US Erection 12 *AND* 16 *AND* 20 *AND* 22 *AND* 24 *AND* Beyond

[5thhorseman]

Vance in 2028 is real.

Harris v Vance would have been a good debate.

How long before Trump gets jealous and bashes Vance?

[Topper]

Do you really believe the Dems will recycle her after losing in 2024?

[rats19]

Vance in 2028 is real.

Harris v Vance would have been a good debate.

How long before Trump gets jealous and bashes Vance?

Is this a troll post 5th

[5thhorseman]

Vance in 2028 is real.

Harris v Vance would have been a good debate.

How long before Trump gets jealous and bashes Vance?

Is this a troll post 5th

Not at all Rats. The guy is ruled by his ego. That and any chance to grift he's there. Trump in a nutshell.

[5thhorseman]

Do you really believe the Dems will recycle her after losing in 2024?

Pretty sure she'll win the popular vote but might be done in by the gerrymandering.

[rats19]

Vance in 2028 is real.

Harris v Vance would have been a good debate.

How long before Trump gets jealous and bashes Vance?

Is this a troll post 5th

Not at all Rats. The guy is ruled by his ego. That and any chance to grift he's there. Trump in a nutshell.

Brainwashed anyone

[UWSaint]

Do you really believe the Dems will recycle her after losing in 2024?

Pretty sure she'll win the popular vote but might be done in by the gerrymandering.

Gerrymandering? Which state boundary got redrawn? Problem with the 2020 census? What on earth are you talking about?

[UWSaint]

A few comments on the debate....

My two cents.

Vance ran a master class on pre-2016 debating. May it be the future be like that past. Most knew he was intelligent and knowledgeable (whether you agree with his conclusions or interpretations of fact), but it seemed his aim was to demonstrate that he's also civil, empathetic, and reasonable. The dems have leaned hard into that he is weird and fringe, and now voters who knew more about what people said about him than knew him have the choice to believe what they heard or what they saw. Even when he took on the moderators (legal status) or tied Walz in knots (reliance on experts), he came off as good-spirited and well-meaning. If there were voters out there whose concern was that a Trump-Vance white house would be impulsive, I think those concerns are somewhat diminished (through the Principal is the Principal).

Outside of Tiananmen, I thought Walz did all right. He's in a tough spot -- a progressive running with a progressive who needs to convince the swing and sometimes-voters (who are usually center-left or center or center-right) that they aren't radical, that they are "safe" but they aren't the same as Biden. They can't really do this with policy, because it will either be more lefty than Biden (which also requires them to say Harris didn't agree with the policies in place) or it will be more of the same that's got us where we are, which most voters are dissatisfied with. The solution is to be vague, and Walz was appropriately vague. The second solution is to be likeable, and Walz did that in one important respect. Progressives come across as having contempt for the people they wish to control, generally because they have contempt for the people they wish to control (see Deplorables). They have a hard time hiding the better-than-you smarter-than-you thing. No problem here with Walz! This isn't just a joke that "he's not smart" -- I don't know if he is and I don't have enough to conclude he isn't -- which is just right. To be sure, he takes the numnutz routine a little far at times (my wife sez im nor good with grammar stolen valor thing, or the im a knucklehead with china last night), and you don't need to flip off Michigan fans to be an "every man." But he does, in my view, come off more as an every man than, say, John Kerry. And that means he's not an archetype of the progressive that is despised by the people progressives despise -- which include some voters who are swing voters or who were recently in the democratic coalition and could be there again. Doing things last night like talking about hunting are very effective in making Walz an every man. Of course, there's a cost to going too far with this. An every man can be a knucklehead, and sometimes that's even endearing, but you don't make your interview pitch "I'm a knucklehead, elect me vice president."

The moderators were the losers again. Topper is spot on with the bit about the follow ups; I wish they'd ask open ended follow ups, and that for the most part, after setting the "topic" going with the initial question, their role should be to control traffic. Generic "do you have a response to that?" will yield the most informative responses (circle the airport); or they move on to the next topic (land the plane). A few pointed questions can be fine (and should be evenly distributed), but mostly we want to hear what the candidates will do and learn enough about the candidates values and principles so we can project what they will likely do when faced with future circumstances that are presently unknown (or not the issues being asked about).

Two more points. One, I wish they'd stop asking questions with so many dubious premises. To Vance: "there's been a hurricane, you've acknowledged climes change, what will you do to combat it." Questions like this are set ups and can only dumb down America. IF you want to know about climate policy, ask it directly, or ask it in conjunction with a competing weight. "What is your energy policy, and how do you response to those saying your plans won't do enough to combat climate change." Two, I don't mind the fact check, but hate it as the "last word." If you want to challenge a dubious claim, challenge it with a question and keep the conversation going. "You are complaining about illegal immigration, but many of those immigrants have legal status. Do you care to respond?" (Without that question, Vance's treatment of this was a highlight of the night, though I would have liked to have seen him underscore the point that it is a discretionary CHOICE of the Harris administration to grant that temporary legal status, that they've done so liberally, and this just encourages more people to come. Positive feedback loop. Once here, many, too many, stay, without hearings, requiring housing, public resources, competing for jobs, many under the table, and making our cities and often themselves less safe. Harris, as border czar, was asked to study the cause of mass migration. She didn't come up with the reason; she's the reason....). At any rate, let the candidates have a chance to respond to an assertion they are wrong/lying.

