Walz vs. Vance: VP Debate Oct 1 2024

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Main stream media is going nuts because they were unable to manipulate how Vance appeared. They had published so much garbage , it is like they are out to target anyone that supports America first

Garbage = actual interviews and rallies

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And the carousel of Republican respectability moves forward. Every year we get to hear about how the Republicans of yesteryear were actually the normal good ones and the current ones are "scary" "fascist" "chilling." It's been going on since W when I was a young teen.

Such utter BS. Yes, I loathed Bush, Jr. No, I NEVER feared that he would try to overthrow an election. He was able to express genuine sympathy at memorials. He didn’t call his opponents Tampons. If you can’t see the difference it’s because your lips are stuck to Trump’s @ss limiting your vision.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2000/dec/24/uselections2000.usa2
Here's a contemporary source saying Bush pulled off a COUP. Yes, this is what everyone was saying back then. That he stole the election. I disliked him then and now, I don't care whose funeral he cried at.
Trump will be dead soon and you'll be saying he wasn't that bad, the NEW GUY is the real devil.

He and the supreme court indeed stole the election, thanks in part to the Roger Stone Brooks Brothers riots) that starred, among others, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Barrett,

That may be true. The point is, his reputation has been completely rehabilitated 20 years later and Dems all talk about him fondly. FONDLY! It would have been unthinkable to imagine.

That's because things get hazy with time. And it's because he's become a recluse painter who is friends with Michelle Obama since the WH. And it's because Trump is so f'in monstrous that Dick Cheney has now joined Team Kamala. Life is different now, than it was when W was in office, and that makes us different, too.

The real truth is that people have forgotten Bush and Cheney's misdeeds because they did not have their homeland burned to the ground and hundreds of thousands of their compatriots killed as a result of the conflict they triggered.

You can be sure all the terrorist cells that sprung up in the wake of Bush and Co. are taught to hate America because of actual, real, acts of terror. American ones.

So yes, they were arrogant men who didn't care about others living on the other side of the world. They have shaped the Middle East we know today.

+1 and every Republican under 40 knows this

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And the carousel of Republican respectability moves forward. Every year we get to hear about how the Republicans of yesteryear were actually the normal good ones and the current ones are "scary" "fascist" "chilling." It's been going on since W when I was a young teen.

Such utter BS. Yes, I loathed Bush, Jr. No, I NEVER feared that he would try to overthrow an election. He was able to express genuine sympathy at memorials. He didn’t call his opponents Tampons. If you can’t see the difference it’s because your lips are stuck to Trump’s @ss limiting your vision.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2000/dec/24/uselections2000.usa2
Here's a contemporary source saying Bush pulled off a COUP. Yes, this is what everyone was saying back then. That he stole the election. I disliked him then and now, I don't care whose funeral he cried at.
Trump will be dead soon and you'll be saying he wasn't that bad, the NEW GUY is the real devil.

He and the supreme court indeed stole the election, thanks in part to the Roger Stone Brooks Brothers riots) that starred, among others, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Barrett,

That may be true. The point is, his reputation has been completely rehabilitated 20 years later and Dems all talk about him fondly. FONDLY! It would have been unthinkable to imagine.

That's because things get hazy with time. And it's because he's become a recluse painter who is friends with Michelle Obama since the WH. And it's because Trump is so f'in monstrous that Dick Cheney has now joined Team Kamala. Life is different now, than it was when W was in office, and that makes us different, too.

The real truth is that people have forgotten Bush and Cheney's misdeeds because they did not have their homeland burned to the ground and hundreds of thousands of their compatriots killed as a result of the conflict they triggered.

You can be sure all the terrorist cells that sprung up in the wake of Bush and Co. are taught to hate America because of actual, real, acts of terror. American ones.

So yes, they were arrogant men who didn't care about others living on the other side of the world. They have shaped the Middle East we know today.

+1 and every Republican under 40 knows this

Remember the movie Charlie Wilson's War?

