Walz vs. Vance: VP Debate Oct 1 2024

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's get this right. Settlers came to America and built something. Immigrants came to something that was already built.

+1

Wow the DAR snobs out in force tonight. I’m proud descendent of 19th and 20th century immigrants who came to a country where previous arrivals had built something, and who helped to build something even better, working in factories and building America’s bridges and roads to create the world’s greatest economy.

That's cool, doesn't mean we are at our foundation a nation of immigrants and should allow for mass immigration now. None of this means that immigration never happened. Just means that plenty of us are not immigrants or descendant from immigrants, and do not have warm fuzzy feeling about immigration.

Why won't you answer which tribal nation you belong to?

One, I don't have to answer any of your questions, and two, I am talking about the nation and the establishment of a government, not simply land.

Yeah so your ancestors came over here on a boat some time after the 16th century, just like most of American's ancestors did.

Guess what, there were already nations here across the North American continent.

Her ancestors murdered those people so they don't count.

Yes, the ones that came in the 1600s (not 16th century) formed the nation and government of the USA. Yes, including the slaves. They and their their descendants are not immigrants.

1600s is after the 16th century, no?

And did they come over on a boat? And did they establish residence in a place which was not the country of their birth? Then they immigrated. Learn your vocabulary.

They didn't immigrate. They formed a country that did not exist beforehand.

And yes 1600s is after the 16th century. Your point?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BREAKING: CNN admits Tim Walz lost the debate

Vance won hands down. Not even close, not debatable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Vance / Walz 2024!

Harris and Trump are complete idiots compared to these two. Love this debate but hate that we’re saddled between voting for the two gaslighting, intellectual lightweights who are running for president.

Is this the new line from you guys? Kamala Harris is obviously not an intellectual lightweight, and is running a fantastic campaign and destroyed Donald in a debate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BREAKING: CNN admits Tim Walz lost the debate

Vance won hands down. Not even close, not debatable.

Of course it's debatable. I guess you think lying through your teeth is laudable. I don't.

You like surface. We want substance. Vance has none, none that isn't deeply weird.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BREAKING: CNN admits Tim Walz lost the debate

Vance won hands down. Not even close, not debatable.

Up until this moment, where Vance couldn’t simply state who won in 2020, I would have said he won the debate. But it was such a damning thing to do, it swallowed his performance whole.

[Anonymous]

I’m not voting for VP Knucklehead.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/10/01/us/walz-vance-vp-debate#iran-which-launched-this-attack-has-received-over-100-billion-in-unfrozen-assets-thanks-to-the-kamala-harris-administration-what

Vance delivered some incredibly unique twists on a handful of the Republican ticket’s unpopular positions tonight. He described his anti-abortion position as a desire “to make it easier for moms to have babies.” On Trump’s failure to repeal Obamacare, Vance praised the former president for leaving health-care options in place for Americans. Asked about the Jan. 6 riot, he praised Trump for supposedly peacefully departing from the White House on Jan. 20.

Next up--Vance will spin Trump's infidelities as "his graciousness in sharing with others"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can the people arguing about whose ancestors came over on the Mayflower start their own thread?!

No, because immigration is the biggest issue in politics right now, but we are supposed to be ok with open borders because blah blah we are a nation of immigrants! No, that is not true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's get this right. Settlers came to America and built something. Immigrants came to something that was already built.

+1

Wow the DAR snobs out in force tonight. I’m proud descendent of 19th and 20th century immigrants who came to a country where previous arrivals had built something, and who helped to build something even better, working in factories and building America’s bridges and roads to create the world’s greatest economy.

That's cool, doesn't mean we are at our foundation a nation of immigrants and should allow for mass immigration now. None of this means that immigration never happened. Just means that plenty of us are not immigrants or descendant from immigrants, and do not have warm fuzzy feeling about immigration.

Why won't you answer which tribal nation you belong to?

One, I don't have to answer any of your questions, and two, I am talking about the nation and the establishment of a government, not simply land.

Yeah so your ancestors came over here on a boat some time after the 16th century, just like most of American's ancestors did.

Guess what, there were already nations here across the North American continent.

Her ancestors murdered those people so they don't count.

Yes, the ones that came in the 1600s (not 16th century) formed the nation and government of the USA. Yes, including the slaves. They and their their descendants are not immigrants.

1600s is after the 16th century, no?

And did they come over on a boat? And did they establish residence in a place which was not the country of their birth? Then they immigrated. Learn your vocabulary.

They didn't immigrate. They formed a country that did not exist beforehand.

There were nations ALREADY here. They immigrated. The North American continent was not a tabula rasa. Good lord are you that ignorant of history?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Vance / Walz 2024!

Harris and Trump are complete idiots compared to these two. Love this debate but hate that we’re saddled between voting for the two gaslighting, intellectual lightweights who are running for president.

Is this the new line from you guys? Kamala Harris is obviously not an intellectual lightweight, and is running a fantastic campaign and destroyed Donald in a debate.

No, her and Trump are horrible. Vance is obviously much smarter than both of them and Tim Walz is a good guy, not a craven partisan like both Trump and Harris. Love them both, hate Harris and Trump.

[Anonymous]

Walz "I'm friends with a school shooter" and " I'm a knucklehead at times," "I misspoke" about lying about china. So embarrassing for the Dems.

That with his unprepared debate he's not making a case for himself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's get this right. Settlers came to America and built something. Immigrants came to something that was already built.

+1

Wow the DAR snobs out in force tonight. I’m proud descendent of 19th and 20th century immigrants who came to a country where previous arrivals had built something, and who helped to build something even better, working in factories and building America’s bridges and roads to create the world’s greatest economy.

That's cool, doesn't mean we are at our foundation a nation of immigrants and should allow for mass immigration now. None of this means that immigration never happened. Just means that plenty of us are not immigrants or descendant from immigrants, and do not have warm fuzzy feeling about immigration.

Why won't you answer which tribal nation you belong to?

One, I don't have to answer any of your questions, and two, I am talking about the nation and the establishment of a government, not simply land.

Yeah, we know. Immigration starts the minute after your immigrant ancestor arrived.

My people were here at the founding, so no immigrants in my family tree.

Unless your ancestors were native american, they were not here at the founding, they were the first violent conquerors. And even the native american tribes migrated from other areas at some point in the distant past.

Your premise is faulty.

Yes, the founding was in part violent, but it happened. There was a time when the U.S. existed and a time when it didn't. Many of us, our ancestors were here at the founding. We were never immigrants.

Worse. You were violent immigrant conquerors!

[Anonymous]

Vance didn't respond to Walz about the Haitian eating cats and dogs!

[Anonymous]

Vance : smooth, lying, no memorable moments
Walz: not smooth, substantive, several distinct and strong sound bites

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Vance / Walz 2024!

Harris and Trump are complete idiots compared to these two. Love this debate but hate that we’re saddled between voting for the two gaslighting, intellectual lightweights who are running for president.

Well....honestly, a bipartisan ticket would actually be a great way to unite Americans!!

I saw the debate and all I could think of was wow....they are having a "bromance"!!