Reality check

My opinion about who won last night debate is hopelessy compromised by my bias. So it’s nice to know that Dan Drezner watched the same debate I did:

a) Bush did better than the first debate;

b) Kerry also did a bit better — he was sharp from the start this time;

c) Again, both candidates whiffed on the openings given by the other candidates;

d) If Kerry gets elected, you just know that his to-the-camera pledge not to raise taxes for households under $200,000 is going to bite him in the ass,

e) The bizarre moment of the night was the Bush foray into Dred Scott territory. But I do feel safer that Bush will not appoint pro-slavery judges.

So I think Kerry won, but not by as much as last time.

Author: Mark Kleiman

Professor of Public Policy at the NYU Marron Institute for Urban Management and editor of the Journal of Drug Policy Analysis. Teaches about the methods of policy analysis about drug abuse control and crime control policy, working out the implications of two principles: that swift and certain sanctions don't have to be severe to be effective, and that well-designed threats usually don't have to be carried out. Books: Drugs and Drug Policy: What Everyone Needs to Know (with Jonathan Caulkins and Angela Hawken) When Brute Force Fails: How to Have Less Crime and Less Punishment (Princeton, 2009; named one of the "books of the year" by The Economist Against Excess: Drug Policy for Results (Basic, 1993) Marijuana: Costs of Abuse, Costs of Control (Greenwood, 1989) UCLA Homepage Curriculum Vitae Contact: Markarkleiman-at-gmail.com

7 thoughts on “Reality check”

  1. Dred Scott = Roe v. Wade

    Some people seem to be a bit boggled by Bush's Dred Scott remark last night. It wasn't about racism or slavery, or just Bush's natural incoherence. Here's what Bush actually said:If elected to another term, I promise that I will nominate Supreme Court …

  2. Dred Scott = Roe v. Wade

    Some people seem to be a bit boggled by Bush’s Dred Scott remark last night. It wasn’t about racism or slavery, or just Bush’s natural incoherence. Here’s what Bush actually said:If elected to another term, I promise that I will nominate Supreme Court …

  3. Dred Scott = Roe v. Wade

    Some people seem to be a bit boggled by Bush’s Dred Scott remark last night. It wasn’t about racism or slavery, or just Bush’s natural incoherence. Here’s what Bush actually said:If elected to another term, I promise that I will nominate Supreme Court …

  4. Dred Scott = Roe v. Wade

    Some people seem to be a bit boggled by Bush’s Dred Scott remark last night. It wasn’t about racism or slavery, or just Bush’s natural incoherence. Here’s what Bush actually said:If elected to another term, I promise that I will nominate Supreme Court …

  5. This all turned out to be right interesting

    Dubya's Dred Scott comment the other day struck everyone else as strangely as it did me. I've discovered it struck my political interpretational biases right between the eyes.
    Between Shanikka's comment the other day and this from Mark via emai

  6. This all turned out to be right interesting

    Dubya's Dred Scott comment the other day struck everyone else as strangely as it did me. I've discovered it struck my political interpretational biases right between the eyes.
    Between Shanikka's comment the other day and this from Mark via emai

  7. Dred Scott and a Bush Supreme Court

    I have heard African American Citizens express that they don't want judges who would strictly interpret the Constitution because that view is the same view that caused the Supreme court in the Dred Scott case to refer to blacks as property.
    I disa…

Comments are closed.