2004 Debates

[PBrunsel]

The League of Women voters says that the following candidates:

G. Bush (Republican)
J. Kerry (Democratic)
R. Nader (Independent)
M. Badnarik (Libertarain)
M. Peroutka (Constitution)
D. Cobb (Green)

can join the  2004 debates so that Americans can see all the serious choices in 2004. Who wins this 6 way debate?

But most importantly, how long is the debate!?

[King]

Bush wins the debate.  To win over voters, the third party candidates would have to sell themselves as a better alternative to Kerry for the ABB Bush voters so they rip Kerry apart and his campaign goes down in flames...

[opebo]

Kerry.  I think he'd look just as good against five nincompoops as he did against one.

The amusing thing is that Bush would come up well down the list!

[Ebowed]

I think Badnarik or Peroutka would.  All Badnarik would have to do is show that you don't have to make the government bigger to succeed, and all Peroutka would have to do is show that Christians don't need to (and shouldn't) vote for Bush.

[YRABNNRM]

I think Badnarik or Peroutka would.  All Badnarik would have to do is show that you don't have to make the government bigger to succeed, and all Peroutka would have to do is show that Christians don't need to (and shouldn't) vote for Bush.

Badnarik was a terrible public speaker(and candidate), I doubt he would come close to winning.

[John Dibble]

I think Badnarik or Peroutka would.  All Badnarik would have to do is show that you don't have to make the government bigger to succeed, and all Peroutka would have to do is show that Christians don't need to (and shouldn't) vote for Bush.

Badnarik was a terrible public speaker(and candidate), I doubt he would come close to winning.

I've seen him debate, he's quite good.

[YRABNNRM]

I think Badnarik or Peroutka would.  All Badnarik would have to do is show that you don't have to make the government bigger to succeed, and all Peroutka would have to do is show that Christians don't need to (and shouldn't) vote for Bush.

Badnarik was a terrible public speaker(and candidate), I doubt he would come close to winning.

I've seen him debate, he's quite good.

Maybe I just saw him at the wrong time.

[Jake]

I think Badnarik or Peroutka would.  All Badnarik would have to do is show that you don't have to make the government bigger to succeed, and all Peroutka would have to do is show that Christians don't need to (and shouldn't) vote for Bush.

Badnarik was a terrible public speaker(and candidate), I doubt he would come close to winning.

I've seen him debate, he's quite good.

Maybe I just saw him at the wrong time.

That one ad with him was terrible

[King]

I think Badnarik or Peroutka would.  All Badnarik would have to do is show that you don't have to make the government bigger to succeed, and all Peroutka would have to do is show that Christians don't need to (and shouldn't) vote for Bush.

Badnarik was a terrible public speaker(and candidate), I doubt he would come close to winning.

I've seen him debate, he's quite good.

Maybe I just saw him at the wrong time.

That one ad with him was terrible

His suit was crunched up and his desk looked like it was stolen from an elementary classroom.

[MaC]

I think David Cobb would have done quite well.  In the Badnarik/Cobb debates, Cobb came off as quite energetic and eager to respond to solutions of issues that we're discussed.  However, by political bias leans toward Badnarik, and even though Badnarik wasn't very exciting to watch, he's good at explaining his stance on the issues.  I think Nader would have gotten creamed big time in that debate.  Peroutka would kinda  look like a clone of Geroge Bush until the right issue was brought up to differenciate them.