And how at the very end, when Republicans were glorying in the Afghan defeat of the Russians, all any sane person could think about was the blowback to come.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Vance is why we pick the bear.

+1

What does this mean?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s so shocking that creepy guy like Vance and rapists like Trump are trying to strip women of bodily autonomy and access to birth control. It’s almost like they want them barefoot and pregnant and are supremely angry at childless cat ladies reject them and are taking white men jobs.

These guys are so predictable and pathetic.

So much more important stuff going on than having moved abortion terms to the state level from the federal level.

How many abortions a year in America? 1M?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Vance is why we pick the bear.

+1

What does this mean?

It means pp agrees that Vance is why women pick the bear.

And now millions of more women have seen Vance in action. He’s creepy. Not helpful for the Trump campaign.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's amazing to me how people from each side choose to stubbornly defend the candidate they support. There was a clear winner yesterday night, but each side insists on claiming their candidate won. The debate, although quite interesting, did not change anyone's mind.

clear winner on what?

on style and delivery, vance was better.

on substance and accuracy, walz was better.

on big knock-out punches, there was only one. walz landed it in the final moment of the debate.

on bad behavior, there was only one instance, when vance whined to moderators after being fact-checked that he prepared for the debate assuming he wouldn't get fact-checked.

on first half of the debate (including opening), vance did better.

on second half of debate (including closing), walz did better.

on who was overall better according to pundits, most said a tie, some said vance.

on who was overall better according to regular people focus group, most said tie, some said walz.

on who won over more independents, walz.

You wish. You're dreaming

The CNN cross-tabs among independents are very interesting. They surveyed the same people before and after the debate:
https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/25182006/cnn-instant-poll-no-clear-winner-in-vp-debate-between-tim-walz-and-jd-vance.pdf

Takeaway: Walz underperformed expectations for Independents

Regardless of which presidential candidate you support, who do you think is likely to do a better job in
the upcoming vice-presidential debate? Walz 60%, Vance 40%

Regardless of which candidate you support, who did the better job in the debate? Walz 46%, Vance 54%

Takeaway: even if they think Vance did better in the debate, Independents still have increased their "favorable" views of Walz and he's viewed more favorably than Vance by a large margin for Independents.

Tim Walz - % "Favorable opinion"
Pre-debate: 40%
Post-debate: 58%

JD Vance - % "Favorable opinion"
Pre-debate: 18%
Post-debate: 32%

Takeaway: Walz is viewed as more relatable and representative of the America Independent voters want by strong margins

Regardless of which candidate you support, who is more in touch with the needs and problems of people like you?
Walz 47%, Vance 27%, Both 16%, Neither 10%

Regardless of which candidate you support, who more closely shares your vision for America?
Walz 46%, Vance 29%, Both 13%, Neither 12%

Takeaway: the VP debate will largely be inconsequential for Independents in casting their vote

Did tonight's debate:
Change your mind about whom to vote for - 1%
Make you reconsider, but not change your mind - 22%
Not affect your choice for president - 77%

Conclusion: JD had a better presentation style in the debate. But he was also facing very low expectations relative to Trump. The bar for a "good performance" was lower. Critically, Vance is less personally appealing to Independents relative to Walz. It also seems that Walz's lack of polish relative to Vance makes him appear more relatable and Independents are forgiving of that.

Yes. Vance was smooth. But it was clear that Walz has actual experience and knows how to get things done. Understands the principle of compromise. Walz was fluent in detail and honest about the challenges.

Vance was confident but substantively empty. It was notable that he did not refer to any of his work in the senate or was he has accomplished for his constituents. His lack of real world experience was apparent and not what you want for the VP of a guy as elderly and declining as Trump. We don’t need someone learning on the job.

