Reply to Walz vs. Vance: VP Debate Oct 1 2024

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Walz vs. Vance: VP Debate Oct 1 2024"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]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.[/quote]

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.[/quote]

You wish. You're dreaming  :lol: [/quote]

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

[quote][i]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%[/quote][/i]

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.

[quote][i]
Tim Walz - % "Favorable opinion"
Pre-debate: 40%
Post-debate: 58%

JD Vance - % "Favorable opinion"
Pre-debate: 18%
Post-debate: 32%
[/i][/quote]

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

[quote][i]
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%
[/i][/quote]

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

[quote][i]
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%[/i][/quote]

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. 
[/quote]

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

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 [/quote]

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.[/quote]

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. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics