Watched the debate. Both candidates held their own, but I think Kerry did a little better, mostly on style. Bush isn't a public speaker, and doesn't have a good debate instinct. Kerry is, thankfully, only a bit better.
It bothered me, though, to see Bush miss several killer opportunities.
On the North Korean negotiations, with Kerry repeatedly talking about bilateral talks and downplaying the role of China and Japan, Bush missed the opening to say "The Senator complains, with respect to Iraq, that we didn't involve enough allies, but when it comes to Korea, he wants to tell China, Japan, South Korea and Russia -- the bordering countries -- to take a hike. Can the Senator tell us why allies are bad in this case?"
On Kerry's claim that Iraq was a diversion away from al Qaeda, and that "attacking Iraq was like FDR attacking Mexico after Pearl Harbor", the better reply would have been, "No, Senator, it's more like claiming that going to war with Nazi Germany was a distraction from the 'real war' with Japan, and that Germany "had never attacked us". We had to do both then and we have to do both now."
On the issue of bunker-buster nukes, which Kerry said he'd cancel "first thing", Bush should have claimed that "if we had to go to war against a nuclear-armed North Korea, those weapons might save a million South Korean lives. The Senator would be quick to blame me for not having that ability. Just like he blames me for our Iraq troops not having the body armour he also voted against."
On the allies question: Given that France and Germany never negotiated in good faith before the war, strongarmed Turkey into denying US troops transit rights at the last minute, and stated just the other day that they wouldn't fight in Iraq even under Kerry's leadership, how on earth does Kerry expect to get them on board?
And lastly, how does Kerry plan to work with Iraqi leaders after calling them puppets and liars?
See running commentary at: N.Z. Bear, Hugh Hewitt, The Corner, and Instapundit. Spoons, too.
Allah has the ultimate link list.
I was astonished by how similar last night's debate was to the 2000 debates. Kerry/Gore, so polished and forceful. Bush, so fumbling but sincere.
What is the obvious implication?