My assessment of the debate

[Chichiri]

First of all, let's not kid ourselves: next to Bush, Cheney kicked ass as a debater. That is admittedly an absurdly low hurdle to clear, but hey, credit where credit's due. He was relaxed, confident, clear, concise, and well-spoken. He also knew when to be aggressive and when to be restrained.

The major point against him in terms of style was the fact that he was, well, evil. He tried to cover it up with his graciousness re the gay marriage thing -- and that was gracious -- but it didn't make up for his NASTY behavior in the first part of the debate, or the sneer he wore throughout.

That aside, however, the fact that he lost the debate shouldn't really be held against him. It's just hard to win a debate when the facts so clearly aren't on your side.

[ScreamingMeemie]

1. He did really well on the fear factor I thought....

Fear, fear, fear...!!! :hi:

[Chichiri]

2. Evidently, fear is not a factor for us. (n/t)

:D

[vetwife]

3. There is a lot to be said about being a crook and Cheney proved it !

He talked a lot but most americans noted that articulate lying is not winning !

[sr_pacifica]

4. I found my attention drifting listening to Cheney

As you posted though, Cheney did a helluva better job than Bush, but then who couldn't. Cheney did not have the facial mannerisms flaw of his boss, except for an occasional mean grimace. Overall he looked like a mean Dad or Boss. But I found his monotone boring. Edwards was enthusiastic and much clearer in his responses and nicely on the offense. I think the American viewing public will say Edwards won this one, because it just could be they're not believing the lies anymore AND Cheney just was not an interesting speaker. I don't think he was able to keep the listeners' attention as Edwards was, so Edwards' message got heard, but not Cheney's.