[5thhorseman]

Do you really believe the Dems will recycle her after losing in 2024?

Pretty sure she'll win the popular vote but might be done in by the gerrymandering.

Gerrymandering? Which state boundary got redrawn? Problem with the 2020 census? What on earth are you talking about?

I'm not talking of any recent gerrymandering UW. It's entrenched in the US political system now and has led to the Republicans winning only one national popular vote in 32 years and that was on the heels of 9/11.

Hopefully this gains more momentum: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationa ... te_Compact

[Topper]

A few comments on the debate....

My two cents.

I think Vance reeled in many of the "never Trump" Republicans. The Hailey backers who felt left out by Trumps attacks on Nikki.

I still believe Vance blind sided Walz with his geniality. VP debates are usually gloves off nasty affairs and I think that is what Walz prepped for with his memorized lines. Good for him for realizing that when Vance went high, he could not go low without coming across as a complete jerk

[Strangelove]

An every man can be a knucklehead, and sometimes that's even endearing, but you don't make your interview pitch "I'm a knucklehead, elect me vice president."

Tim Walz is Homer Simpson!

Even looks like him now that I think about it...

[UWSaint]

Do you really believe the Dems will recycle her after losing in 2024?

Pretty sure she'll win the popular vote but might be done in by the gerrymandering.

Gerrymandering? Which state boundary got redrawn? Problem with the 2020 census? What on earth are you talking about?

I'm not talking of any recent gerrymandering UW. It's entrenched in the US political system now and has led to the Republicans winning only one national popular vote in 32 years and that was on the heels of 9/11.

Hopefully this gains more momentum: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationa ... te_Compact

Do you think the framers rationale for the electoral college, giving each state two votes in addition to their proportional population (# of house seats) is really antiquated? What’s the argument for simple popular vote available now that wasn’t then? Would you think that if your party was the beneficiary? It it isn’t a system designed to help any particular party. But it is designed to help preserve state sovereignty.

As for popular vote totals, what do they mean in a world where that’s not the election candidates are running? It’s like an nhl team saying, yeah, but our goal differential over the whole season was better than this team who earned more points.

The compact legislation is bull shit. Want to change the way the president is elected? Do it the right way. Change the constitution.

[UWSaint]

A few comments on the debate....

My two cents.

I think Vance reeled in many of the "never Trump" Republicans. The Hailey backers who felt left out by Trumps attacks on Nikki.

I still believe Vance blind sided Walz with his geniality. VP debates are usually gloves off nasty affairs and I think that is what Walz prepped for with his memorized lines. Good for him for realizing that when Vance went high, he could not go low without coming across as a complete jerk

Aside from the tarrif stuff, there was a whole lot of pre tea party pre populism 2000s republican in Vance’s delivery and messaging. I guess also less neocon, but more 1980s style peace through strength than 1930s conservative isolationism.

If he can bridge the never trumpers with the populists, then Vance 2028 may well be a sound prediction. The fiscal conservatives will remain an endangered species clinging to the republicans as not quite as bad….

[5thhorseman]

Vance in 2028 is real.

Harris v Vance would have been a good debate.

How long before Trump gets jealous and bashes Vance?

Is this a troll post 5th

Not at all Rats. The guy is ruled by his ego. That and any chance to grift he's there. Trump in a nutshell.

Brainwashed anyone

Why so dismissive Rats? Why else would anyone argue about crowd sizes at their own inauguration? Kamala easily derailed him about it almost 4 years later in the debate lol. Trump eagerly boasts about how he's the best at everything, an expert in a variety of inane subject areas, he hires the best people, has the best policies, the best economy, the guy must be the messiah?
And his followers seem to gobble it up. Has he ever done anything wrong Rats?

[rats19]

Vance in 2028 is real.

Harris v Vance would have been a good debate.

How long before Trump gets jealous and bashes Vance?

Is this a troll post 5th

Not at all Rats. The guy is ruled by his ego. That and any chance to grift he's there. Trump in a nutshell.

Brainwashed anyone

Why so dismissive Rats? Why else would anyone argue about crowd sizes at their own inauguration? Kamala easily derailed him about it almost 4 years later in the debate lol. Trump eagerly boasts about how he's the best at everything, an expert in a variety of inane subject areas, he hires the best people, has the best policies, the best economy, the guy must be the messiah?
And his followers seem to gobble it up. Has he ever done anything wrong Rats?

Vance is the future of the Republican Party, Trump knows that and he hopes the rest of the country sees it too… why would he bash him???

No one’s perfect 5th..