Wednesday, September 29, 2010
2010 Meg Whitman vs. Jerry Brown
Well that was an interesting debate. It seemed as if Brown never fully answered any of the questions, where as Whitman seemed more collected and actually answered the questions without hesitation. If you notice, Brown lost his train of thought a couple of times and seemed almost unprofessional at times. As Levin said, he seemed like a crazy old man, which he did. His thoughts were all mixed up and in my view, he didn't seem like he could handle it. I know he was governor once, a long time ago, but why is he running again? Whitman seemed like she knew what she was talking about and the points she was making were very strong and though out. No matter how awkward her facial expressions were, she delivered her speech very well. She also made very good rebuttals and points against Brown. I think she seems like a better governor since she made strong points that seems like she can actually follow through with and overall seemed more calm and collected. Do we want a governor who doesn't fully answer the questions and looses their train of thought? Or do we want someone who can handle the hardships they are faced with?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree that Brown did seem a little frazzled at times, but to me at least he seems like a real person, and it was evident that he did know his stuff. I wasn't totally impressed with his responses either, but to me Whitman sounded like a reheared, infomercial-esque femm bot. Her response, no matter what the question, seemed to lead back to "put Californians back to work!" and it sounded like she had practiced every sentence beforehand instead of sounding truthful or genuine. Personally, I would rather have a slightly ditsy but experienced old man as a governor instead of some puppet looking out for the rich or wealthy corporations such as her own.
ReplyDelete