By Peter Shanley
Over 60 students assembled in Snell Library Thursday night to watch President George W. Bush and Sen. John F. Kerry of Massachusetts face off in the first of three presidential debates.
The contest, which was televised live from the University of Miami, centered on foreign policy and domestic security issues ranging from the war on terrorism and Iraq to the absence of political discourse on the Sudan genocide.
After the 90-minute debate, political science professor John Portz asked the consortium of students which candidate had won the debate. The majority responded in favor of Kerry, less than 10 of 60 decided it was a draw and no one thought Bush was victorious.
Junior Curtis Bergh and freshman Amanda Eggers, the co-chairs of public relations for Northeastern’s College Repub-licans said they felt the debate ended in a tie with Bush giving specific details on his agenda and painting Kerry as a flip-flopper.
“I think it was a draw,” Eggers said. “There were certain points in which Bush could have attacked Kerry on more.”
Heidi Buchanan, the president of Northeastern’s College Democrats, saw it differently.
“Kerry all the way,” said Buchanan, who watched the debate at home. “Kerry debated very well — Bush didn’t convey his message.”
The students’ views at the event, which was sponsored by the Political Science Department, mirrors the national perspective according to a poll conducted by Newsweek, which found 61 percent of those polled thought Kerry won, while 19 percent believed Bush was victorious.
And now, the race is back to a virtual deadlock with Kerry having a 47-45 lead with a four-point percentage of error, according to a recent Newsweek poll.
With Jim Lehrer of PBS moderating, the debate featured a list of rules including a time limit for each candidate’s response and a prohibition on split-screen shots of the candidates. Most of the television stations refused to abide by the latter rule, saying they never signed a contract.
While Kerry spoke, the split-screen showed President Bush increasingly becoming annoyed and grimacing, especially when the democratic nominee mentioned the fact that Bush’s father, George H. W. Bush, refrained from going into Iraq during the Gulf War, because of a lack of an exit strategy.
“Reactions were good I think,” Buchanan said. “It showed Kerry can keep his cool under fire.”
Buchanan also said Bush’s mannerisms revealed his impatience.
A continuing theme in the debate centered on which candidate would make the better leader for defending the nation against terrorism.
Kerry argued that Iraq was a “colossal misjudgment” and a divergence from Afghanistan and Al Qaeda while President Bush stressed that America was safer with Saddam Hussein gone and that the military could handle both the challenge in Afghanistan and in Iraq.
Bush supporters said the military is more than capable of handling what the president has asked of them.
“To say we are stretched thin is simply ludicrous,” Bergh said. “We definitely can fight a war on two fronts, in Afghanistan and Iraq.”
When the debate addressed the nuclear threat of North Korea, President Bush advocated continued multi-nation talks while Kerry wanted bilateral negotiations. Both thought the biggest threat against the United States was nuclear proliferation.
Lehrer raised the question of why neither candidate had mentioned the genocide in the Darfur region of Sudan during the run-up to the debate. Both politicians’ responses deflected the criticism, focusing instead on what can be done: giving humanitarian assistance while deploying African Union peace keepers into the country.
Buchanan said she considered the Sudan crisis an important topic that needed to be addressed by both candidates, and Bergh agreed.
“I was not surprised that Sudan was mentioned,” Bergh said. “Lehrer is an excellent journalist and he has been around for a long time.”
The next presidential debate on Friday at Washington University in St. Louis, is a town-hall style format where Bush and Kerry will answer questions from audience members.
