Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought Waltz did a great job. Public speaking does not come easy to everyone and that's ok. Vance being able to tell repeated lies with a straight face does not mean he is better prepared for the position. He's just better at being a BS artist.

I think this moment is going to haunt him - whiny little b**ch who wants to be able to lie without anyone calling him on it

Dishonest spin, and embarrassing and shameful for Kamala to post that. Vance's next statement was to fact-check their fact-check, while the moderators, who are not running for office, talked over Vance (and also Walz) and cut off their mics to prevent them from stating facts and having a debate.
CBS literally stifled debate when both candidatees tried to debate the issue that million of voters are deeply concerned about.

But hey, it's a fun sound byte! Who cares about truth?

What "truth" are you talking about? What was not truthful about the post from Kamala HQ?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought Waltz did a great job. Public speaking does not come easy to everyone and that's ok. Vance being able to tell repeated lies with a straight face does not mean he is better prepared for the position. He's just better at being a BS artist.

I think this moment is going to haunt him - whiny little b**ch who wants to be able to lie without anyone calling him on it

Dishonest spin, and embarrassing and shameful for Kamala to post that. Vance's next statement was to fact-check their fact-check, while the moderators, who are not running for office, talked over Vance (and also Walz) and cut off their mics to prevent them from stating facts and having a debate.
CBS literally stifled debate when both candidatees tried to debate the issue that million of voters are deeply concerned about.

But hey, it's a fun sound byte! Who cares about truth?

OH THE IRONY

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought Waltz did a great job. Public speaking does not come easy to everyone and that's ok. Vance being able to tell repeated lies with a straight face does not mean he is better prepared for the position. He's just better at being a BS artist.

I think this moment is going to haunt him - whiny little b**ch who wants to be able to lie without anyone calling him on it

I agree. Vance tried to lawyer his way out later by trying to explain they are legal temporarily versus legal permanently, but there's no avoiding the truth: Vance intentionally LIED when he called them ILLEGAL. They are not illegal, and that LIE has dangerous consequences to the humans living and working legally in that community, and Vance needed to be fact-checked ASAP.

But debates of these types are about presentation. I'm a Dem but you really can't change the rules and say Walz was better just because he didn't lie (as much). I think what it is is that you like who you like. If you never knew them and watched - really watched them - Vance did better. They ALL lie in these debates. Every one of them incl Biden, Obama, Clinton, Bush, Reagan, etc. it's less about the lying and more about your ability to articulate a coherent response and get your points across. This is not mock trials where you're debating in HS - this is a political 2024 debate where you have to have some polish and come across as confident. Even in a courtroom, it's psychological to a degree - you're telling a story. It's not the accuracy it's the message. You may hate Vance's policies as I do but in terms of Walz knocking him down - he didn't. In terms of Walz projecting competence - he didn't.

Be honest. You may all like Walz better and his policies better but in terms of his performance cause that's what this is - a performance - he was mostly bad.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought Waltz did a great job. Public speaking does not come easy to everyone and that's ok. Vance being able to tell repeated lies with a straight face does not mean he is better prepared for the position. He's just better at being a BS artist.

I think this moment is going to haunt him - whiny little b**ch who wants to be able to lie without anyone calling him on it

Nurse: step in the scale please
Me: I was told there would be no fact checking

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What were the actual policy points that JD laid out last night.... Like what is his position on who won the 2020 election on affordable child care on affordable healthcare??

Go replay it or read the transcript, he was very clear and articulate.

All I got was he is married to A nice looking woman and child care is a young woman issue

And how many times did he mention his beautiful family and his three beautiful children? I almost threw something at the screen. Especially how he slid over the issue of gun control and kids being in danger at school. His three beautiful children I'm sure have no such worries in their wealthy bubble.

How many times did Walz mention Minnesota? Does he know he’s not running for reelection as governor?

His experience as Governor helps him. Sorry your guy doesn’t have any.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I enjoyed watching the debate.

