But how did the debate, and the candidates’ different approaches to aid, trade and foreign engagement, play overseas? Here’s what the international press had to say about the Oct. 11 debate:
Israel’s The Jerusalem Post
“Critics of the Clinton-Gore Middle East policy have urged Bush, the Republican candidate, to criticize the administration for pressing Israel into concessions and for violating the Jerusalem Embassy Act. But in response to questions in the debate, Bush suggested that his policy toward Israel would be similar to that of the Democrats, President Bill Clinton and Gore.”
Canada’s Globe and Mail
“In the first half of the debate, which was consumed by questions on foreign policy, the two rarely disagreed, although they articulated different visions of U.S. power. Because this line of questioning favored Mr. Gore, who has more experience in foreign affairs, the lack of disagreement may actually have favored Mr. Bush, who showed once again that he could hold his own with the more seasoned Vice-President…Although the issues were largely fought on Mr. Gore’s ground, polls suggest that Mr. Bush may be succeeding in closing the stature gap, which may be enough to propel him to the White House.”
Australia’s Sydney Morning Herald
“George W. Bush, who went a long way to erasing doubts about whether he had the intellectual stature and grasp of foreign policy to be president….Mr. Gore was no less cautious about using U.S. troops, but said the U.S. had a responsibility to ‘step up to the plate to provide the leadership,’ including emphasizing human rights.”
Singapore’s The Business Times
“With one final debate to go, Republican presidential candidate Gov. George W. Bush seems to be sitting pretty after Wednesday night’s debate when he acquitted himself well…[He] was able to prove wrong the conventional wisdom that had predicted he would look shaky on foreign policy, by succeeding to hold his own with the more experienced vice-president and projecting a sense of understanding of American diplomacy and national security.”
“While expressing a mutual agreement with the need to maintain America’s traditional internationalist and pro-free trade policies, the two candidates did disagree on some aspects of U.S. role in the world, with Mr. Bush urging a more restrained American diplomatic and military approach, warning that the US shouldn’t be an ‘arrogant nation.’”
“Indeed, Mr. Bush’s main goal of entering into the debate was to show that he has the knowledge, the competence and the leadership qualities to be a president, and most pundits seem to agree in the post-debate analyses that he came out as a winner.”
France’s Le Figaro
“The Republican and the Democrat played the card of prudence, each one of them seeking to prove his capacity to assume the responsibilities for the White House.”
“[I]n this debate, the challenge to take up for Bush and Gore was not only intellectual. For many voters, the general attitude of the candidates–to smile, pace, sighs, movements of eyes–are as significant, if not more, as their speech.”
Britain’s The Guardian
“In many ways, it was a replica of the impeccably civilized vice-presidential debate in Kentucky last Thursday. Overall, like the veep debate, last night was a no-score draw.”
“…the most commonly repeated phrase from both men was the one the voters liked most in the Cheney-Lieberman vice-presidential contest–‘I agree with you.’”
“…a draw probably wasn’t quite good enough for Gore, even though it will have steadied his side’s nerves after Bush’s post-Boston surge. Gore seemed to give few hostages to fortune, but at the same time he failed to make the kind of impact on Bush’s record that his team were looking for. Gore desperately needs a good week on the campaign trail. Possibly, the Texas record will be his deliverance.”
Mexico’s La Cronica
“The differences between Gore and Bush, as they were expressed at least last night, in many subjects are of shades. Both consider that the aid to nations with economic problems must stay although Gore showed one more a ampler vision, when maintaining that the International Monetary Fund must have reforms.”
