** KAMALA HARRIS FOR PRESIDENT -PART DEUX **

Johnny Abruzzo

It was like a typical "without Trump" debate. I got bored and watched baseball instead.

Halifax2TheMax

mrussel1 said:

Pretty much dead even on "who won".  Republicans said Vance won, D's to Walz.  Unaffiliated broke slightly to Walz, but probably not statistically significant.  I think what we can see is that it is Trump who is creating the coarseness of the debate and the anger in this country.  I think the civility of these exchanges is yet more evidence of what we already knew.  JFC, let's get him out of the public eye once and for all. 

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/02/politico-snap-poll-division-debate-00182131

I’ll do my part. Vote early.

Gern Blansten

mrussel1 said:

Pretty much dead even on "who won".  Republicans said Vance won, D's to Walz.  Unaffiliated broke slightly to Walz, but probably not statistically significant.  I think what we can see is that it is Trump who is creating the coarseness of the debate and the anger in this country.  I think the civility of these exchanges is yet more evidence of what we already knew.  JFC, let's get him out of the public eye once and for all. 

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/02/politico-snap-poll-division-debate-00182131

yeah and his "truths" during the debate were more third grade bullshit...what a fucking fool

mrussel1

Gern Blansten said:

mrussel1 said:

Pretty much dead even on "who won".  Republicans said Vance won, D's to Walz.  Unaffiliated broke slightly to Walz, but probably not statistically significant.  I think what we can see is that it is Trump who is creating the coarseness of the debate and the anger in this country.  I think the civility of these exchanges is yet more evidence of what we already knew.  JFC, let's get him out of the public eye once and for all. 

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/02/politico-snap-poll-division-debate-00182131

yeah and his "truths" during the debate were more third grade bullshit...what a fucking fool

I admit to not watching.  I just read some analysis this morning and watched a few highlights. 

Tim Simmons

As much as cable news people and homers will try, it didn't, and was never gonna change anything. 

mace1229

Gern Blansten said:

mrussel1 said:

Pretty much dead even on "who won".  Republicans said Vance won, D's to Walz.  Unaffiliated broke slightly to Walz, but probably not statistically significant.  I think what we can see is that it is Trump who is creating the coarseness of the debate and the anger in this country.  I think the civility of these exchanges is yet more evidence of what we already knew.  JFC, let's get him out of the public eye once and for all. 

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/02/politico-snap-poll-division-debate-00182131

yeah and his "truths" during the debate were more third grade bullshit...what a fucking fool

Didn't Walz say that immigration numbers are below Trump's numbers now? And that isn't true. 

Gern Blansten

mace1229 said:

Gern Blansten said:

mrussel1 said:

Pretty much dead even on "who won".  Republicans said Vance won, D's to Walz.  Unaffiliated broke slightly to Walz, but probably not statistically significant.  I think what we can see is that it is Trump who is creating the coarseness of the debate and the anger in this country.  I think the civility of these exchanges is yet more evidence of what we already knew.  JFC, let's get him out of the public eye once and for all. 

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/02/politico-snap-poll-division-debate-00182131

yeah and his "truths" during the debate were more third grade bullshit...what a fucking fool

Didn't Walz say that immigration numbers are below Trump's numbers now? And that isn't true. 

not sure...I was referring to trump's comments on truth social while the debate was going on. It was like giving your phone to an ape and letting them bang on the keyboard

tbergs

mace1229 said:

Gern Blansten said:

mrussel1 said:

Pretty much dead even on "who won".  Republicans said Vance won, D's to Walz.  Unaffiliated broke slightly to Walz, but probably not statistically significant.  I think what we can see is that it is Trump who is creating the coarseness of the debate and the anger in this country.  I think the civility of these exchanges is yet more evidence of what we already knew.  JFC, let's get him out of the public eye once and for all. 

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/02/politico-snap-poll-division-debate-00182131

yeah and his "truths" during the debate were more third grade bullshit...what a fucking fool

Didn't Walz say that immigration numbers are below Trump's numbers now? And that isn't true. 

It is true that they are lower than Trump's last months in office. I just read it somewhere the other day. Probably in WAPO.

