Walz v. Vance VP Debate - Post-Game Thread | Vance now says Trump won in 2020

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 628
  • Views: 12K
  • Politics 
UNCMSinLS said:
The debate did make me wonder when the last time a man with facial hair ran for Prez or VP. Thomas Dewey in 1948?
Click to expand...
Dewey was indeed the last major party nominee to rock the ‘stache.

However, Cornel West, who I heard speak as a Carolina undergrad about 1,000 years ago, is in fine form this year.

1727843400889.png
 
CFordUNC said:
I can't stand him, but Vance was sharp. He was as dishonest and disingenuous as the day is long in many/most of his answers, but he was sharp. I'd like to think that beneath the MAGA mask, which requires unconditional sycophancy to Trump, there is a principled, reasonable conservative with whom I may disagree vehemently on many or most policy ideas, but still believe him to be a good person. I'm certain I have no reason to think it's true based on what we've seen and heard from him ever since he began his Senate run, but I'd like to believe it's possible.
Click to expand...
Vance is like an Evil Mr. Haney Everything he said was FOS. Don't trust doctors. Don't trust experts. Only Trump who lost jobs, tanked American manufactureng. Killed 700,000 people by mismanaging COVID. Crapped the economy and USA, Inc. just like virtually every LLC he owned.
 


To me, Vance clearly won a round by round victory, though he also suffered a near late round TKO on J6. Shows what I know, I guess, as it seems a lot of people’s view of Walz improved even if they (narrowly somehow) though Vance won the debate.

I was with the punditry that Walz let Minnesota Nice (and maybe just debating incompetence) get in the way of multiple opportunities to respond to lies and personal policy reversals by Vance. But it seems a lot of people really liked Walz even more, perhaps seeing his sometimes fumbling but genuine performance as endearing.
 






🤷‍♀️ — prior to the Trump era, I was often mistaken about the general response to debates and this debate feels like a throwback to those before times. As a political nerd into the minutiae, I tend to miss the holistic (?) way a lot of the electorate judges candidates.
 
somewhat tangential to the debate - Vance has this interview tic where he says "Well 'x'" - where x is the first name of the interviewer/questioner and he says it with such a snide tone. It is so off putting. He does this in almost every interview. I'm sure it is intentional and he must think it shows strength of some kind. I can't be the only one who finds it incredibly insulting.
 
Callatoroy said:
We agree on far more than this forum allows. I am incredibly busy with the death of a family member, my son’s sports schedule, work, and my daughter just received a devastating diagnosis that will require a ton of time with research and travel for medical treatment. I will pop in from time to time. In all honesty I have made peace with the fact that I think Harris wins. As things turn to shit I will come back to say I told you so. And if trump were to win I will come back to say I told you so. Peace to you. Go Heels
Click to expand...
That sounds awful, Calla. Wishing you and your family the best and good health.
 
p5mmr9 said:
somewhat tangential to the debate - Vance has this interview tic where he says "Well 'x'" - where x is the first name of the interviewer/questioner and he says it with such a snide tone. It is so off putting. He does this in almost every interview. I'm sure it is intentional and he must think it shows strength of some kind. I can't be the only one who finds it incredibly insulting.
Click to expand...
With the two moderators last night, that definitely gave a heavy mansplaining vibe (even if it is really just a verbal tic).
 
Only watched about half and didn’t read through all 20+ pages, but doesn’t sound like Walz had any big “oops” moments that’ll get replayed/twisted by the Right and hurt the ticket. Is that accurate?

A tie doesn’t really hurt Harris’ campaign because the focus is/should be about how historically awful Trump is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top