Slashdot Mirror

The pundits said Gore won. The public decided Bush won- there is a big difference. Gore didn't connect well with the average Joe- he came across as elite and condescending. I think Kerry might have the same problem. He will be long winded and too political sounding. Bush will talk to the people whereas Kerry will talk to the political elitists. Because of this, despite what the talking heads say about the debate afterward (on the 1,000 cable channels), Bush will win with the public. I don't say this as a partisan (I make no secrets, I am a staunch Bush supporter). I just think this is an area where Bush will excel and win big time.

http://rupertzone.net/

I think you're missing a certain other element- who won is really about how the public responds to a candidate. After a few days, it became clear that the public related more to Bush during the debates.
I don't say this as a partisan (I am, aren't you?), but when Gore talks he's not very engaging. Bush is- Bush seems like "one of us" when he talks. That's good. I think Kerry is going to have the same problem that Gore had in 2000- he comes across as condescending when he speaks. Bush doesn't. This isn't Repub or Dem- its just an observation.

http://rupertzone.net/

so anyone who supports Bush is uneducated? How elitist of you...
http://rupertzone.net/

The Kerry cheerleaders are worried that it could be "exploited." Coming from a techie (whoever posted the article), its safe to say its a lib (I am trying to be unbiased here, but bias is inherent in everyone).

Whatever you think, its pretty clear that Bush has more of a supportive presence on the internet (blogs for bush, powerline, etc) than Kerry. Not sure how this happened, but it is very interesting.

http://rupertzone.net/

Blogs are proving to provide very good checks and balances. The reader has at his disposal all the tools he needs to verify stats, facts, and accusations. This is why the media is so fearful of the blogosphere... It doesn't allow them to have any kind of bias. Big media is dead.

I think its cool that the candidates recognize the Internet as a battleground. I think the Internet is proving to be a more effective medium for getting out your message than television. Lib or Conservative, nothing wrong with that.

http://rupertzone.net/

Dear Lord, you people are nuts! Seen any black helicopters lately?

[Rupertzone]

Yeah, I don't put much faith in blogs as news either- they are biased (as is my own The Rupertzone. But that's the point. On the other hand, Drudge, who definately leans to the right, gives the scoop much faster than the New York Times, ABC News, CNN, Washington Post, you name it. These places aren't happy that most web users go to The Drudge Report more often to get the latest breaking news. I've never seen anything posted inaccurately on Drudge's web site. This isn't to say it doesn't happen- I am sure it has.

The established press, or "big media" (Libs like to put the word "big" in front of things to make it sound worse) doesn't like it that individuals have the ability to spread their news and commentary to the worlds just as simply as they can. The more media giants slam sites like Drudge and private blogs, the more they validate the worth of such sites.

[The RupertZone]