Anonymous wrote:Jamelle Bouie, Times columnist It’s a pretty straightforward verdict: Vance won this debate. It’s not hard to see why. He has spent most of his adult life selling himself to the wealthy, the powerful and the influential. He is as smooth and practiced as they come. He has no regard for the truth. He lies as easily as he breathes. We saw this throughout the debate. He told Americans that there are 20 million to 25 million “illegal aliens” — a lie. He told Americans that Mexico is responsible for the nation’s illegal gun problem — a lie. He told Americans that Trump actually tried to save the Affordable Care Act — a lie. If Vance had to sell the benefits of asbestos to win office, he would do it well and do it with a smile.

Anonymous wrote:Vance is the white Obama.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"I'm pretty shocked ... He lost the election. And that isn't a debate anywhere but in Donald Trump's world. And when Mike Pence made the decision to certify that election, that's why Mike Pence isn't on this stage right now.

So what I'm concerned about is where is the firewall for Donald Trump? Where is the firewall with Donald Trump if he knows he could do anything, including taking an election, and his VP isn't going to stand up to it.

We're left asking "will you keep your oath of office, even if the President doesn't"? Of course I would, that's why Kamala Harris picked me.

"So America, I think you've got a really clear choice to make."

Tim Walz ripped off Vance's mask with this response. My jaw dropped and I immediately knew it would be the most talked about exchange of the night.

This was Walz's "at long last, have you no, have you no decency sir?"

Vance just froze and had zero response.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"I'm pretty shocked ... He lost the election. And that isn't a debate anywhere but in Donald Trump's world. And when Mike Pence made the decision to certify that election, that's why Mike Pence isn't on this stage right now.

So what I'm concerned about is where is the firewall for Donald Trump? Where is the firewall with Donald Trump if he knows he could do anything, including taking an election, and his VP isn't going to stand up to it.

We're left asking "will you keep your oath of office, even if the President doesn't"? Of course I would, that's why Kamala Harris picked me.

"So America, I think you've got a really clear choice to make."

Jd Vance was rehearsed within one inch of his life and he had all his facial cues and lies memorized. But when Tim Walz just pointed out that Vance (the Emperor onstage) had no proverbial clothes, it was like Walz was Dorothy and threw just a bucket of water on the Wicked Witch and she melted. There was no there, there. Vance had no answer.

And the most important job for the VP is to oversee the peaceful transfer of power and Vance confirmed onstage that he won't do that. It was shocking.

Why would Vance be overseeing the peaceful transfer of power? He is not Vice President at this time, so will have nothing to do with the certification of this election. That is the job of the present Vice President.

Because moron, if he's VP, then he'd be doing so in four years.

You appear to be unfamiliar with the concept of checks and balances.

If Trump wins, it would be Vance running for presidency in another 4 yrs, not Trump again.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone who doesn't want to be fact checked should be disqualified...what is the point otherwise? I want to believe my leaders whether or not I agree with them who wants to be gaslighted for 4 years?? I don't want to hear lies that make me happy. I want to hear the truth.

Politicians already get a bad rep for being slimy, smooth, not answering direct questions and outright lying. Vance acted like a exaggerated version of a "bad politician" trope last night. Vance was lying about obvious, proveable things (Donald Trump lost in 2020 (he did), Donald Trump peacefully transferred power in 2020 (he didn't), Donald Trump promoted ACA/Obamacare (he didn't), Haitian immigrant community in Springfield are illegals (they aren't), Vance never in favor of national abortion ban (he's on record and audio saying he would like an national abortion ban).

It was a crazy amount of lies on big, major, important significant things. How does Vance tell such enormous, egregious lies with such ...ease??

It's chilling.

He’s a conniving sociopath. It’s interesting how hysterical Democrats are over Trump when Vance is the real evil on that ticket. He’s young too. He’s going to be a threat to this nation for a long time.

I hear you that he could be very dangerous. I think for that to occur one of two things needs to happen:
1. He is able to hold his own electorally after Trump is no longer with us. So far the GOP has not been able to replace Trump though they desperately want to. Vance's style is very different from Trump.
2. Or the nightmare scenario occurs and he manages to get SCOTUS to allow a coup installing him as permanent president

SCOTUS has already allowed this. So once Trump/Vance are "legally" elected, there is no getting rid of them short of death. Vance is very young and once installed would be there for the rest of our lives. Is that acceptable to you?

Its funny how you folks project exactly what you are attempting to do.
IE put in place a puppet that Obama pulls the strings of.

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.

OK this is accurate.

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"I'm pretty shocked ... He lost the election. And that isn't a debate anywhere but in Donald Trump's world. And when Mike Pence made the decision to certify that election, that's why Mike Pence isn't on this stage right now.

So what I'm concerned about is where is the firewall for Donald Trump? Where is the firewall with Donald Trump if he knows he could do anything, including taking an election, and his VP isn't going to stand up to it.

We're left asking "will you keep your oath of office, even if the President doesn't"? Of course I would, that's why Kamala Harris picked me.

"So America, I think you've got a really clear choice to make."

Jd Vance was rehearsed within one inch of his life and he had all his facial cues and lies memorized. But when Tim Walz just pointed out that Vance (the Emperor onstage) had no proverbial clothes, it was like Walz was Dorothy and threw just a bucket of water on the Wicked Witch and she melted. There was no there, there. Vance had no answer.

And the most important job for the VP is to oversee the peaceful transfer of power and Vance confirmed onstage that he won't do that. It was shocking.

Why would Vance be overseeing the peaceful transfer of power? He is not Vice President at this time, so will have nothing to do with the certification of this election. That is the job of the present Vice President.

Because moron, if he's VP, then he'd be doing so in four years.

You appear to be unfamiliar with the concept of checks and balances.

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Passing over Kelly and Shapiro for Walz now doesn't seem like such a smart decision on Kamala's part . . .

Kelly would not have been any better than walz.
Shapiro would probably have come off just as "smooth" as Vance, but given the baggage he would have faced with his state staff, the headache would not have been worth it.