After last night’s presidential debate The Bruin sat down
with Erin Templeton, a graduate student in English and the current
president of Bruins for Edwards. The Bruin also conducted a phone
interview with Mark Lincoln, a second-year molecular, cell and
developmental biology student and the technical director for Bruin
Republicans. *** Daily Bruin: What were your overall
impressions of the debate?
Erin Templeton: I think that both candidates did very well. I
think that President Bush is a really good debater. We sort of
laugh at him and make fun of him, but he has a really impressive
way of sounding sincere and sounding genuine ““ even if
he’s sounding silly, I think that really strikes a chord with
a lot of people. But I think it was a very even contest. The other
thing I wanted to say is that Sen. Kerry seemed very presidential
in the way that he presented himself, in the way that he spoke. I
think that was really important for a lot of people to see because
they haven’t had a chance to hear him speak. A lot of people,
especially those who aren’t in the big swing states ““
like us in California ““ haven’t necessarily had the
chance yet to see him speak publicly outside of the primaries,
which was a fairly long time ago.
Mark Lincoln: I think that Bush did a better job. I don’t
think Kerry gave specifics to back up the points he made, and Bush
did.
DB: Which of your candidate’s points did you agree
with most strongly?
ET: Just that Kerry could do the job better than President Bush.
That he hasn’t changed his mind, that it’s not waffling
or flip-flopping when you realize you made a mistake or that things
are going wrong, to change things and do it differently. It’s
just stubbornness and the sort of determination to stay the course
that’s getting us into trouble. I think that Kerry made that
point. He showed that he has been consistent, that he hasn’t
changed his mind. I think that he did that very well. That was
really, really important.
ML: I really agreed with Bush’s point that Iraq is one of
the major centers in the war on terror. I also agreed that we need
to continue doing what Bush is doing to win the war.
DB: Where did you think that the opposing candidate looked
the weakest?
ET: I think that President Bush’s weakest point was his
constant repetition of “bringing the terrorists to
justice.” He kept saying the same thing. He kept accusing
Sen. Kerry of changing his mind and sending mixed messages. If I
had a quarter for every time he said “brought to
justice” or “mixed message” then I could drop out
of school and just retire! He just kept kind of saying the same
thing, and he didn’t really directly address any of the
issues as I would’ve hoped. He just sort of said “you
can’t say this to our troops, you can’t send mixed
messages” instead of being specific about what he would do
differently and what about his policy is different from Sen.
Kerry’s. Because things aren’t going as well as we
would have wanted in Iraq, a lot of people out there do want our
troops home. Instead of actually being up front about that and
saying “I made a mistake” or “yeah, it’s
not going so well,” he would sort of dodge and say “you
can’t say that to our troops, you can’t send mixed
messages.”
ML: Kerry looked the weakest when he would make points but
wouldn’t use statistics to back them up. He would do things
like say, “my plan is a good plan,” but then
wouldn’t explain why it would work. Even when they asked for
specifics he danced around the questions.
DB: How would you characterize the debating style of both
candidates?
ET: I think that Sen. Kerry was very intellectual, very factual,
and very concerned with getting the truth across as he perceived
it. He was very much concerned with relaying information, whereas
President Bush was much more concerned with the emotional tenor of
what he was saying and was less concerned with the actual facts of
the statements. He was much more concerned with conveying a feeling
““ or a sentiment ““ and I think in some ways that can be
more effective ““ unfortunately. I think that especially
people who are watching ““ depending on who they are, what
their values are, where they live and whatever ““ a lot of
times you might not understand so much of what Sen. Kerry is
saying, whereas with Bush you know how he feels and how he wants
you to feel. Sen. Kerry was much more factual.
ML: I think Bush interjected some humor and some sarcastic
comments. Kerry was more long-winded.
DB: What did you think of Kerry’s repeated references
to Osama bin Laden?
ET: I think it’s really important because everybody seems
to forget that he’s still out there, and the president sort
of wants us to forget ““ until he finds him anyway. He wants
us to forget that we got sidetracked with Saddam Hussein. Now that
we’ve left Afghanistan behind and now that all of our
attention is focused on Iraq we forget that wasn’t the
problem. I think Kerry made the point very clear that the war on
terrorism started with al”“Qaeda, Osama bin Laden, and Sept.
11, 2001. This whole Iraq thing, well yes they’re both in the
Middle East and both of them tend to be Islamic-based ideologies,
but they’re two different issues and two different wars.
ML: Kerry is using what he knows now to shape what he says he
would have done then. While the difference of whether or not to go
to war was originally based on judgment, now it’s based on
facts and Kerry’s trying to change the facts. Frequently
mentioning bin Laden was an effective way for Kerry to work his
angle.
DB: What do you think of Kerry’s belief that nuclear
proliferation is the most dangerous obstacle facing the United
States?
ET: I think it’s true, and I think it’s really
scary. He made a really good point about the fact that we are
sending mixed messages by saying “you can’t have
nuclear weapons,” meanwhile we have them ourselves and
we’re testing new ones and trying to come up with new
technology in that respect. I mean, if it’s not OK for them,
why is it OK for us? This idea that the United States is sort of
superior or smarter or whatever, (we see that over and over again
in this administration) that the Iraqis can’t do it
themselves, that we need to show them how to do it ““ I mean
give these people some credit! Maybe they aren’t
Harvard-educated, but they’re capable. They’re not
stupid people. We sort of assume that our way is the best way for
everyone, and that sort of arrogance is just embarrassing.
ML: I agree, and I think Bush does as well. Weapons of mass
destruction in the hands of terrorists are the most dangerous thing
we face today.
DB: What kind of impact do you think tonight’s
presidential debate will have on the election?
ET: I think that people will see that a lot of the Republican
spin on Kerry and the Democratic party’s message is just that
““ spin. And when the candidates actually get a chance to
speak for themselves and people can hear them, it’s not that
Kerry’s just flip-flopping and inconsistent and not clear
about what’s going on. I think Kerry expressed very clearly
that that’s just not true. It’s integrity to change
course when that course is horribly wrong. It’s not being
inconsistent or lacking strength. It takes strength to change, to
admit, hey this isn’t going the way we wanted it to. It takes
much more strength to stand up and say I want to do something
different, this isn’t working.
ML: Very little. I don’t think the debates tend to have
much of an impact at all on the actual presidential elections.
Interviews conducted by Colleen Honigsberg, Bruin senior
staff.