QUOTE
Credit goes to Steven Pryor of PWInsider.com
I watched the debates on ABC News NOW through Comcast.net's stream between the two at University of Miami. Stephanie started things off with some WWE PR speech about Smackdown the Vote and how important the youth is. Same stuff she and Linda have said before.
Foley is a Democrat, supporting Kerry.
Bradshaw is a Republican, supporting Bush.
The crowd seemed somewhat left leaning, but not so much that it ever seemed lopsided. It's hard to say and I'm basing this on the pops to the responses.
FIRST SEGMENT:
The format was question: Foley answered, Bradshaw countered, Democrat student countered response, Republican student countered Democratic response.
The moderator was cheesy.
The two students on the forum were ill-informed and did not speak well in front of the audience. The girl was just horrible and lost her composure many times. The guy was more confident but was hard to follow at times. Sorry that I don't have their names.
Now on to Foley and Bradshaw.
I find it hard to believe that anyone would expect that Bradshaw would be as articulate as Foley, so I won't go into much depth comparing the speaking styles. It's not really fair, Foley is more articulate on RAW and Smackdown than Bradshaw, and it carried over into the debate.
Foley was quite well informed. He had statistics, historical and current references, and was able to say more than just Democratic talking points in his responses to the questions. His speaking style was well paced, deliberate, and strong. He seemed in good control of the situation, and confident in his delivery.
Bradshaw was not as informed as Foley. I can't truly blame him on this. He is on the road more than Foley and may not have been able to research things as in depth as Mick. Bradshaw was very energetic in his delivery, however. His arguments seemed somewhat hollow. His statements were not very clear or developed. There were a lot of cheap shots and low blows used as filler, and at times he seemed somewhat arrogant. Even for cheap crowd pops. At times he seemed to be just regurgitating talking points from FOX News. However, he did truly seem to care about the questions based on education and the problems with proper funding for it.
Overall Mick seemed to win if you rate speaking ability and clarity of message. However, I don't think that Bradshaw is truly the proper type of opponent for someone with his skill. As far as message goes, its hard for me to grade it.
END OF FIRST SEGMENT.
Public Service announcement from John Cena. Word.
SECOND SEGMENT
The second segment saw two current Florida congressmen join the forum, State Sen. Dave Aronberg (D) Florida, and State Rep. Marcelo Llorente ® Florida. For the most part they sound like all other partisan politicians we've heard so far. Very little original content, rehashes of things Bradshaw and Mick already said, and regurgitations of Democrat and Republican talking points.
Mick and Bradshaw then got to ask one question for each of the congressmen.
This was supposed to be a brief question, but JBL talked and talked and had almost no sort of question at the end of his comment, it was something about military strategy. Aronberg did his best to reply but it was sort of hard since there was no clear question. Bradshaw interrupted and said he wasn't answering the question, Foley stepped in and said JBL got to ask a 5 minute question and he needed to have patience and get a 5 mins response. Overall, it was a poor question that lead to a poor response.
Foley asked Llorente a question that was somewhat big too, but he used the first part to somewhat educate the audience on the background about his question. He then went on to ask where Bush is coming up with the figures that Bush says he is going to use to pay for everything considering that we are in big deficits. The response from Llorente was decent, but nothing spectacular. Overall a better response than Aronberg, but he had a better question to deal with.
END OF SECOND SEGMENT
Shelton got the next PSA. Bling, bling, yo.
THIRD SEGMENT
Third segment was crowd interactive time! Crowd got to pose a question, and then state who they wanted to answer it.
Bradshaw was a real prick here and cut off the girl asking the first question, since she was attacking Bush, asking if she had a time limit. The crowd booed this and his reply was "I'm a bad guy." The response by Llorente was good and articulate. Not bad for being put on the spot. Foley responded to Llorente, jabbing that his answer was dull and hurting the ratings. The crowd was somewhat mixed to this. He then said we have what he would call a "Suck It" precedence. His arguments compared Bush to DX and that the American people will demand more of the President, as WWE viewers demanded more of the wrestlers and characters.
The second crowd question was a hard hitting on to the republican student representative, and seemed that the kid asking was doing so to tick this guy off on a personal level. A SHOOT IN A POLITICAL DEBATE, OH THE DRAMA! His response was ferocious (sp?), if rambling. The democratic response cam from Aronberg, and was somewhat arrogant.
Third question was to Mick and the student wanted to know how a first time voter can get info that is not just sound bites. Mick said she needs to get news from multiple sources (TV and print) and then take what she can from everything and come to her own conclusions. Mick did a bad impression of Vinnie Mac firing Bush. Bradshaw replied saying she had to decide for herself saying that anyone who states they are a die hard republican or democrat are saying they can't think for themselves. According to his earlier statements, JBL just stated he can't think for himself. He then stated the first presidential debate Thursday is going to be dumb and that it is to processed and controlled. Trying to tune viewers away from the debates and to Smackdown? Hmmm?
Question 4 was on defense, and why things are safer for use with Bush? JBL had a wise crack again on the student who asked a serious question and got a bigger boo this time. Not very classy JBL. He had no idea what he was talking about here, talking about killing bad guys and things. Foley responded sounding like Dick Cheney. The crowd is now officially on Mick's side.
Question 5 was for Foley, wanting to know about how he felt about Democrats feeling threatened with Nader getting on ballots and using lawsuits and whatnot. Foley said Nader makes sense but now is not the time to vote for him, there are more important things on the line, and if he gets in office he will have no pull in Washington to get anything done. Foley asked if that was a good answer, she said no, and so he tried to clarify. Saying intimidation was the reason why. JBL replied by saying Ralph Nader is an idiot, again heeling the crowd. Boos are really heavy now and Foley says this is more heat than he gets in the ring.
Things ramble from here and I lost interest.
END OF SEGMENT
Final question was a roundtable posed to everyone. I didn't really pay attention since the question was about what the most straight forward thing they wanted to hear in the debate on Thursday.
Overall, JBL looked like a dolt, and by the end came off as a real pr**k.
Foley looked smart.
So, everything that people thought was going to happen happened. No real surprises.
Source: NODQ
I found this really funny
He looks in pretty good shape (for himself at any rate 
It did make a change from the usual chair shot or whatever...I mean...it sort of says: "How on earth do you take a man that size down!? Oh....yeah...shooting him ought to do it 
