This is probably my favorite thing to come out of the debates... look at the time stamp.
Official Vance /Walz debate thread
- Thread starter UncleMark
- Start date
We’re clueless!!!! They should only present Vance in suits behind a podium doing press on policy. Don’t let him go out in public. Football games. Donut shops. No. Only formal. And that’s fine. Smart on issues and able to communicate them is what’s most important
In terms of being presidential or as someone interviewing for a CEO position, Vance gets my nod over the other three VP and CIC candidates based only on their debate performances.
However, based upon experience he may be the least qualified.
The most redeeming factor in the debate was when the debators actually agreed on some points along with being respectful to each other.
Finally, occasionally they actually spoke to the questions asked with Vance being slightly better in this regard.
He can communicate like Clinton Obama etc. none of the other 3 can. I suspect he has a better grasp of policy and is simply smarter than the other three too. His lack of experience isn’t far off from where Obama was to be fair.
I’m guessing he’d do well. He again is just a very odd guy. Hard to explain
He's the ultimate insurance. Probably more anti war and anti deep state than Trump. And if something happened to Trump they'd get RFK as VP. Trump is likely now safe. Perfect pick.
MM66, if Trump wins, it will be interesting to see how Trump and Vance work together.
Somehow, I see a potential clash.
Vance clearly won the debate. Harris won the other debate not on substance but because she got under Trump's skin. Vance answered most of the questions directly with precise bullet points particularly on immigration, economy, abortion. He presented himself in a likable manner to people who didn't know much about him which was a huge win. Walz was fidgety and nervous. His answer on the Tiananmen square question was particularly embarrassing. Vance fact checking the moderators when the rules said there were be no fact checking was excellent.
Historically the VP debate doesn't carry much weight but you've got to be thinking as the next man up Vance would be the only choice.
Historically the VP debate doesn't carry much weight but you've got to be thinking as the next man up Vance would be the only choice.
Constitutionally empowered or not, the VP is empowered by the POTUS whatever duties directly tasked with and agreed to.
Remarks by President Biden and Vice President Harris in a Meeting on Immigration | The White House
State Dining Room 2:14 P.M. EDTTHE PRESIDENT: Well folks, today I have two announcements to make. One, is we’ve got ourselves a Secretary. Xavier,www.whitehouse.gov
The VP may be mostly a ceremonial position, but she was green lit and agreed to the above responsibilities...and by any and all measures failed at it...unceremoniously.
Pretty much anything official will require the president's signature, not the VP's. Cheney had power because Bush really trusted him on foreign policy so would do what Cheney recommended. I don't know Harris' situation. President's always want to stress the VP is active and involved, but it isn't always true. I don't know how much power Harris really has, but one can assume whatever power she has is to carry out what Biden wants done. I don't believe for a moment she wanted mass deportation, but does anyone think if she wanted mass deportation Biden would sign off on it?
If you don't, this is a pretty even handed summary:
Vance Won the Debate. Walz Got Something That Might Be Better.
There’s a defining takeaway for the Harris campaign to use.
Harris and Vance are in a difficult situation.
My guess is both don't agree with either Trump or Biden on everything but must go on record as supporting them.
If you don't, this is a pretty even handed summary:
Vance Won the Debate. Walz Got Something That Might Be Better.
There’s a defining takeaway for the Harris campaign to use.slate.com
Lol....that's 'fair and balanced'.......to a Leftist.
I'd be a little nervous about nervous Tim getting that 3:00 am call Hillary used to talk about, were he ever in that position. OTOH, he'd be an upgrade from Kamala, no doubt.
That was the most revealing thing to me. If you strip away MAGA and Trump what you heard Vance espouse on that stage for the most part was the same compassionate conservatism we heard from Bush, McCain, Romney, etc.
As a rock-ribbed Conservative, I would have liked to hear Vance challenge the premise a little more often on issues like childcare, climate change, abortion, etc. I understand this is a ploy to win votes and not a CPAC conference, but at some point, Conservatives are going to have to stop arguing those issues on Democrat's terms.
If Vance failed at anything last night, it was his inability to paint Harris/ Walz as progressive radicals. Both parties came off as pretty politically reasonable.
As good as Vance was last night, we dont have much to go on when considering his executive skills. The guy is very smart and articulate, that’s a good start.
Biased, no doubt. The Republican party has never had the balls to limit the # of debates and insist that at least of them has to be moderated by FOX or someone not in the MSM. They just do not do hardball politicking, unfortunately. The # of 'gotha' questions to Vance was about 5/1. The only one Walz got he screwed up.
They have already clashed. Trump often listens to strong forceful people, others he casts aside in juvenile fashion. I think Trump and Vance click.
I'd say 'a little odd' is fair and goes to Goat's assertion that he's 'not quite human'. I would counter by saying that Kamala is 'very odd', and that Walz is not quite an adult.
I want a fact check on Walz' statement that his 17 year old witnessed a school shooting. Not saying it didn't happen, but I'd like to see the original reporting.
Upgrade to Harris? He’s a service dog for Harris.
Here's the thing.......when someone asks a question about what are you going to do to help parents with child care costs, what can you really say other than "give them money"? We all know that the more $$ the govt contributes to 'buyers' in any sector in the economy, the more prices go up. Education, health care et al. The same will be true if Kamala gets her $25000 and $6000 credits for RE and child care. But that's an academic argument that would not play well on TV.
