I know what you mean, but there has to be a middle-of-the-road between CNN's brand-new plastic action figures (Wolf Blitzer's kung-fu grip, anyone?) and these tired, worn-out toys of the 1970s we saw last night.
I also think Royal came across not as "clueless" but rather as "passionate."
"Clueless" in terms of the the solutions or proposals she put forward; the "passionate" angle is what I was referring to as "PMS". Okay, I admit I'm not biased towards emotional fits; maybe in Italy she would have come across as the epitome of coolness and composure. But it didn't work for me.
Sarkozy, was cool, manipulative, condescending and more Republican than I thought it was possible for a non-American to be.
To our jaded eyes, transparently so, I'd say, yes. I like my Blackadder comparison; you could almost see the wheels turning, oozing insincerity... with a thought balloon reading "I have a cunning plan" above his head, he would have been perfect.
It reminded me of a local debate in the U.S., say for county supervisor, where the big issues are fluoridation and when are they going to put traffic lights up at that dangerous exit by the mall.
Bingo! Couldn't have put it better myself!
Honestly, escorts for female cops!!!!
Anyway, back to the debate, it is about personality. The two candidates face off, speak freely within a loose structure and show themselves to the public. After this amount of time one can begin to understand how a person reacts, thinks and feels. Electing a leader, especially in a more Federal system such as the one in France, is more than policy statements.
All that said it's appalling that you'd defend a system that has produced such AWFUL and TERRIBLE results as our own. Perhaps this system that we have is a REASON for the hoodwinking? duuuuhhh.