The Juggler

mace1229 said:

Gern Blansten said:

mrussel1 said:

Pretty much dead even on "who won".  Republicans said Vance won, D's to Walz.  Unaffiliated broke slightly to Walz, but probably not statistically significant.  I think what we can see is that it is Trump who is creating the coarseness of the debate and the anger in this country.  I think the civility of these exchanges is yet more evidence of what we already knew.  JFC, let's get him out of the public eye once and for all. 

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/02/politico-snap-poll-division-debate-00182131

yeah and his "truths" during the debate were more third grade bullshit...what a fucking fool

Didn't Walz say that immigration numbers are below Trump's numbers now? And that isn't true. 

https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/10/01/migrant-encounters-at-u-s-mexico-border-have-fallen-sharply-in-2024/

HughFreakingDillon

Gern Blansten said:

mace1229 said:

Gern Blansten said:

mrussel1 said:

Pretty much dead even on "who won".  Republicans said Vance won, D's to Walz.  Unaffiliated broke slightly to Walz, but probably not statistically significant.  I think what we can see is that it is Trump who is creating the coarseness of the debate and the anger in this country.  I think the civility of these exchanges is yet more evidence of what we already knew.  JFC, let's get him out of the public eye once and for all. 

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/02/politico-snap-poll-division-debate-00182131

yeah and his "truths" during the debate were more third grade bullshit...what a fucking fool

Didn't Walz say that immigration numbers are below Trump's numbers now? And that isn't true. 

not sure...I was referring to trump's comments on truth social while the debate was going on. It was like giving your phone to an ape and letting them bang on the keyboard

LMAO

teskeinc

Vance won the debate. Does it matter? No. Will it move the needle? No. 

If you’re a Trump hater (😂😂😂) you’re not going to admit it. But for pretty much the same reasons Kamala won the last debate, Vance won this one.

Walz is a bad liar. He starts to stumble badly when questioned on something he knows he lied about. For example, the trip to Hong Kong. He immediately got really nervous and  pivoted to how he’s from a small town and everyone knows who he is. Same as when CNN asked him about his “stolen valor” in the co-interview. He’s a guy who over exaggerates stories to make him look more important. A “knucklehead” so he says. There’s definitely more to his China visits he doesn’t want us to know about.

Vance was polished and surprisedly stayed on message. He could have attacked Walz more for his radical left policies in Minnesota but remained calm and in control the whole 90 minutes.

Once again you had 2 Trump hating moderators who were looking to create viral moments even violating their own rules at times. It’s sad that we can’t find a media outlet to just do their job and ask questions and move along. As someone posted before here, it needs to be a town hall style debate with the audience asking questions rather than an
obviously one sided media organization.

Gern Blansten

teskeinc said:

Vance won the debate. Does it matter? No. Will it move the needle? No. 

If you’re a Trump hater (😂😂😂) you’re not going to admit it. But for pretty much the same reasons Kamala won the last debate, Vance won this one.

Walz is a bad liar. He starts to stumble badly when questioned on something he knows he lied about. For example, the trip to Hong Kong. He immediately got really nervous and  pivoted to how he’s from a small town and everyone knows who he is. Same as when CNN asked him about his “stolen valor” in the co-interview. He’s a guy who over exaggerates stories to make him look more important. A “knucklehead” so he says. There’s definitely more to his China visits he doesn’t want us to know about.

Vance was polished and surprisedly stayed on message. He could have attacked Walz more for his radical left policies in Minnesota but remained calm and in control the whole 90 minutes.

Once again you had 2 Trump hating moderators who were looking to create viral moments even violating their own rules at times. It’s sad that we can’t find a media outlet to just do their job and ask questions and move along. As someone posted before here, it needs to be a town hall style debate with the audience asking questions rather than an
obviously one sided media organization.

oh please...you call the media one sided because they weren't going to put up with the blatant lie that the Haitian immigrants were "illegals"...

Vance got plenty of leeway with his tangents. Walz was probably too focused on not going over his allotted time as he cut himself off a few times.

You want to make a bigger deal out of the China thing than it warrants. Walz was likely remembering the after effects of the incident and placed himself there at the time by mistake. Big fucking deal. Same as the "weapons in war" comment. Makes no difference because neither slip ups had any effect on anything at all. 