At the turn of the century we had looming energy problems. Bush created the Energy Task Force and put Cheney in charge. Cheney greased the skids for fracking and we have become energy dominant. I really don’t care what you think the constitution says, Dick Cheney was one of the most impactful people in government in this century.
As good as Vance was last night, Haley would have been better. If she were the VP candidate, this election would be a landslide run-a-way.
She would have been strategically for votes for sure but from an intelligence standpoint she’s not remotely close to Vance. She’s closer to Harris walz. I don’t see the appeal in her. SC should do way better than it has - in spite of Clyburn
He did and I was screaming at the TV for them not to let him off the hook.
She rocked the house at the UN. Had she been around when the third world idiots walked out or boycotted Netanyahu, she would have forced the world to notice. Hell, nobody even knows who the UN ambassador is these days.
This doesn’t help throwing sh!t at each other in the same party. The two guys you me mentioned are voting for Trump.
And whose fault would that be? We are mostly in the same team, don’t make me say it.
That would obviously be Trump's fault for choosing her. Thankfully he learned a lot from his first administration and would never make that mistake again.
I agree with most of your post, except the contention that Vance did a better job of "answering" questions. I think he maybe actually answered 1, but I can't recall what it is. Much easier to remember all the times he pivoted and changed the subject to completely avoid answering even a yes or no question. JD is obviously a skilled debator in terms of pivoting and avoiding answering simple question so some are going to feel he "won"....
But when it came to a simple response to Walz asking if Trump lost the 2020 election JD was trapped. He knows Trump lost in 2020, but he also knows if he admits it there won't be a ketchup bottle in either FL or NJ safe from ending up smashed against the walls of MAL. So he had to pivot to some nonsense about (then Senator) Harris instituting some sort of censorsip in the "wake of the 2020 covid crisis". Still waiting for someone to explain that one to me?
Both men lied at some point (or at least admitted to mispeaking) but some "lies" are immaterial and some carry far more weight. For example who cares if Walz was in Tiannmen Square during the tank incident or just at some other point during that summer of demonstrations? He was a teacher and not in any government capacity at all, so if he fudged the details of his trip to friends over the years how does that affect anything? What are the Trump folks going to do, run an add of Walz claiming he was in TS 3 months earlier than he was as an expose? I can see it now, vote for (mega liar) Trump because Walz is a liar...LOL
But Vance saying that Trump tried to rescue the ACA is just a baldfaced lie. So is him claiming he never advocated for a nationwide abortion ban, when he did exactly that during his own Senate Primary. Both will hurt him and Trump on 2 key issues (healthcare, abortion) once the Dems make ads and start plastering them all over the swing states. To me that is primarily the main consideration of how a debate goes, do you give your opposition ammunition on issues that motivate voters?
Maybe Walz did that as well, but I can't recall that happening. The Harris campaign has already cut ads revolving around Vance's refusal to say Trump lost 2020.
Now people who were already tuned in to the race pretty much knew that was true. But for some people just tuning in or undecided finding out that Trump/Vance still can't admit that Trump lost in 2020 and more importantly won't commit to a peaceful transfer in 2024 is going to be a shock.
I've already seen one of those debate watchers voters groups in where they asked people prior to the debate which way they are leaning or planning on voting. This was a group in PA where 2 people who said they were pro-Trump leans prior to the debate, said afterwards that they had switched due to Vance's answer.
That's basically all the campaigns are looking for down the stretch where can they find a few votes to narrow the margins by attracting moderates/persuadables. IMHO that is the biggest mistake Vance made, although there wasn't really anything he could do to avoid it...
They watch clips and reactions on X and YouTube the next day. They know it was a route.
And the "I'm friends with school shooters" line will be everywhere until election day.
Walz got one got you question. He looked like a babbling idiot trying to answer. Imagine what would have happened if the moderators gave him the same number as Vance.
I would have asked him if he agreed with his wife opening the windows during the BLM riot because she loved the smell of burning tires.
nypost.com
I would have asked him if he agreed with his wife opening the windows during the BLM riot because she loved the smell of burning tires.
Tim Walz’s wife, Gwen, said she kept windows open during George Floyd riots to smell ‘burning tires’
The wife of Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz described her husband’s struggle to grapple with the outcry following the May 25, 2020, murder of George Floyd by a Minneapolis police officer.
nypost.com
I've got a client like Vance...has mitigating answers queued up for any potential question...whether it be from underwriters/credit or investors. Quick, and smart as hell. Can talk his way out of anything. Guy used to sell gym memberships, now he raises equity like McM getting guys to invest in dispensaries, and owns 5,000+ units. 😄
I never said he wasn't. It was because Bush trusted him.
It isn't what I think the Constitution says, you tell me where I am wrong. It IS what it says. Think about it, in the beginning the prez and vice were to be rivals. It did not make sense to give a Jefferson power to undo what Adams was doing. The 12th doesn't add any powers to the Veep
So tell me where in the Constitution a Veep gets power?
The only answer is a president lets them. It is a credit to Bush that he was willing to go along, a lot of presidents are unwilling to effectively share power.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
So...we aren't going to talk about Purdue dismantling #2 Alabama?
- Latest: LoneStarHoosier56
-
