The Sept. 30 presidential debate in Miami marked the kickoff to the 2004 series of three contests between republican incumbent George Bush and democratic candidate John Kerry with a focus on foreign policy and homeland security.

On campus views of the debate were mixed with some students not watching at all, while others watched it in its entirety including the media spin and analysis afterward. Those students who watched were passionate about discussing the debate.

“Kerry wasn’t explaining himself. He sounded too intellectual, said Eileen O’Brien, 21, a liberal arts major from Langhorne. “He just has to say what he wants to say and get on with it.”

“On the other hand, Bush was dragging,” she continued. “You could tell he was getting angry. He didn’t seem to react, and he looked tired. Maybe it was because he spent the day with the victims of the Florida hurricanes.”

“I agreed with Bush, and I admire his compassion for the troops. Kerry thinks he can help the situation in Iraq by pulling out the troops. I don’t think this will help,” explained Alex Lochetto, a 20-year-old liberal arts major from Warminster.

Other students agreed upon a winner of the debate, but not a winner of votes. “Kerry definitely dominated the debate,” said Kristof Masszi, a 19-year-old Humanities major from Doylestown. “Kerry says things to get the votes. He will say anything to get people on his side.”

Still some students haven’t taken an interest in the election despite increased media coverage. Dave Grebe, a 20-year-old criminal justice major from Warwick, said, “I don’t care about the election. I didn’t watch the debate and I am not voting.”

When asked whether the debate helped students gain an understanding of the candidates’ views, Stefanie Sulikowski, a 19-year-old liberal asrts major from Fairless Hills, said, “The debate helped me see how the candidates felt about certain issues. Bush seemed to repeat himself and he avoided answering the questions. Kerry brought out his views and really explained himself, and he didn’t make any silly faces.”

Mona Shatter, a 19-year-old Communications major from Bensalem said, “Watching the debate strengthened my opinion of who I am going to vote for.”

Others said the debate did not change their opinions.

“The debate didn’t persuade me,” said Nicole Kesselman, 19, a liberal arts major from Holland. “I knew who I wanted to vote for before hand, and I am still going to vote for him.”

Many students also felt the spilt screen used during the event added extra insight into the candidates’ attitudes.

“The spilt screen was great! It made Bush look real smug,” said Sulikowski. “Almost like he was showing Kerry that I am the president now, and you have no chance of beating me.”

“The spilt screen reminded me of watching an episode of Ricki Lake, Masszi said. “It was very interesting to watch the candidates’ facial expressions while they were speaking and listening to each other.”

A lot of students who did not watch the debate did find out about what happened. Ron Lipson, a 20-year-old Liberal Arts major from Doylestown said, “I didn’t watch the debate, but I heard about it. I saw the clips of Bush’s facial expression and he looked like a mouse in a snake’s cage. I am probably going to vote for Kerry because I agree with him more, but he does change his mind.”

The first debate is just one in a series of three. The candidates will continue to exchange their arguments in St. Louis on Oct. 8 and Tempe, Arizona on Oct. 13.