Walz vs. Vance: VP Debate Oct 1 2024

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Day 1 was 1400 days ago!

Bam.

Why has Harris not working o this right now!!!

Somebody flunked their high school civics class. Go back and study what powers are enumerated in a Vice President versus President and then you’d know how stupid you really are when making this allegation.

Let me clean that up.

The problems we have had in the last 3.5 years fall directly on Biden/Harris. They have similar policies.

Even so, Biden has exited the stage and handed over most responsibilities to Harris. She is sitting in on calls with world leaders, leading relief efforts for Helene, and he is letting her do whatever she wants now with his support.

So if these problems are so urgent, why is not fixing them NOW vs waiting for January 2025?

Trump torpedo'd the immigration bill that should have passed in March. If immigration is so important, why didn't the GOP pass the bill?

Simple!!!!!

That bill still allowed up to 5000 illegals to cross daily. Was weak on border security and enforcement!


That bill was written up in 2024.


In 2023, HR2 was passed by the Republican House and was never taken up by the Democrat Cornell’s
Senate.


It was better in every way possible. Limits on asylum claims, made migrants wait at posts of entry, limited false asylum claims, more agents and border wall.


So. Senate bill was worse than HR2.

Democrats sank that bill in 2023!!!!!

False narrative used to provide cover for Trump’s blatant agenda to exploit illegal migration as his strongest issue for the 2924 election.

Here is that claim fact checked

https://www.factcheck.org/2024/02/unraveling-misinformation-about-bipartisan-immigration-bill/

The $118 billion bill (https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/news/majority/murray-releases-text-of-bipartisan-national-security-supplemental), called the Emergency National Security Supplemental Appropriations Act, sought significant changes in border policy. It included (https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/emergency_national_security_supplemental_section-by-section.pdf)

money to build more border barriers, to greatly expand detention facilities, and to hire more Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol agents, asylum officers and immigration judges to reduce the years-long backlog in cases to determine asylum eligibility. It sought (https://www.politico.com/news/2024/02/05/biden-bipartisan-immigration-deal-00139558) to expedite the asylum process, essentially ending — in most cases — the so-called “catch and release” po
licy whereby migrants are released into the U.S. pending asylum hearings. And it would have increased the standard of evidence needed to win asylum status.

The bill also would have supplied more funding to interdict fentanyl and human trafficking, and it included $60 billion in aid for Ukraine and $14 billion for Israel.

Does Not ‘Accept’ 5,000 Illegal Immigrants a Day

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

This is not good for the GOP

I googled abortion during the debate, and it was because Vance started telling lies about Minnesota abortion laws and I wanted to see what he was talking about.

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/10/01/us/factcheck-walz-vance
“The statute you signed into law, it says that a doctor who presides over an abortion where the baby survives — the doctor is under no obligation to provide life-saving care to a baby who survives a botched late-term abortion.”
— Senator JD Vance

This is false.
Mr. Vance is distorting Mr. Walz’s repeal of a so-called born alive law that had been in effect in Minnesota since the 1970s. That law required doctors to report when a “live child” was “born as the result of an abortion,” and to provide “all reasonable measures consistent with good medical practice” to care for that infant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Walz was not brilliant but could have made his points more clearly. But he performed better than Biden.

I thought Walz did OK.

Obviously Biden's last performance is a very low bar, as that literally ended his campaign.

[Anonymous]

Vance is a practiced liar and smooth gaslighter so the ladies fact-checking him really pissed him off.

"Wah you promised no fact-checking!"

[Anonymous]

Vance will return to race-baiting demagoguery tomorrow. One more month of delusional fear and prejudice. They know what their voters want to hear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Kamala Harris wants to fix these things on Day 1.

Day 1 was 1400 days ago. She should be working on them right now.

Learn American civics before opining

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Walz was not brilliant but could have made his points more clearly. But he performed better than Biden.

I thought Walz did OK.

Obviously Biden's last performance is a very low bar, as that literally ended his campaign.

Yes that was in response to PP’s observation that Joe Klein opined that Walz did nearly as bad as Biden. I think that Walz was awkward here and there but he did better than Biden. Also, he is running for VP not P.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Walz was not brilliant but could have made his points more clearly. But he performed better than Biden.

I thought Walz did OK.

Obviously Biden's last performance is a very low bar, as that literally ended his campaign.

Yes that was in response to PP’s observation that Joe Klein opined that Walz did nearly as bad as Biden. I think that Walz was awkward here and there but he did better than Biden. Also, he is running for VP not P.

Who is Joe Klein and why should we care about his opinion?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Walz was not brilliant but could have made his points more clearly. But he performed better than Biden.

I thought Walz did OK.

Obviously Biden's last performance is a very low bar, as that literally ended his campaign.

Yes that was in response to PP’s observation that Joe Klein opined that Walz did nearly as bad as Biden. I think that Walz was awkward here and there but he did better than Biden. Also, he is running for VP not P.

Walz did fine and got better as he went along. He is not a smooth talker but he said substantive, thoughtful things and he nailed Vance to the wall at the end about Jan 6.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Walz was not brilliant but could have made his points more clearly. But he performed better than Biden.

I thought Walz did OK.

Obviously Biden's last performance is a very low bar, as that literally ended his campaign.

Yes that was in response to PP’s observation that Joe Klein opined that Walz did nearly as bad as Biden. I think that Walz was awkward here and there but he did better than Biden. Also, he is running for VP not P.

Walz did fine and got better as he went along. He is not a smooth talker but he said substantive, thoughtful things and he nailed Vance to the wall at the end about Jan 6.

+1

[Anonymous]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/elections/interactive/2024/vice-presidential-debate-voter-poll/

[Anonymous]

friends with school shooters|