Rate the Debate- Who Actually Won (and why)
Last edited Wed Oct 2, 2024, 01:23 PM - Edit history (1)
The Vice Presidential Debate: Tim Walz vs. J.D. Vance
This dealt with issues and substance to a far greater degree than the previous Presidential debate, but it still wasn't an actual debate. Tim Walz did an adequate job of making solid points, but debate is not his strong suit. J.D. Vance was a better speaker; however, he had a much weaker hand. To continue the poker analogy, he not only had to bluff a lot, he also actually had to tell quite a few lies. And in the end that cost him the debate.
Vance was quite inaccurate and frequently resorted to outright lying. Sometimes it was something simple; for example, he tried to paint the Biden Administration as the Harris Administration, and implied that Harris was in charge and had the power to make Executive orders that only the President could write. (He was awarded -4 for these attempts.)
Walz is not a debater. On many occasions he had the opportunity to spike the ball and get the point, but he didn’t go for the kill. He seems to be a person who prefers conversation, finding common ground, making alliances, and getting things done.
There were many lost opportunities for Walz. For example, Vance claimed that migrants coming into this country with only the clothing on their back are responsible for the median U. S. housing price being above $400,000. An outright silly assertion. But Walz also failed to mention the role that venture capitalists are buying up the housing and forcing the prices higher and higher. And that JD Vance is a venture capitalist! There’s even an app for that! ( https://www.politico.com/news/2024/08/23/feds-sue-software-company-rent-collusion-00176154)
Walz said women should have control of their health care and control of their own bodies. He said that character matters, that women are dying due to Trump’s policies, and that this will continue under another (god help us) Trump administration. I would have liked to see Walz go on offense. He had plenty of opportunities to say “That, sir, is a lie, and you are a liar.” But he never threw those punches.
In spite of that, Vance lost the three most important points:
1) Gun violence: Vance wants to harden school walls, doors, and windows. Walz’s reply was “Sometimes it just is the guns. It’s just the guns.”
2) Abortion: Vance is fine that women’s rights vary from state to state. It’s ok for their health care and their very lives to be threatened in one state and preserved in the state next door.
3) The biggest point and the technical knock out came at the end when Vance was asked about January 6th, and twice he refused to answer whether he thought Trump won the election. In the face of 62 court losses and Trump’s own admission that he lost the election (by a whisker), Vance refused to be honest. When a person lies this blatantly it should be disqualifying.
He denied the truth that everybody saw on January 6th, twice.
At the end of this debate for anybody who believes in democracy, there really is no choice. For this reason alone, neither he nor Trump should be allowed in any elected or appointed office for at least fifteen years to life.
By awarding a negative point for each lie and 1 point for each solid statement, J.D. Vance earned a total of (– 19) points. For being honest and answering the majority the questions asked of him, Tim Walz was awarded 3 negative points but had a final score of +15 points. For those of you who need help with math, the final score was a dramatic 34 point difference. This was a massacre.
= new reply since forum marked as read
... then it probably ended like many a soccer match: nil-nil.
The debates are entertaining (sort of), but GOTV.