Yet you don't get concerned about Vance not accepting the results of the election and that your boy trump is a serial rapist.

Tim Simmons

And that’s why Vance’s team didn’t want fact checks. In one post. 

teskeinc

Tim Simmons said:

And that’s why Vance’s team didn’t want fact checks. In one post. 

It was agreed upon because of what happened in the last debate. These are obviously left-leaning Trump hating moderators. 

I’m OK with fact-checking, just do it for both sides or not at all. 

Tim Simmons

Maybe one side doesn’t need it as much as the other have you considered that? 

Merkin Baller

Boo fucking hoo. 

They corrected the blatant lie that those immigrants in Springfield are here illegally. 

That's the least they could have done. 

Tim Simmons

I mean they did last time. He was just more egregious with the lies. So of course it stands out. 

mace1229

The Juggler said:

mace1229 said:

Gern Blansten said:

mrussel1 said:

Pretty much dead even on "who won".  Republicans said Vance won, D's to Walz.  Unaffiliated broke slightly to Walz, but probably not statistically significant.  I think what we can see is that it is Trump who is creating the coarseness of the debate and the anger in this country.  I think the civility of these exchanges is yet more evidence of what we already knew.  JFC, let's get him out of the public eye once and for all. 

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/02/politico-snap-poll-division-debate-00182131

yeah and his "truths" during the debate were more third grade bullshit...what a fucking fool

Didn't Walz say that immigration numbers are below Trump's numbers now? And that isn't true. 

https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/10/01/migrant-encounters-at-u-s-mexico-border-have-fallen-sharply-in-2024/

That's like comparing Creed's best song to PJ's worst song, and using that as evidence that creed is better.
You're taking the best month under the last 4 years and comparing it to one of the highest months under Trump and claiming the numbers are better.
Comparing the whole term, or even year to year, its still not that close. 

Gern Blansten

teskeinc said:

Tim Simmons said:

And that’s why Vance’s team didn’t want fact checks. In one post. 

It was agreed upon because of what happened in the last debate. These are obviously left-leaning Trump hating moderators. 

I’m OK with fact-checking, just do it for both sides or not at all. 

you mean like when Walz didn't answer the Hong Kong question and they pressed him on it? Give it a rest. You've been duped again.

brianlux

Anyone who supports Trump and Vance and makes an issue about an insignificant Walz lie is a major hypocrite.  Not that I condone lies.  No way.  I'm with John Lydon on that one.  No tolerance for lying.  But you cannot support Trump or Vance and make Walz out to be as egregious a liar as those two.  That's like comparing a jay walker with a drunk driver.  Give me a break.  Seriously? 

teskeinc

mace1229 said:

The Juggler said:

mace1229 said:

Gern Blansten said:

mrussel1 said:

Pretty much dead even on "who won".  Republicans said Vance won, D's to Walz.  Unaffiliated broke slightly to Walz, but probably not statistically significant.  I think what we can see is that it is Trump who is creating the coarseness of the debate and the anger in this country.  I think the civility of these exchanges is yet more evidence of what we already knew.  JFC, let's get him out of the public eye once and for all. 

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/02/politico-snap-poll-division-debate-00182131

yeah and his "truths" during the debate were more third grade bullshit...what a fucking fool

Didn't Walz say that immigration numbers are below Trump's numbers now? And that isn't true. 

https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/10/01/migrant-encounters-at-u-s-mexico-border-have-fallen-sharply-in-2024/

That's like comparing Creed's best song to PJ's worst song, and using that as evidence that creed is better.
You're taking the best month under the last 4 years and comparing it to one of the highest months under Trump and claiming the numbers are better.
Comparing the whole term, or even year to year, its still not that close. 

Much like the left-leaning moderators, that’s what they do here. Only post the favorable polls and Walz flat out lies about Hong Kong but “it doesn’t matter” to them. It’s OK tho, it matters to those with common sense and when they wake up on Nov 6th and start the “Not My President” thread asking “where they went wrong” making excuses about it just wasn’t enough time for everyone to get to know Kamala and so on, they might come back and reread the nonsense peddled in this thread.

