|
Washington Post - September 4, 2004
Speech fails to sway these undecideds
By Peter Slevin and Jonathan Finer
CLAYTON, Mo., Sept. 3 -- Half a dozen undecided voters who gathered here to watch President Bush's acceptance speech made it clear before he took the podium that they had serious doubts about his leadership and his political choices. After listening to 62 minutes of carefully crafted oratory, Christopher A. Jackson found himself leaning ever so slightly the president's way.
But, then, after listing all that bothered him about the speech, Jackson announced that he still wasn't sure. "I honestly don't trust the guy," said Jackson, 41, a businessman and registered independent.
In Goffstown, N.H., Kate Tullgren, 18, said she was undecided and might vote for Bush. Yet she greeted the speech with whispered sarcasm and scowls of incredulity. When Bush mentioned judicial appointments, she said, "What about Roe v. Wade, buddy?"
In Las Cruces, N.M., government professor Jose Z. Garcia, 59, said of his dilemma, "Bush lost me when we went into Iraq, and Kerry has never really grabbed me." He thinks come Election Day that he will choose between Democratic challenger John F. Kerry and third-party candidate Ralph Nader.
The reactions of undecided voters in three battleground states who agreed to watch Bush's convention speech with Washington Post reporters suggest that Bush still has work to do to win their allegiance. Some expressed skepticism about portions of the speech, and others found themselves nodding in agreement with some of the president's comments. But none said that the president had overcome their doubts in his nationally televised address.
No group in America is more coveted by the two major presidential campaigns this year than undecided voters. Because the race is so close in so many states, and because an unusually high percentage of voters say they have already made firm decisions, the undecideds are being studied by campaign strategists from every angle…..
About 40 students gathered in the cafeteria of St. Anselm College in Goffstown (not far from Kerry's home state of Massachusetts) to watch the president's address. In a room where walls were plastered with campaign posters dating to the days of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, reactions ranged from hearty applause to eye-rolling sighs. Few said the address helped them make up their minds….
At the beginning of Bush's address, New Mexico State University professor Garcia was undecided. By the end he remained so, although he had largely eliminated the president from contention. At his home in Las Cruces, a dozen registered voters reflected several slices of New Mexico's cross-cutting political history…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A60447-2004Sep3?language=printer
Bush's speech: main points
NEW YORK, Sept 3, 2004: The following are the main points of the speech by President George Bush to the Republican National Convention:
WAR ON TERRORISM: We have fought the terrorists across the earth, not for pride, not for power, but because the lives of our citizens are at stake. Our strategy is clear
- We are staying on the offensive striking terrorists abroad so we do not have to face them here at home. And we are working to advance liberty in the broader Middle East, because freedom will bring a future of hope, and the peace we all want. And we will prevail.
THE PRESIDENCY: I believe the most solemn duty of the American president is to protect the American people. If America shows uncertainty and weakness in this decade, the world will drift toward tragedy. This will not happen on my watch.
- I am running for President with a clear and positive plan to build a safer world, and a more hopeful America. I am running with a compassionate conservative philosophy: that government should help people improve their lives, not try to run their lives. I believe this Nation wants steady, consistent, principled leadership and that is why, with your help, we will win this election.
CRITICISMS OF JOHN KERRY: (John Kerry's) policies of tax and spend, of expanding government rather than expanding opportunity are the policies of the past. We are on the path to the future and we are not turning back.
- I proposed, and the Congress overwhelmingly passed, 87 billion dollars in funding needed by our troops doing battle in Afghanistan and Iraq. My opponent and his running mate voted against this money for bullets, and fuel, and vehicles, and body armor.
When asked to explain his vote, the Senator said, "I actually did vote for the 87 billion dollars before I voted against it." Then he said he was "proud" of that vote. Then, when pressed, he said it was a "complicated" matter. There is nothing complicated about supporting our troops in combat.
IRAQ, AFGHANISTAN AND ME: Because we acted to defend our country, the murderous regimes of Saddam Hussein and the Taliban are history, more than 50 million people have been liberated, and democracy is coming to the broader Middle East.
In Afghanistan, terrorists have done everything they can to intimidate people, yet more than 10 million citizens have registered to vote in the October presidential election a resounding endorsement of democracy.
Iraq now has a strong Prime Minister, a national council, and national elections are scheduled for January. Our nation is standing with the people of Afghanistan and Iraq, because when America gives its word, America must keep its word. As importantly, we are serving a vital and historic cause that will make our country safer.
- Free societies in the Middle East will be hopeful societies, which no longer feed resentments and breed violence for export.
|