- independent

Really? I was unimpressed with his reply to the only question in this debate that actually caught my attention - law Walz allegedly signed allowing doctors not to provide life saving care to babies that survive abortion. I found it deeply disturbing as any normal mother would.
JD Vance kept asking him about it repeatedly, but Walz cleverly kept avoiding providing honest answer.
So I had no choice but to google the answer.

https://www.ncregister.com/news/tim-walz-born-alive-abortion

Here is my favorite section of this publication:

“ The bill, which passed the U.S. House 241-183 but didn’t get a vote in the U.S. Senate, sought to require that “any health care practitioner who is present when a child is born alive” after an attempted abortion “exercise the same degree of care as reasonably provided to any other child born alive at the same gestational age” and “ensure that such child is immediately admitted to a hospital.”
Walz explained in a tweet that he meant to vote No on the bill, but mistakenly voted Yes because he thought he was voting on an unrelated procedural measure.
“It was an honest mistake. I meant to vote NO, as I did on an identical bill last Congress.”

So according to you, Vance is “substantively empty” and Walz is… what? Morally wholesome, huh?

“Evil guy” who cares about helpless newborns, and “good guy” who leaves them for dead?

On a more upbeat note - I can picture Walz saying: “It was an honest mistake. I meant to press ABORT button but mistakenly pressed LAUNCH” because I thought I was ordering food”.

- a registered democrat and a former catholic. Also, pro-Ukraine, hence not a Vance supporter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s so shocking that creepy guy like Vance and rapists like Trump are trying to strip women of bodily autonomy and access to birth control. It’s almost like they want them barefoot and pregnant and are supremely angry at childless cat ladies reject them and are taking white men jobs.

These guys are so predictable and pathetic.

So much more important stuff going on than having moved abortion terms to the state level from the federal level.

How many abortions a year in America? 1M?

That's your opinion. Many of us think it's a very big deal for women to be able to have control over their own bodies.

[Anonymous]

Vance did a whole lot better than Trump.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s so shocking that creepy guy like Vance and rapists like Trump are trying to strip women of bodily autonomy and access to birth control. It’s almost like they want them barefoot and pregnant and are supremely angry at childless cat ladies reject them and are taking white men jobs.

These guys are so predictable and pathetic.

So much more important stuff going on than having moved abortion terms to the state level from the federal level.

How many abortions a year in America? 1M?

You can’t sense your casual misogyny, can you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Vance did a whole lot better than Trump.

Yeah but the bar is in hell for Trump and Vance didn’t really do a very good job. A slick liar who reads “sex predator” isn’t a voter winning look.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s so shocking that creepy guy like Vance and rapists like Trump are trying to strip women of bodily autonomy and access to birth control. It’s almost like they want them barefoot and pregnant and are supremely angry at childless cat ladies reject them and are taking white men jobs.

These guys are so predictable and pathetic.

So much more important stuff going on than having moved abortion terms to the state level from the federal level.

How many abortions a year in America? 1M?

You can’t sense your casual misogyny, can you?

That one time we left slavery up to the states…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Main stream media is going nuts because they were unable to manipulate how Vance appeared. They had published so much garbage , it is like they are out to target anyone that supports America first

Garbage = actual interviews and rallies

How about Vance's itsy bitsy tantrum when he shouted " I thought you weren't going to fact check!". Big bad Margaret Brennan won't let me lie. Mwah, mwah.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's amazing to me how people from each side choose to stubbornly defend the candidate they support. There was a clear winner yesterday night, but each side insists on claiming their candidate won. The debate, although quite interesting, did not change anyone's mind.

clear winner on what?

on style and delivery, vance was better.

on substance and accuracy, walz was better.

on big knock-out punches, there was only one. walz landed it in the final moment of the debate.

on bad behavior, there was only one instance, when vance whined to moderators after being fact-checked that he prepared for the debate assuming he wouldn't get fact-checked.

on first half of the debate (including opening), vance did better.

on second half of debate (including closing), walz did better.

on who was overall better according to pundits, most said a tie, some said vance.

on who was overall better according to regular people focus group, most said tie, some said walz.

on who won over more independents, walz.