As I watched, the main thing I considered is who is more prepared to step into the presidency. That is the primary purpose of a VP.

Vance proved he is ready. He has a command of the issues. He is able to articulate his positions and can explain and defend the positions of the ticket he is running on. He understands the concerns of the American people. And, he is at ease addressing a large audience.

The same cannot be said for Walz. He struggled trying to defend his past statements. And, they didn't even get into the whole military service embellishments. It wasn't clear that he understood or could defend the positions of his ticket. This is not surprising since it is questionable whether Harris actually can articulate her positions. He was uncomfortable. And, what was the "I became friends with school shooters" all about? WTH?

You know, I don’t want a commander in chief who makes sh!t up, by his own admission. Narcissists are masters of ease. Not exactly a plus.

Vance explaines this. Erratic, unpredictable, uncivilized leaders with nuclear weapons are scary, so everyone defers to them. It worked for Putin and Kim, and it worked for Trump.

Anonymous wrote:Anyone wondering why the debate moderators didn’t talk about:

-the military service records of either candidate?

-the two assassination attempts on Trump’s life?

Why were those topics not covered?

Nobody cares.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought Waltz did a great job. Public speaking does not come easy to everyone and that's ok. Vance being able to tell repeated lies with a straight face does not mean he is better prepared for the position. He's just better at being a BS artist.

I think this moment is going to haunt him - whiny little b**ch who wants to be able to lie without anyone calling him on it

Dishonest spin, and embarrassing and shameful for Kamala to post that. Vance's next statement was to fact-check their fact-check, while the moderators, who are not running for office, talked over Vance (and also Walz) and cut off their mics to prevent them from stating facts and having a debate.
CBS literally stifled debate when both candidatees tried to debate the issue that million of voters are deeply concerned about.

But hey, it's a fun sound bite! Who cares about truth?

Vance lied a lot. If he stopped lying, he would have other problems.

The Moment When Vance Dodged a Jan. 6 Question but Said Plenty

JD Vance sailed fairly smoothly through some 90 minutes of Tuesday’s debate with Tim Walz. Then the subject turned to the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/02/us/politics/vance-jan-6-debate.html

Anonymous wrote:Illegal immigrants drive down wages and drive up real estate? How? Are they buying up houses with even less money than everyone else?

It happens when multiple households combine their income to buy one home. You have at least two families living in a home.

The rental market is also affected because there is less in inventory.

What is the point of a debate? Is it to offer a slick rhetorical response to everything even if your response is a lie and/or you are refusing to answer the question that was actually asked? Or to make a honest case that is grounded in reality and has some bearing on what people actually want to know?

if you eliminate truth and answering questions from your standards, Vance did well. But he did well *only* if you remove those things. Unfortunately I still think truth and actual responses matter.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought Waltz did a great job. Public speaking does not come easy to everyone and that's ok. Vance being able to tell repeated lies with a straight face does not mean he is better prepared for the position. He's just better at being a BS artist.

I think this moment is going to haunt him - whiny little b**ch who wants to be able to lie without anyone calling him on it

Dishonest spin, and embarrassing and shameful for Kamala to post that. Vance's next statement was to fact-check their fact-check, while the moderators, who are not running for office, talked over Vance (and also Walz) and cut off their mics to prevent them from stating facts and having a debate.
CBS literally stifled debate when both candidatees tried to debate the issue that million of voters are deeply concerned about.

But hey, it's a fun sound byte! Who cares about truth?

Walz was unswerving questions with substance. He had couple stumble moments but that’s what makes him relatable. Vance didn’t stumble, he was well prepared and rehearsed. Vance was auditioning for smooth talking politician. And he overdid it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone use the QR code to read the fact checks last night..... I'm guessing anyone who did that are the people who said Walz won

Yeah Walz was better on substance once you looked up whether what they said was accurate.

Vance was better at playing the smooth-talking politician.

Correct.