More differences of opinion on the debate

From a commenter at Captains Quarters, a report (or a canard?) that Bush did poorly among undecided voters, especially women, because of his aggressiveness:

The Gallup post-debate poll shows Kerry destroying Bush among undecided viewers 53-37. Also, Kerry won substantially among women viewers—guess all that yelling by Bush didn’t play well in the heartland. This means Kerry will continue to gain ground in the polls this week. All Bush did was throw meat to freeperland, whose citizens were so desperate for something from their man after his pathetic performance last week, that they lapped it up like manna from heaven. Tick…tick…tick…time’s running out for Shrub.

Also, I got this e-mail about my evaluation of the debate:

Reading your post, my jaw literally dropped in amazement. Did you actually watch the same debate I did? Didn’t Bush seem pathetically weak, desperate, and defensive?

I replied that I was fascinated at how different people can see the same thing so differently, and that I called the debate as I saw it, just as I had the previous week, when I said that Bush was abyssmal. Of course, I was aware that Bush was being unusually aggressive in the second debate, even almost shouting at times in the early part, but I liked his charge-forward manner and thought it was effective. However, it’s possible that I’m so out of touch with a majority of Americans that what I see as confidence and aliveness, they see as pathetic, desperate, defensive aggressiveness, or whatever. We will see. Meanwhile, European newspapers, not exactly known as supportive of Bush, are giving him good grades for the debate.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at October 09, 2004 07:59 PM | Send