You wish. You're dreaming

The CNN cross-tabs among independents are very interesting. They surveyed the same people before and after the debate:
https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/25182006/cnn-instant-poll-no-clear-winner-in-vp-debate-between-tim-walz-and-jd-vance.pdf

Takeaway: Walz underperformed expectations for Independents

Regardless of which presidential candidate you support, who do you think is likely to do a better job in
the upcoming vice-presidential debate? Walz 60%, Vance 40%

Regardless of which candidate you support, who did the better job in the debate? Walz 46%, Vance 54%

Takeaway: even if they think Vance did better in the debate, Independents still have increased their "favorable" views of Walz and he's viewed more favorably than Vance by a large margin for Independents.

Tim Walz - % "Favorable opinion"
Pre-debate: 40%
Post-debate: 58%

JD Vance - % "Favorable opinion"
Pre-debate: 18%
Post-debate: 32%

Takeaway: Walz is viewed as more relatable and representative of the America Independent voters want by strong margins

Regardless of which candidate you support, who is more in touch with the needs and problems of people like you?
Walz 47%, Vance 27%, Both 16%, Neither 10%

Regardless of which candidate you support, who more closely shares your vision for America?
Walz 46%, Vance 29%, Both 13%, Neither 12%

Takeaway: the VP debate will largely be inconsequential for Independents in casting their vote

Did tonight's debate:
Change your mind about whom to vote for - 1%
Make you reconsider, but not change your mind - 22%
Not affect your choice for president - 77%

Conclusion: JD had a better presentation style in the debate. But he was also facing very low expectations relative to Trump. The bar for a "good performance" was lower. Critically, Vance is less personally appealing to Independents relative to Walz. It also seems that Walz's lack of polish relative to Vance makes him appear more relatable and Independents are forgiving of that.

Yes. Vance was smooth. But it was clear that Walz has actual experience and knows how to get things done. Understands the principle of compromise. Walz was fluent in detail and honest about the challenges.

Vance was confident but substantively empty. It was notable that he did not refer to any of his work in the senate or was he has accomplished for his constituents. His lack of real world experience was apparent and not what you want for the VP of a guy as elderly and declining as Trump. We don’t need someone learning on the job.

- independent

Really? I was unimpressed with his reply to the only question in this debate that actually caught my attention - law Walz allegedly signed allowing doctors not to provide life saving care to babies that survive abortion. I found it deeply disturbing as any normal mother would.
JD Vance kept asking him about it repeatedly, but Walz cleverly kept avoiding providing honest answer.
So I had no choice but to google the answer.

https://www.ncregister.com/news/tim-walz-born-alive-abortion

Here is my favorite section of this publication:

“ The bill, which passed the U.S. House 241-183 but didn’t get a vote in the U.S. Senate, sought to require that “any health care practitioner who is present when a child is born alive” after an attempted abortion “exercise the same degree of care as reasonably provided to any other child born alive at the same gestational age” and “ensure that such child is immediately admitted to a hospital.”
Walz explained in a tweet that he meant to vote No on the bill, but mistakenly voted Yes because he thought he was voting on an unrelated procedural measure.
“It was an honest mistake. I meant to vote NO, as I did on an identical bill last Congress.”

So according to you, Vance is “substantively empty” and Walz is… what? Morally wholesome, huh?

“Evil guy” who cares about helpless newborns, and “good guy” who leaves them for dead?

On a more upbeat note - I can picture Walz saying: “It was an honest mistake. I meant to press ABORT button but mistakenly pressed LAUNCH” because I thought I was ordering food”.

- a registered democrat and a former catholic. Also, pro-Ukraine, hence not a Vance supporter.

Pp here. That’s interesting. I thought the question was about a Minnesota law that a governor of Minnesota would have signed. But tbh I know the GOP platform on women’s healthcare, regardless of what Vance was trying to peddle in the debate, is not good for women or men so I tuned out on the moral outrage that Vance is trying to gin up about a medical decision that is private. I’m comfortable that no one supports infanticide after the ninth month - or whatever tortured phrasing is employed.

I’d be curious though as to what substance you heard from Vance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Vance did a whole lot better than Trump.

Yes. That’s true. No slurring or slumping. But as a nation, we can leave Trump and his divisiveness behind.