I watched the debates last night, and I finally got smart about it. I watched it on C-Span. Enjoying the relative silence both before and after.

I thought that the questions asked were particularly good at getting the candidates to try to address specifics. The questions about abortion and stem cell research were two of the better questions. The answers were a bit less pointed in general.

Bush certainly did a better job of containing himself and his reactions this time out, but I felt it was Kerry who, in general, gave much clearer answers. His response to the abortion question, to me, showed an understanding of the issue and further presented a clear approach to the Governments role in that particular debate. Bush continued to speak mainly in generalities, but did manage to pound his point about Kerry's senate record, again without specifics.

I also thought Kerry tended to actually answer questions and provide specifics ( both candidates continued to use exaggerated facts. Some people would call those lies, but apparently in this forum they are merely "distortions" and ""labels")

Both erred in most attempts at humor, with the exception of Bush's "....need some wood?"

I found myself thinking that if I was able to sit down with GW in a non political setting and just shoot the shit, that I would find him quite personable and entertaining. I imagine a relaxed GW would in  fact be fun at a party.

But back to the Commander and Chief job opening. I thought Kerry did a good job of calling the President on his earlier champaign promises, in particular, going to war and prescription drugs.

Over all a much closer debate, than the first, but I still give the edge to Kerry. Despite his "honest" pledge , (he looked right at me ) not to raise taxes. I think that bit of folly may come back, like "read my lips".

I think a fresh start and reestablishing and repairing relationships around the global is needed, and cannot occur with Bush still in the office.