Tim Simmons

Fact check all politicians. Definitely. In articles, on cable news in debates. Start stamping it out and you’ll start getting more forthright politicians. 

Johnny Abruzzo

I like whats-his-face saying Walz is a bad liar. Vance is a very good liar, and a serial one at that. It's legal to kill a baby in Minnesota? Fuck off LIAR. And he had a nice whine festival there about the fact checking.

tbergs

The difference is always that the GOP candidate sticks to the lie. They came back at Walz after he side stepped the Hong Kong question and he then admitted his mistake. Every time they tried to pin Vance down, he doubled down on the lie, or dodged the question (see: who won the election, did he support an abortion ban, Haitians, energy production, ACA , etc.). Yeah,  but Walz is a liar everyone 🙄  Party of accountability at it again. Bunch of losers.

teskeinc

Tim Walz lied about the Minnesota abortion law. There is no limit or restrictions to when an abortion can be performed up to 9 months.

Tim Walz continues to say Trump/Vance want a National abortion ban. They have never said that, they want to return it to the states and the states are now voting on it. 

If you’re a Trump hating leftist you can’t see things rationally. It’s sad to not be able to see things objectively. But it is what it is.

Gern Blansten

teskeinc said:

mace1229 said:

The Juggler said:

mace1229 said:

Gern Blansten said:

mrussel1 said:

Pretty much dead even on "who won".  Republicans said Vance won, D's to Walz.  Unaffiliated broke slightly to Walz, but probably not statistically significant.  I think what we can see is that it is Trump who is creating the coarseness of the debate and the anger in this country.  I think the civility of these exchanges is yet more evidence of what we already knew.  JFC, let's get him out of the public eye once and for all. 

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/02/politico-snap-poll-division-debate-00182131

yeah and his "truths" during the debate were more third grade bullshit...what a fucking fool

Didn't Walz say that immigration numbers are below Trump's numbers now? And that isn't true. 

https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/10/01/migrant-encounters-at-u-s-mexico-border-have-fallen-sharply-in-2024/

That's like comparing Creed's best song to PJ's worst song, and using that as evidence that creed is better.
You're taking the best month under the last 4 years and comparing it to one of the highest months under Trump and claiming the numbers are better.
Comparing the whole term, or even year to year, its still not that close. 

Much like the left-leaning moderators, that’s what they do here. Only post the favorable polls and Walz flat out lies about Hong Kong but “it doesn’t matter” to them. It’s OK tho, it matters to those with common sense and when they wake up on Nov 6th and start the “Not My President” thread asking “where they went wrong” making excuses about it just wasn’t enough time for everyone to get to know Kamala and so on, they might come back and reread the nonsense peddled in this thread.

Actually if trump wins it will be because of the ignorance of his supporters. Too many people that vote against their own self interests.

The racists and bigots will be happy they got their guy and the rest of us will just have to deal with it for four years.

You've dealt with Biden for four years just fine right? We'll survive another four years of the orange fuckface and we'll get a kick out of you defending his corrupt bullshit.

teskeinc

Actually if Kamala wins it will be because of the ignorance of her supporters. Too many people that vote against their own self interests.

tbergs

Tim Walz is a liar who admits his mistakes, that's why I'm voting Donald Trump this election. We need someone who won't back down when challenged by facts  and sticks to their lies 🤣.

Gern Blansten

tbergs said:

Tim Walz is a liar who admits his mistakes, that's why I'm voting Donald Trump this election. We need someone who won't back down when challenged by facts  and sticks to their lies 🤣.

Yeah we need a tough guy. Someone who calls up Secretary's of State and demands they "find" the votes needed to get him elected.

Just like the founding fathers intended.

Go Beavers

teskeinc said:

Tim Walz lied about the Minnesota abortion law. There is no limit or restrictions to when an abortion can be performed up to 9 months.

Tim Walz continues to say Trump/Vance want a National abortion ban. They have never said that, they want to return it to the states and the states are now voting on it. 

If you’re a Trump hating leftist you can’t see things rationally. It’s sad to not be able to see things objectively. But it is what it is.

Since Trump lies at a high rate and also has vacillated on his abortion stance, if someone is objective and rational, they wouldn’t believe Trump when he says he doesn’t want a federal abortion ban.