Dem4EverMore
(27 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Sep-09-03 09:18 PM
Original message |
Debates: Not enough attacks on Bush for me |
|
They spent too much time on idle talk instead of attacking Bush like they should have been doing. Hopefully they'll hit Bush a bit harder.
The one exception was Mosley-Braun when she said Bush was not elected.
|
uptohere
(603 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Sep-09-03 09:20 PM
Response to Original message |
1. was I watching the same channel ? |
|
there was constant hacking at Bush, occasionally to the detriment of making debate points.
Its supposed to be a debate between candidates, not a bitch session against Bush.
|
bahrbearian
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Sep-09-03 09:28 PM
Response to Original message |
2. I guess they don't consider him any kind of Opponent.... |
oostevo
(293 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Sep-09-03 09:34 PM
Response to Original message |
3. They Didn't Attack Bush Because ... |
|
Edited on Tue Sep-09-03 09:35 PM by oostevo
Attacking Bush is reserved for when people like us (who will be voting in the primaries) are listening, so that we will vote for them. A debate on a channel like Fox would be to attract any moderates watching Fox, so they will have to use a more moderate message.
|
T Roosevelt
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Sep-09-03 09:44 PM
Response to Original message |
4. Either that's sarcasm... |
|
or we were watching different debates. They were constantly hammering * all thru the debate. Can't recall a response that didn't have some comment against him or the administration. Personally I'm suprised Fox didn't drop the signal, claim technical difficulties, and put up Hannity an hour early.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Wed Apr 24th 2024, 12:08 PM
Response to Original message |