[us_politics] In Defense Of Debates

There's been a great deal of moaning and groaning about the Presidential debates.

"They aren't real debates"

"They're just media events"

"They're too much show"

"They don't really talk about issues"

and on and on and on.

I've watched each one of them, and I'm going to watch the last. I'm also not watching them for what I wish they'd be, but what they are.

They give us the two men, in a pressure situation. They have to think on thier feet. They have to respond to conditions that they can't completely control, regardless of the number of items in that ridiculous contract.

We've found out that John Kerry is cool under pressure, concise, and to the point. His brain is clearly engaged. We've found out that W acts like a deer in the headlights in a formal situation, and like he's on the stump when in a 'town hall' style forum

We've found out that both men sometimes answer a bit too elliptically for the answer to be useful.

I'm in it for Kerry. I don't think Bush has done a good job, not well enough for me to approve him for four more, and certainly not to give him a chance to 'do over'. So, cards on the table, I thought we were seeing the true Bush in Event one, and the only thing that saved him in Event two was that he was able to work the crowd. I always feel like a huckster is talking to me when he does.

I was positively impressed by the wit and nimble intellect that Kerry displayed. I found him to be engaged, ready to hit the ground running. Bush seemed intimidated by both experiences. Kerry seemed eager to go at them.

Of course, we also see that which we want to see in these things. But when you see the gentleman answering the question, he's relying on his wit and his smarts. In a way, we see what each man is really made of. And that, my friends, is the value of these events.