Anonymous wrote:The vibe from Vance was weird guy holding himself tightly in check to present as a calm, polite, rational conservative. Anyone who has not been exposed to the clips of the real Vance might be deceived.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Visually, Vance looked better and was calmer than Walz. Waltz is folksy and relatable but the split screen visual did go in Vance’s favor with Walz appearing sweaty and anxious. Remember, younger generations know all about social media and how to look better, sound better and be insta ready angled.

The age difference did show just as with Trump vs Harris. Look as far back at Kennedy vs Nixon. There is a lesson to be learned about how to present yourself and how others will view you. Calm means you are winning.

None of this will matter in a week. Trump is still at the top of the ticket and Vance wrote the forward to Project 2025.

No he did not write the foreword to project 2025, and Trump disavowed Project 2025 and they closed up shop.

https://newrepublic.com/article/184393/jd-vance-violent-foreword-kevin-roberts-project-2025-leader-book

he wrote the forward to the book by the author of project 2025

https://newrepublic.com/article/184393/jd-vance-violent-foreword-kevin-roberts-project-2025-leader-book

He has also assured Trump’s supporters that Project 2025 would become a reality if the former president returned to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. In June, he told former Trump adviser Steve Bannon’s “War Room” podcast that Project 2025 was “gonna be a D-Day invasion plan” and urged listeners to “flood the zone with us.” “We’re going to make this happen under President Trump,” Dans said. “And this is ultimately his direction and his team’s direction.”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Climate change
Amid the devastating damage from Hurricane Helene, both were asked if climate change was contributing to such extreme weather events. Walz emphatically said climate change was "real" while Vance expressed skepticism about "weird science," stating carbon emissions were contributing to the climate crisis.

Health care,
Vance was pressed on Trump's comment that he only had "concepts of a plan" to replace the Affordable Care Act and how their administration would protect people with preexisting conditions.

He also distorted many of Trump's actions on the ACA and claimed Trump made the law stronger, which he actually tried to kill twice but failed thanks to the late great John McCain.

Housing crisis
Walz was asked about Harris' plan to build three million new homes (which he argued would not drive up prices and would lead to generational wealth) and whether he believed it was likely Congress would agree to her proposal for an enhanced Child Tax Credit. He said both high housing and child care costs were the biggest burdens on American families.

Abortion
Vance claimed that he never supported a national abortion ban, despite previously signaling support for a bill introduced by Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham that would ban abortion after 15 weeks nationwide.

Walz spoke about the women whose health has been negatively impacted by state-level restrictions since the fall of Roe v. Wade. Walz blamed Trump for the Supreme Court nominations he said "put this all into motion."


Groundhog Day Jan 6

Vance refused to say if he will accept election, doesn't condemn Jan. 6

Near end, Vance was asked if he would seek to challenge the 2024 election even if every governor certified the results. However, the senator sidestepped the question and pivoted to what he claimed was Harris and tech companies censoring people. He also brought up the endorsements of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Tulsi Gabbard.

Walz said he was troubled by Vance's statement and said such denials needed to come to an end.
"Here we are, four years later, in the same boat. I will tell you, that when this is over, we need to shake hands, this election, and the winner needs to be the winner. This has got to stop. It's tearing our country apart.”

Amen Gov Walz

https://apple.news/AWaCpHbXDQ_606DUDARVptQ

he lied

So Vance, a trained and certified lawyer, understands the difference between a Federal and State, unlike you. Maybe ask your biglaw DH to explain.

LOL, those are the hairs you are splitting? If you have to go that route, you already lose the debate on the topic.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Vance came off as very likeable.

I thought he came off very slick, his facial expressions just a tad smug, bordering on know-it-all, with a whiff of condescension. It was totally apparent this is a guy who knows how to do PR on the fly. Rewriting Trump's actions in the telling, with such easy-breezy confidence was infuriating. Maybe that's the benefit of Yale law school training.

Usha was heavily involved in preparing him to debate. It is refreshing to hear highly educated people speaking in public.

So I bet you love hearing Obama talk

I LOVE Obama! Vance speech and presentation was at his level. Walz was not.

Yes Vance was really that good.

Poised and articulate like Obama.

I swear I did not expect to come off liking this guy who has been the butt of jokes the last one month.

Vance certainly proved himself to be expertly skilled at gaslighting and rewriting history. He was poised and articulate as he blatantly lied for 90 minutes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Pallative care for an unviable baby, anyone? the GOP fixaation on this is absurd and grotesque.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Vance came off as very likeable.

