Letter to the Editor
There’s a lot of discussion about why Kerry beat Bush in the debates last night. Bush supporters are claiming that Jim Lehrer was biased and gave Bush harder questions than he gave Kerry. Some say it was because of camera angles and that Kerry was taller. Although the problem with Kerry being taller was made worse because Bush slumped at the podium, making him shorter. Some people think that Kerry to unfair advantage of Bush because Kerry is smarter. But I have a different opinion.
I think Kerry had the advantage in the debate because reality was on his side. Iraq has become a quagmire and it’s now obvious that invading Iraq was a bad decision. The economy is in shambles and so is foreign policy. Bush has used poor judgment for the last 4 years and because of that – it made it easier for Kerry to argue his position. Bush would have had the advantage if he had a record of success to run on rather than a record of failure. It seem that if a sitting president wants to have an advantage in a presidential debate – that doing a good job would be a good debate strategy.