texas
Democratic Party event, not to inspect fire damage. (ABC News website)

The Standing Whopper: Al Gore told a moving - but inaccurate - story about a
schoolgirl whose classroom was so crowded she couldn't sit down. This
morning, the school's principal told Florida's WFLA Radio Gore's story was
"misleading" and said the room had been crowded because it was being
refurbished and was packed with $100,000 worth of yet-to-be-unpacked new
equipment. Asked if Gore had engaged in "a little twisting of the truth,"
the principal said: "Yes, I think so."

The Supersize Whopper: "I have actually not questioned Governor Bush's
experience," Gore asserted in his opening remarks. But The New York Times
and other publications have quoted Gore directly attacking the Governor's
experience. "You have to wonder whether [Bush] has the experience to be
president. I mean, you really have to wonder. ... You have to wonder: Does
Governor Bush have the experience to be president? ... Again you have to
wonder: Does George Bush have the experience to be president?"(The New York
Times, 3/12/00)

If Al Gore told this many untruths in 90 minutes, how many more will he tell
in the next 34 days?


There He Gores Again. . .

?Gore falsely said the size of government would go down if he were elected;
falsely boasted he favors local control of education and accountability
through mandatory measurements, when his plan includes neither; and falsely
claimed a couple with an income of $25,000 would receive no benefit under
Governor Bush's program when it provides catastrophic coverage for every
senior of every income level. Is Al Gore honest enough to be president?

Reality Check

? Gore last night claimed that "ninety-five percent of seniors would
get no help whatsoever under [Governor Bush's prescription drug] plan for
the first four or five years." But the Bush plan would offer an "immediate
helping hand" in 2001 to provide prescription drugs to lower income seniors
until Medicare modernization is implemented - while the Gore plan starts
slowly in 2002 and another six years to fully implement.

? "Gore erroneously left senior citizens thinking that they would get
no prescription drug benefits for four to five years if Bush becomes
president. That's not so." (The Boston Globe, 10/04/00)

"[R]ight out of the box, the vice president began hedging the truth." -
Boston Globe, 10/04/00


------------------

NRA Joe's Second Amendment Discussion Forum

http://Second.Amendment.Homepage.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top