I thought he came off very slick, his facial expressions just a tad smug, bordering on know-it-all, with a whiff of condescension. It was totally apparent this is a guy who knows how to do PR on the fly. Rewriting Trump's actions in the telling, with such easy-breezy confidence was infuriating. Maybe that's the benefit of Yale law school training.

Usha was heavily involved in preparing him to debate. It is refreshing to hear highly educated people speaking in public.

So I bet you love hearing Obama talk

I LOVE Obama! Vance speech and presentation was at his level. Walz was not.

Yes Vance was really that good.

Poised and articulate like Obama.

I swear I did not expect to come off liking this guy who has been the butt of jokes the last one month.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Visually, Vance looked better and was calmer than Walz. Waltz is folksy and relatable but the split screen visual did go in Vance’s favor with Walz appearing sweaty and anxious. Remember, younger generations know all about social media and how to look better, sound better and be insta ready angled.

The age difference did show just as with Trump vs Harris. Look as far back at Kennedy vs Nixon. There is a lesson to be learned about how to present yourself and how others will view you. Calm means you are winning.

None of this will matter in a week. Trump is still at the top of the ticket and Vance wrote the forward to Project 2025.

No he did not write the foreword to project 2025, and Trump disavowed Project 2025 and they closed up shop.

https://newrepublic.com/article/184393/jd-vance-violent-foreword-kevin-roberts-project-2025-leader-book

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Climate change
Amid the devastating damage from Hurricane Helene, both were asked if climate change was contributing to such extreme weather events. Walz emphatically said climate change was "real" while Vance expressed skepticism about "weird science," stating carbon emissions were contributing to the climate crisis.

Health care,
Vance was pressed on Trump's comment that he only had "concepts of a plan" to replace the Affordable Care Act and how their administration would protect people with preexisting conditions.

He also distorted many of Trump's actions on the ACA and claimed Trump made the law stronger, which he actually tried to kill twice but failed thanks to the late great John McCain.

Housing crisis
Walz was asked about Harris' plan to build three million new homes (which he argued would not drive up prices and would lead to generational wealth) and whether he believed it was likely Congress would agree to her proposal for an enhanced Child Tax Credit. He said both high housing and child care costs were the biggest burdens on American families.

Abortion
Vance claimed that he never supported a national abortion ban, despite previously signaling support for a bill introduced by Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham that would ban abortion after 15 weeks nationwide.

Walz spoke about the women whose health has been negatively impacted by state-level restrictions since the fall of Roe v. Wade. Walz blamed Trump for the Supreme Court nominations he said "put this all into motion."


Groundhog Day Jan 6

Vance refused to say if he will accept election, doesn't condemn Jan. 6

Near end, Vance was asked if he would seek to challenge the 2024 election even if every governor certified the results. However, the senator sidestepped the question and pivoted to what he claimed was Harris and tech companies censoring people. He also brought up the endorsements of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Tulsi Gabbard.

Walz said he was troubled by Vance's statement and said such denials needed to come to an end.
"Here we are, four years later, in the same boat. I will tell you, that when this is over, we need to shake hands, this election, and the winner needs to be the winner. This has got to stop. It's tearing our country apart.”

Amen Gov Walz

https://apple.news/AWaCpHbXDQ_606DUDARVptQ

he lied

So Vance, a trained and certified lawyer, understands the difference between a Federal and State, unlike you. Maybe ask your biglaw DH to explain.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/02/politics/election-poll-walz-vance-debate/index.html

"Among debate watchers, Walz remains the candidate who’s seen more positively and as more in touch with their needs and vision for the country. Vance, who suffers from more of an image deficit among both viewers and the public at large, boosted his standing among the debate audience, outperforming expectations and gaining ground on the share who perceive him as qualified. He was also narrowly seen as doing a better job than Walz of defending his running mate. Both men, the poll finds, are viewed by a majority of debate watchers as qualified to assume the presidency if needed. And practically none of the voters who tuned in saw the debate as a reason to change their votes."

At the end of the day, this won't change anyone's opinions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think Harris will win. I'm not really excited about that but I can't imagine Trump.

I still feel both are equally bad for different reasons. It's nothing to be proud of. Y'all who suggest Walz did great last night weren't actually watching objectively. You love him and are Dems but objectively, his performance was not impressive for the high profile event this was. You can say Vance's policies suck and he's a slimy imbicile but his performance was objectively better.

I think that it's about 2028. Nobody wins for the next 4 years - these people are all fools. Harris will drive us all to the ground but yes, for whatever it's worth I suppose she's better than Trump/Vance.

