Debate #2

I'll keep this relatively short. I think both candidates did very well, especially compared to their performances in the last debate. Both were at ease and spoke fluidly and comfortably. Each was also notably more aggressive in attacking the other. My opinions, broken down:

• Kerry pros:
  • He had good answers on a lot of the staple democratic issues, notably abortion and stem cell research. His answer on abortion was great: I can't legislate for all Americans based on my own belief. He also answered reasonably well on the environment, but see my concerns below.
  • Kerry again beat Bush on form. He stayed calm and collected during his rebuttals, and yet was pretty energetic.
• Kerry cons:
  • He took too long to get to the point (this is a big surprise). He had a lot of good answers, but I found myself thinking several times that he was missing an opportunity to really go after Bush on policy (especially on the environment), only to have him get to a point I wanted him to mention a minute later.
  • He didn't go after Bush aggressively enough on anything but Iraq. He mentioned Bush's poor record on the environment, but didn't go into any details (another common Kerry failing). He didn't say much at all about Bush's profligate spending since he's come into office, and in fact let Bush have the last word on it. In his defense, that may be because he's proposing a lot of expensive programs (e.g. health care reform). In summary, he didn't bat at some of the humongous softballs that were pitched to him.
  • I realize that Kerry needed to stay away from being too far to the left for the undecided voters, but what was with all that time he spent telling the people who asked about religious and moral issues that he "deeply respects" where they come from?
  • [Added 10/11/2004] Kerry kept saying "I have a plan", but didn't go into any details of any such plans, with the exception of his tax plan, and then only when pressured.
• Bush pros:
  • Smooth, energetic, confident. He had answers quickly, he went after every Kerry answer (I loved the "you can't win in Iraq if you thought we shouldn't have been there in the first place" bit), and was very much at ease. Much better than last week.
  • Missouri is a swing state that historically votes right. All he needed to do was emphasize his positions on the issues clearly and concisely (illustrating a contrast with his historically long-winded opponent). He did that.
• Bush cons:
  • Again, he came off as plaintive. Aggressive, yes, but not as collected as he could have been. That plaintiveness detracted from his presidential image.
  • While he was better, as I said above, at staying focused and coming up with answers quickly, he did falter a couple of times, confused Senator Kerry with Senator Kennedy, and otherwise flubbed a couple of his points.
  • [Added 10/11/2004] What was up with the weird jaw twitch?

Although one can expect presidential debates to be tougher on the incumbent, it really seemed that the questions were heavily biased against Bush. I mean, come on. The last question: Mr. Bush, name the three worst mistakes you've made. What a freebie for Kerry!

I'm not going to call for one or the other of the candidates in this one; both the left and the right had their pundits in full spin mode immediately following the debate. We'll see how they're polling in another day or two.