This is more important that the “who won?” question… in fact doesnt this better answer that question?
I find hilarious the “Vance wins on points” angle some are spouting…
What point system are people using…
Seems to me Walz set up Vance to be asked 100x who won the 2020 election…
The one answer he cant seem to lie about, or tell the truth about… 
I enjoyed the part where Vance kept yelling about being fact checked for his blatant lie after being told his time was up, and they cut his mike, and then from the moderators’ desk, you could still hear him bellowing in the distance.
I keep thinking that we need actual debates - that’s why the League of Women Voters I believe started this whole tradition, which was taken from them later - but also that, especially, refraining from fact-checking (?!) by moderators makes the whole thing not a debate at all, just a sham and a circus. For eyeballs, which = $. In fact that’s likely part of the motive for having the media and campaigns take it over from the LWV.
Fake debates presented as real ones may do more harm than good, but non-fact-checking is literally granting permission to lie. In a “debate.”
“Vance to Walz: Do you want to “force” Catholic hospitals to perform abortions? Do you want to force nuns to abort babies?” Huh??
This is the biggest face-plant for me. By inference, Vance’s position is that it’s ligit to restrict women’s healthcare options based on someone else’s beliefs. Dead women don’t birth live babies, so where does he see an upside to this?
Another instance of IOKIYAR, I’m afraid.
Profiting personally to an insane degree by wrecking US foreign policy (and therefore much of the world) would also be on his agenda, I think. (Would, not will, to avoid feeding it any energy!)
Well, after they 25th amendment TCF, it’s all Vance’s and Thiel’s.
This is the kind of thing I’ve been anxiously scrolling through the comments looking for. Reading everyone’s takes is fun, but I’m so focused on what the impact is. I know, normally, historically, debates don’t change much. But we live in weird times, and firehoses of lies are now tolerated by media who say it would be “partisan” to disallow it. [Edit: That’s actually a tell that they know very well which side relies on the firehose-of-lies thing.]
Given that, and what’s at stake, I feel like checking every single nut and bolt to be sure it’s reasonably well tightened. I think, at this point, any impact it has does matter. And it seems like this debate has had some.
You’re right. There’s a smarmy coldness to him even when he talks about his kids. It’s like they’re concepts of children or something?
Concepts on working out the details are in progress. They will be released soon, along with a comprehensive healthcare plan.
Ah, yes. Good point!
Mind over matter. I’m familiar with ‘conceptual’ thinking and ‘acting as if’. Chewing a pebble works well too. I like where this is going. (-:
Neither! Being female, there is no way in hell I’d let either of them get anywhere near something I was drinking. One’s a rapist and the other doesn’t appear to think women are people (unlike zygotes, embryos and fetuses).
When is the GOP going to learn that the Internet is forever?
(Deletion accidental but I don’t see how to reverse it.)
By horse, of course. You very well know Gawd never made a car.
In just about two weeks!!
Also female - I might argue that that means that neither of them thinks women are people…
Did Vance actually help Tester here?
Tester said Sheehy wanted to turn public lands over to counties and to his “rich friends” so they could buy them. The Montana GOP platform for 2024 says that the party wants all federal lands to be relinquished back to the states.
Vance said there was a “peaceful transfer of power on January 20.”
Oddly enough, that was one of his only true statements last night.
That said, a failed coup is still a coup. In essence, JD was giving Trump credit for failing! No wonder Trump chose him as a running mate.
That head’s not the only thing Ford was known for overusing without protection.
