Editor’s note: This story is an extended version of our local
presidential debate response coverage in the Oct. 1 paper. We will
continue to feature online-only content to add depth to our print
stories.
University community members gathered on and around campus Thursday
night to witness presidential candidates George W. Bush and Sen. John
Kerry square off over foreign affairs issues during this election
year’s first presidential debate.
A non-partisan viewing event held in Lillis Business Complex 182 drew
about 200 people, making it one of the largest gatherings on campus.
The event was hosted by Residential Academy Director Sharon Schuman and
Vice Provost for Institutional Equality and Diversity Gregory Vincent.
After the televised debate, many audience members stayed behind to
participate in a discussion moderated by Schuman and Vincent. The
moderators wrote a list of key issues and words to describe each of the
candidates on the room’s chalkboard. Students attributed descriptors
like “sincere,” “on message” and “more passion” to characterize Bush
and phrases such as “decisive,” “closer to answering questions,”
“clearer” and “better body language” for Kerry.
Several students said watching the debate influenced their thinking
about the upcoming election.
Junior Tina Beaver said she was disappointed, but not surprised by the
circularity of the debate, stressing the country’s need for more than
just two candidates in a presidential election.
Many audience members expressed support for Kerry, but Beaver said she
would have liked to have heard more from the Republican camp.
“I wanted to hear concrete reasons why Republicans support Bush, and I
didn’t find that,” she said.
Freshman Nick Swope said this was his first time watching a
presidential debate, and he was surprised to find it more enjoyable
than he had expected.
Swope said he was an undecided voter before watching the debate. He
said he has still not made a decision, but watching the candidates talk
about the issues made him feel much more confident in his ability to
make an informed choice.
“Now that I’m able to vote, it’s important to see what the candidates’
stance was,” he said. Freshman Elizabeth Manelick said there was no
clear winner in the debate, but she was impressed with Bush’s
willingness to take a strong stance on the issues and stick to it.
“I don’t even agree with some of the things he’s saying, but at least
he has the conviction to say them,” she said. “Kerry came across much
like the indecisive flip-flopper that the Bush campaign has made him
out to be.”
Manelick said the war in Iraq is not the thing people should look to
when deciding who to vote for. Although her brother was killed in Iraq
a few months ago, Manelick said that hasn’t affected her opinion of
Bush or the war. Instead, she said it has only made her proud of her
brother and what he accomplished.
Freshman Kirsten Reed said her participation in the ROTC influenced her
view of the debate.
“I definitely have a different perspective since I’m going to be in the
Army,” she said.
Reed said she favors Bush’s plans for Iraq over Kerry’s.
“I definitely think President Bush stuck to his position a lot more,”
she said.
Vincent said he gained a “sense of the vision of both candidates” from
the debate.
“I think it went beyond the spin,” he said.
Kerry supporters
Meanwhile, more than 150 people crowded into Knight Law 110 to watch
the debate at an event hosted by student supporters of Kerry. The vocal
crowd alternated between applause for Kerry and roars of laughter
directed at Bush.
Sophomore Cole Robinson, who watched the debate at the event, said
Kerry clearly presented a more eloquent case.
“Bush speaks a lot, but he doesn’t say anything,” Robinson said. “I
think he gives a much more solid picture of his plans for Iraq than
Bush has.”
Robinson said Bush focused too much on Kerry’s voting record.
“I think that Bush is a broken record when he talks about John Kerry
changing positions,” he said.
Robinson also said he agreed with Kerry’s message that Saddam Hussein
was removed from power in an inappropriate manner.
Nicolas Peslin, an international student from France, said the
candidates reiterated the issue of Iraq but answered questions in a
more straightforward manner than he expected.
Peslin said Bush’s view that America sought a multinational coalition
before attacking Iraq is not necessarily held by citizens of his
country.
“America is not seen as very trustful,” he said.
Peslin added he feels that ties between other nations and America will
improve if Kerry is elected.
“I know the French people are not in a position against America but in
a position against the Bush administration,” he said.
Senior Gabriel Zitrin agreed, saying America has lost its position as
an example to the world.
“President Bush has not looked like he’s had a full command of most of
the issues being discussed,” he said.
Zitrin also called Bush’s stance on nuclear proliferation
“inconsistent” with his policy on defending America, saying the
president should be more concerned about North Korea.
Law student Jamie Stoops said she is an independent who plans to vote
for Kerry, but the debate helped solidify her views. She said Kerry
fully answered the moderator’s questions and clarified his position.
“Kerry listened carefully to his opponent’s statements and focused on
details,” she said.
She said she agreed with Kerry that the focus of the war on terror
should be Afghanistan, not Iraq.
Stoops said Kerry worked hard to differentiate himself from Bush on the
issues by moving further to the left.
“I was surprised Kerry took as hard of a line as he did,” she said.
Senior Katie McGee said Kerry called Bush “stubborn and arrogant”
during the debate, saying Kerry used the forum to show that he does not
“flip flop.”
“I feel John Kerry clearly, clearly stated what his views have been all
along,” she said.
Law student Colin Hackett, who said he plans to vote for Kerry, said
neither candidate was more effective in making his case.
“Both candidates were equally effective in laying out their positions,
but that played to Kerry better because he hadn’t defined himself in
his campaign,” Hackett said.
Bush supporters
Members of the College Republicans were among nearly 150 people who
gathered in front of a big screen television at the Town Club in
Downtown Eugene to witness the debate.
College Republicans Chairwoman Laura Jenkins said Bush “came out on
top” in the debate.
“After watching this debate, I think it’s really clear which candidate
stands firm on his goals, his values, and what direction he’d like this
country to go in,” Jenkins said. “It’s the real man versus the East
Coast elitist.”
Jenkins said Bush showed himself to be a strong and steadfast leader.
“I thought Kerry, on the other hand, Kerry continued to flip-flip,” she
said. “The debate really cleared up where each candidates stands.”
She emphasized that foreign policy and homeland security are Bush’s
strong areas.
“In general, the topic in this debate was to his advantage.”
College Republicans member Tom Albright said Bush dominated the
rebuttals.
“His rebuttals were incredibly articulate and witty,” he said. “(He)
backed up all of his arguments with fact and did not change his
position tonight, unlike some other people.”
Albright said many people underestimate the president.
“People say he’s stupid,” he said. “I say he’s stupid like a fox.”
Lane Community College student Andrew Hill, a member of the College
Republicans, said the candidates were polite but not genuine.
“It was just a lot of the same stuff going back and forth, again,” he
said.
Hill said Bush has not changed his stance on the war in Iraq, while
Kerry has wavered.
He said the debate was informative.
“I thought it was pretty good for a first debate,” he said. “It touched
on a lot of different stuff and you definitely saw the differences
between the two candidates.”

[email protected]
News editor Jared Paben and news reporter Meghann Cuniff contributed to
this report