Final point. I[t] drove me crazy that Walz spent half his time saying Vance was probably a good guy and they could probably agree on a lot. Drove me crazy. It drove me nuts that Walz didn’t swing hard and some hanging curveball Vance threw over the plate. (He finally did on democracy.) But I’m not the audience for this stuff. I think the avuncular nice guy thing probably worked for him with the people who matter. Not my cup of tea but I’m not the average voter.
So overall verdict: Vane was smoother, more focused, more organized. But for all his wobbliness Walz got in the stories and the images I think the Harris campaign wanted in there. By the second half of the debate there were repeated questions where Vance was ducking and bobbing and denying the obvious because he and his candidate are just on the wrong side of the public. So overall I think basically a draw. In a way they both did well, even though they did everything differently. And final point: remember that this whole debate probably didn’t matter in the first place unless there was some massive gaffe. And there wasn’t.
Yeah, the other thing that bugged me was that Vance was so wishy washy on things like making it (financially) easier to raise families, something that the Republican Party famously has no interest in whatsoever. He was talking favorably about welfare, while running to be VP for the anti-welfare party. Walz missed a lot of opportunities to point out this empty rhetoric.
Yeah, there were numerous moments just begging Walz to turn to the camera and say, “Listen up America, he’s saying a lot of things that he thinks are exactly what you want to hear. But they’re empty words. His actual plan for childcare costs is to ask the grandparents to help out. That’s not a plan. Donald Trump’s actual plan for healthcare is still a “concept of a plan” now nearly 10 years in. His actual plan for the economy is tax cuts for billionaires, and tariffs that’ll cause double digit inflation. Don’t let the empty words fool you, this guy is a phony. Listen closely and you’ll see, there’s no there there.”
Yeah, to any extent that the pessimists among us (cough ordinary affluence cough) want to flip out about Walz’s weaker opening, he did really well on health care and January 6th, even if he may not have been as strong as we’d hoped. This was a draw at worst, and the more time spent talking about this debate instead of Trump’s racism is a win.
Never was on the table for walz to put a big debate win so now that survived he can have it off his mind and get dedicated to normal campaign trail again which is where he is great. Also now Harris needs to turn up heat on Trump for no showing debate
It’s almost like dudes wanted to lose. Or were playing prevent defense, which we know how that works out. Get those pollsters and advisors FAR from the campaign.
This is what Trump is now. 1/3 of America can’t be bothered to vote, 1/3 think this is the Messiah chosen by God himself because they are literally insane, and 1/3 of America will vote against him.
JD Vance is deeply deeply unlikable. The longer people see him the less they like him. Trump comes across authentic because he’s authentically a carnival huckster. JD isn’t authentically anything. He can’t sell this shit.
Yeah I only watched a snippet of the debate, and the vibe I got from Vance was just a super typical politician slickly and confidently spewing well-rehearsed bullshit, just the type that MAGA folks hate even if they agree with him.
