Serious question—does anyone think Vance said the stuff about cat ladies, and the Haitian stuff.. in order for the media to focus on him being a ridiculous And just as weird ‘Trump’ with the knowledge he’d catch people by surprise as the underdog in this debate?

Debates are 75% performance. And regardless of what you think of Vance’s answers/non-answers.. he was clearly much more wellspoken than Walz.

I know many of you will be quick to call out his many lies and non-answers… but that’s not the kind of stuff… jeeze.. 80-90% of America pays attention to in this kind of setting. Or.. in general tbf.

Idk, if this is what Vance’s plan was from the beginning of him putting out the “weird” headlines. Then that’s impressive, imo.


As a disclaimer I say this as a still undecided voter in a sold blue state who has always voted for dem presidents.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Vance was not likable, but seemed presidential. Walz seemed like a fun guy to hang out with, but not a great up to the #1 job, if needed. Sigh.

I disagree. Vance was very likable and Walz looked like a nervous old man scribbling notes after going back to school for a hobby education.

Same. I listened to it on the radio. Changed my mind on Vance. He was the better speaker, Walz was like listening to a used car salesman with a mouth full of mush. Just observations, tried to give both the benefit of the doubt.

Meh. This has already been spun. Vance was creepy and Walz was sincere. No amount of “he looked/sounded presidential” or photoshopped portraits can clean up the vibe he gives off: stranger danger.

Exactly.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Vance is extremely attractive.

Sir, you are entitled to your own feelings, but please stay focused on the issues.

As if PP is capable of doing that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And the carousel of Republican respectability moves forward. Every year we get to hear about how the Republicans of yesteryear were actually the normal good ones and the current ones are "scary" "fascist" "chilling." It's been going on since W when I was a young teen.

I was an adult back then and this is complete BS.

We didn’t like W’s policies and certainly didn’t trust his warmongering buddies pushing WMDs, but we didn’t think he was a freaking PSYCHOPATH trying to overthrow the US. The GOP wasn’t pushing Christofascism back then. The extremists were fringe, not their party leaders and nominees.

W hired these people : https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooks_Brothers_riot

We were all ready for it to be done by then. The outcome seemed unfair but at no point was anyone worried about having a peaceful transition of power. Once it was done, it was done.

Anonymous wrote:Vance is extremely attractive. Walz looks like a cartoon character.

Yeah. People thought Jeffrey Dahmer and Ted Bundy were attractive too.

Vance is extremely attractive. Walz looks like a cartoon character.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Poor women can’t get to another state but yes, let’s make them carry to term a baby they can’t afford.
Think.

What? Who is getting pregnant if they are not in a stable situation and can not afford to raise a baby?

You can get free condoms at any reproductive clinic, free clinic, or college health center in America. Or you can pay less than it costs to eat at McDonald’s and buy a box of them at a drug store.

Forced birthers keep proving they don’t understand anything.

If you can’t figure out how to put a condom on a banana, don’t have sex. No one is forced to give birth if they use reliable and accessible birth control.

Abortion rates are also way down from two decades ago, but please keep running on this single interest, Democrats. It’s really working for you.

Huh? We aren’t pushing this just to win political votes. We actually believe that all women in the US should be able to make their own medical decisions without the creepy RWNJ religious nutters in the room.

Like this one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And the carousel of Republican respectability moves forward. Every year we get to hear about how the Republicans of yesteryear were actually the normal good ones and the current ones are "scary" "fascist" "chilling." It's been going on since W when I was a young teen.

I was an adult back then and this is complete BS.

We didn’t like W’s policies and certainly didn’t trust his warmongering buddies pushing WMDs, but we didn’t think he was a freaking PSYCHOPATH trying to overthrow the US. The GOP wasn’t pushing Christofascism back then. The extremists were fringe, not their party leaders and nominees.

W hired these people : https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooks_Brothers_riot

Anonymous wrote:“Did Trump lose the 2020 election?” “I’m focused on the future. (But also, I would not have certified the election).”

Anonymous wrote:Vance is also killing it on the campaign trail. His persona and demeanor are a great fit for the ticket. Listen to all the applause. He’s a rising star.

No, he still has historic levels of unlikability. He’s creepy, as was the obvious coordinated “ooh he’s so hot!” posts around last night and then that Republican rep’s creepy post this morning. Your whole party is a neon signing blinking “choose the bear!”

Anonymous wrote:And the carousel of Republican respectability moves forward. Every year we get to hear about how the Republicans of yesteryear were actually the normal good ones and the current ones are "scary" "fascist" "chilling." It's been going on since W when I was a young teen.

I was an adult back then and this is complete BS.

We didn’t like W’s policies and certainly didn’t trust his warmongering buddies pushing WMDs, but we didn’t think he was a freaking PSYCHOPATH trying to overthrow the US. The GOP wasn’t pushing Christofascism back then. The extremists were fringe, not their party leaders and nominees.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After reading multiple threads here, I was expecting Vance to be stupid, inarticulate , unlikeable. I found him to be the exact opposite- charming, bright, nice guy. I may not agree with every one of his policies, but I think he would be fine.

Well, except for the lies he told. That would already DQ him from a high school debate contest, even if he was otherwise respectful and the smoothest debater on the stage.

Yup. Funny how that works when moderators are allowed to fact check.

Anonymous wrote:Vance's bit about his friend who had an abortion and tells him it saved her life just said to me that Vance knows abortion is essential health care and a key part of a civilized society, and he doesn't care.

+1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Poor women can’t get to another state but yes, let’s make them carry to term a baby they can’t afford.
Think.

What? Who is getting pregnant if they are not in a stable situation and can not afford to raise a baby?

You can get free condoms at any reproductive clinic, free clinic, or college health center in America. Or you can pay less than it costs to eat at McDonald’s and buy a box of them at a drug store.

Forced birthers keep proving they don’t understand anything.

If you can’t figure out how to put a condom on a banana, don’t have sex. No one is forced to give birth if they use reliable and accessible birth control.

Abortion rates are also way down from two decades ago, but please keep running on this single interest, Democrats. It’s really working for you.

Huh? We aren’t pushing this just to win political votes. We actually believe that all women in the US should be able to make their own medical decisions without the creepy RWNJ religious nutters in the room.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Vance was not likable, but seemed presidential. Walz seemed like a fun guy to hang out with, but not a great up to the #1 job, if needed. Sigh.

I disagree. Vance was very likable and Walz looked like a nervous old man scribbling notes after going back to school for a hobby education.

Same. I listened to it on the radio. Changed my mind on Vance. He was the better speaker, Walz was like listening to a used car salesman with a mouth full of mush. Just observations, tried to give both the benefit of the doubt.

Meh. This has already been spun. Vance was creepy and Walz was sincere. No amount of “he looked/sounded presidential” or photoshopped portraits can clean up the vibe he gives off: stranger danger.

Meh. That's certainly *your* spin. The rest of us are entitled to our own opinions about each candidate.
DP