From: erics@infoserv.com (Eric S. Smith)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.dan-quayle
Subject: Re: Bush debating
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 92 07:51:11 PDT
Organization: Reigning Cats and Dogs
Reply-To: erics@infoserv.com
X-Mailer: uAccess - Macintosh Release: 1.6v1


madhaus@netcom.com (Maddi Hausmann) writes:

> Well, kiddies, what did you all think of King George's performance?

Here are some of my reactions to all of the candidates:

Clinton - he seemed stiff and a bit nervous. His voice was definitely
showing the strain of the campaign, but thankfully it held out and 
didn't become a croak. He used the camera well, speaking directly to the
audience and he seemed forthright and not too "slick". I think he'll be
more relaxed in the upcoming sessions, and as he becomes more comfortable
it will be harder for Bush to gain any advantage over him.

Bush - there were moments, particularly toward the beginning, when I
thought we might be in for a real treat by seeing him drown in a sea of
inarticulateness (is that a word?). But he seemed to resist that natural
tendency of his and he held his own pretty well. Unfortunately for him,
to retain his presidency he needs to do a lot more than hold his own,
and he looked pretty pathetic trying to defend his record and assure
the audience that "we're not coming apart at the seams". He also didn't
manage the camera well; he constantly looked down or to the side and came
off a little shifty, or maybe even frightened.

Perot - well, clearly he did the best, in terms of improving his image
among the audience. He seemed relaxed, and his down-home humor I'm sure
was seen as "refreshing", especially among those who haven't been exposed
to it before. This was the big danger I saw going in, and the polls show
a big gain in his support - maybe even doubling. However, I think Perot
just about shot his wad last night; he showed his persona, and he railed
about the deficit, and he doesn't have much left to say. I think his
support at this moment is as high as it's going to be. I don't think his
performance will grow on the American audience; I think we'll see his poll
numbers slide consistently as we approach the election. Perot also erred
at the end by looking at the wrong camera (I think; at any rate he was
looking off to the side); it made him look shifty.

Perot also aided Clinton, in my estimation, in another way. He seemed to
back him up on several points, making it look like it wasn't just Clinton's
word against Bush's, and Bush sometimes looked like he was withering under
the double-barreled attack. Noteable was Perot's indirect support for
Clinton's draft and anti-Vietnam demonstration problems (and his seemingly
damning allusion to Bush's involvement in Iran-Contra). At times it
seemed like Perot took the low road, really hammering Bush on his economic
position, while Clinton was able to take the high road by offering his
vision of the future.

So in the end, while Perot undoubtedly got a boost he otherwise wouldn't
have had by appearing in the debate, it may ultimately benefit Clinton
most by solidifying the anti-Bush feeling and showing Clinton as the
real alternative for the future. At least that's MY hope.

The Veep debate today should be something!



-----
Eric Smith
erics@infoserv.com
CI$: 70262,3610


Newsgroups: alt.fan.dan-quayle