I don't disagree with much of this. My main problem with Harris/Walz is that they are fundamentally unknown quantities. Walz does have some substantive policy achievements in MN, which gives me a little hope. Together with the fact that Dems historically have been stronger on more issues I care about, including turning around terrible economies they inherited, women's rights, worker's rights, climate change etc.

Both sides spin so much, I'm not always clear on what they actually believe in. Vance is the king of spin, as he made clear last night in his effort to whitewash Trump and the MAGA platform. So, yes, anything is better than Trump/Vance. Their constant stream of lies, allegiance to the interests of the 1%, misogyny, and disinterest in protecting democracy are disqualifying. Period.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Climate change
Amid the devastating damage from Hurricane Helene, both were asked if climate change was contributing to such extreme weather events. Walz emphatically said climate change was "real" while Vance expressed skepticism about "weird science," stating carbon emissions were contributing to the climate crisis.

Health care,
Vance was pressed on Trump's comment that he only had "concepts of a plan" to replace the Affordable Care Act and how their administration would protect people with preexisting conditions.

He also distorted many of Trump's actions on the ACA and claimed Trump made the law stronger, which he actually tried to kill twice but failed thanks to the late great John McCain.

Housing crisis
Walz was asked about Harris' plan to build three million new homes (which he argued would not drive up prices and would lead to generational wealth) and whether he believed it was likely Congress would agree to her proposal for an enhanced Child Tax Credit. He said both high housing and child care costs were the biggest burdens on American families.

Abortion
Vance claimed that he never supported a national abortion ban, despite previously signaling support for a bill introduced by Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham that would ban abortion after 15 weeks nationwide.

Walz spoke about the women whose health has been negatively impacted by state-level restrictions since the fall of Roe v. Wade. Walz blamed Trump for the Supreme Court nominations he said "put this all into motion."


Groundhog Day Jan 6

Vance refused to say if he will accept election, doesn't condemn Jan. 6

Near end, Vance was asked if he would seek to challenge the 2024 election even if every governor certified the results. However, the senator sidestepped the question and pivoted to what he claimed was Harris and tech companies censoring people. He also brought up the endorsements of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Tulsi Gabbard.

Walz said he was troubled by Vance's statement and said such denials needed to come to an end.
"Here we are, four years later, in the same boat. I will tell you, that when this is over, we need to shake hands, this election, and the winner needs to be the winner. This has got to stop. It's tearing our country apart.”

Amen Gov Walz

https://apple.news/AWaCpHbXDQ_606DUDARVptQ

he lied

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The vibe from Vance was weird guy holding himself tightly in check to present as a calm, polite, rational conservative. Anyone who has not been exposed to the clips of the real Vance might be deceived.

Here are Governor Walz and JD before they gave interviews after:



JD looks like he’s sizing us up for the most sedating but not fatal dose of something to put in our drinks.

Isn't it amazing how so many women have this same reaction to him? My take is Walz is the guy who'd drive you home from the bar if you felt unsafe - and Vance is the guy who'd be making you feel unsafe. Probably smooth, slick, and you don't leave him alone with your drink.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Visually, Vance looked better and was calmer than Walz. Waltz is folksy and relatable but the split screen visual did go in Vance’s favor with Walz appearing sweaty and anxious. Remember, younger generations know all about social media and how to look better, sound better and be insta ready angled.

The age difference did show just as with Trump vs Harris. Look as far back at Kennedy vs Nixon. There is a lesson to be learned about how to present yourself and how others will view you. Calm means you are winning.

None of this will matter in a week. Trump is still at the top of the ticket and Vance wrote the forward to Project 2025.

No he did not write the foreword to project 2025, and Trump disavowed Project 2025 and they closed up shop.

https://newrepublic.com/article/184393/jd-vance-violent-foreword-kevin-roberts-project-2025-leader-book

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Vance looked super slick but dodged all the hard issues, and doubled-down on the pet-eating story.

Walz struggled but his sincerity was apparent.

So naturally, people think Vance won. And they even like him more.

Aren't voters dumb?

What else is new?

I mean these debates are all to win over dumbasses. Not just this one but all of them. You really think these debates are to discuss truthful policies? Maybe in West Wing but your are totally naive if you think any politician in the 2000s are going to be good.

Give me a break. These debates are for show. Why people watch other than for entertainment purposes is BS. Nothing any one of them says is more than for a soundbite.

This is why we have such dismal candidates running in both parties!

Anonymous wrote: