Walz need only say”Senator Vance, you told the American people that you are willing to fabricate lies and tell false stories if it furthers your agenda. So why, Senator, should we believe ANYTHING that you say here tonight?
The question I have is how Walz will deal with the lies. Not just the ones that might be spewed tonight, but the campaign that has lies as it’s foundation.
Perhaps list all the lies. It might take some time.
It doesn't matter how good a debater either Walz or Vance is. It doesn't matter how many interviews each has given recently. It doesn't matter which is the more handsome. At least none of that should matter.
What matters, and what each viewer should look for, is if the person is able to assume command of the highest office in the world if need be. And in the case of Vance, the possibility exists more that he might have to become POTUS to replace a POTUS in his 80s. But that's what viewers should look for tonight; who do they trust more to be President should it become necessary.
One unexpected consequence may be a whole new line of cosmetic eyeliner products for men. DonOld is already trying to capitalize on the new JD Vance trend.
Vance will lie. Period. It doesn't matter a bit if Vance is a smooth liar. He will lie. And Chris should realize that Vance's lies are the most significant part of tonight's (or any) performance.
There are plenty of things that have happened since 2016 which defy political history, and this debate could be one of them, inasmuch as I think it could be a bigger factor this time around. I believe that Walz is going to hugely embarrass Vance tonight. Big time.
Afghanistan was a signal JB is weak! His administration is weak! There are no consequences for bad actors including all those who illegally enter our country. The Biden administration has been a disaster!
Have the VP debates historically been the last debate before the election? I thought, and as a non-historian myself am not sure, that there was always one more presidential debate after the VP debate. If that is normally the case, does the lack of second presidential debate put more importance on today’s debate?
The unspoken issue is whether Convicted Felon Trump will be satisfied with JD Vance -- or whatever his name is this week -- having the final word in the campaign. If Vance does poorly, I'd expect Trump to "suddenly" decide that Oct. 23 isn't too late after all for a rematch with Kamala Harris.
Each side will say the other won. Vance is definitely the better spin guy but Walz is definitely more relatable! I may start watching just to get a feel for how they do on debate stage but it doesn't mean much to me as a voter. I would much rather see Harris do a townhall (have said this many times - nobody is listening 🤣).
Good morning, Chris. I think JD might have had a worse week than you thought. His "rent a dog" thing was ridiculous. Maybe he'll have a "rent a cat" with him tonight. JD is just mean and awful and I expect him to be mean and awful toward Tim. I hope Tim does not respond in kind. Nerves can do that to a person. In any event, I can't wait for tonight to be over.
The thought comes to my mind when you mention that history says the vice presidential debates don’t move the needle. I wonder though if we have a history like this- a historically old presidential candidate linked with a historically highly disliked vice presidential running mate. Maybe if Walz can point out that since Trump is so DonOLD (and not even to mention the two assassination attempts already) , that there is a real possibility voters may actually be voting for Vance for president. Maybe that moves the needle a tiny bit. Sadly probably not.
Chris is just phoning this one in! Sure, the VP debates have not *traditionally* been very decisive in an election and sure, very little has significantly moved the needle in this election (other than subbing in Harris for Biden), so there’s certainly “precedent” for Chris’s comments, but I look to him for a more incisive look into issues and he’s simply not providing it now.
I agree with you, George, that the fact that Trump is the oldest person to run for President in our 247 year history and would be in his 80’s if he gains a second term, makes his VP choice even more significant, as there would be a *high* likelihood that Trump, as poor as his diet is and as little as we actually know about his health, would expire before the end of a second term, making an untested 40 year old with NO leadership ability the President of the United States. While that scenario *may* not cause more people to watch this debate, I would think it would be a topic to discuss, as *many* of the insightful pundits have done today (Gabe Fleischer, Dan Pfeiffer, etc.).
We *do* have a precedent for this sort of situation: at his advanced age, John McCain’s choice of Sarah Palin had a negative effect on his campaign, and at least SHE ran an entire State! And Vance? He wrote a book about a place he didn’t really grow up in, and cast aspersions on those Appalachians; became a venture capitalist; ran for office because his billionaire boss Peter Thiel bankrolled him; and won by a substantially *smaller* margin than literally EVERY OTHER REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE IN OHIO in that election.
At least a *little* conversation on this would have been smart for Chris…
Thank you for this Chris. I was nervous to watch the debate this evening, but the low bar along with not moving the needle no matter what happens, relieves me to watch.
Walz need only say”Senator Vance, you told the American people that you are willing to fabricate lies and tell false stories if it furthers your agenda. So why, Senator, should we believe ANYTHING that you say here tonight?
The question I have is how Walz will deal with the lies. Not just the ones that might be spewed tonight, but the campaign that has lies as it’s foundation.
Perhaps list all the lies. It might take some time.
Can somebody please wake sleepy Joe up! Iran is threatening to send missiles into Israel!
What a mess this administration has made of our great country and the world!
Where’s the 25th amendment???
This guy clearly not up to the job!
Good grief! Enough
It doesn't matter how good a debater either Walz or Vance is. It doesn't matter how many interviews each has given recently. It doesn't matter which is the more handsome. At least none of that should matter.
What matters, and what each viewer should look for, is if the person is able to assume command of the highest office in the world if need be. And in the case of Vance, the possibility exists more that he might have to become POTUS to replace a POTUS in his 80s. But that's what viewers should look for tonight; who do they trust more to be President should it become necessary.
One unexpected consequence may be a whole new line of cosmetic eyeliner products for men. DonOld is already trying to capitalize on the new JD Vance trend.
Make Mascara Great Again
Vance will lie. Period. It doesn't matter a bit if Vance is a smooth liar. He will lie. And Chris should realize that Vance's lies are the most significant part of tonight's (or any) performance.
There are plenty of things that have happened since 2016 which defy political history, and this debate could be one of them, inasmuch as I think it could be a bigger factor this time around. I believe that Walz is going to hugely embarrass Vance tonight. Big time.
Unless I missed it, Chris, are you doing a chat during the debate tonight?
When America is weak the world notices!
Afghanistan was a signal JB is weak! His administration is weak! There are no consequences for bad actors including all those who illegally enter our country. The Biden administration has been a disaster!
Chris, I know....sacrilege!....but watching whatever this 'thing' will be is not worth 90 minutes of my life....
Have the VP debates historically been the last debate before the election? I thought, and as a non-historian myself am not sure, that there was always one more presidential debate after the VP debate. If that is normally the case, does the lack of second presidential debate put more importance on today’s debate?
No, the VP debate has never been the last debate prior to an election, so this is indeed unique.
Thanks Larry!
The unspoken issue is whether Convicted Felon Trump will be satisfied with JD Vance -- or whatever his name is this week -- having the final word in the campaign. If Vance does poorly, I'd expect Trump to "suddenly" decide that Oct. 23 isn't too late after all for a rematch with Kamala Harris.
Each side will say the other won. Vance is definitely the better spin guy but Walz is definitely more relatable! I may start watching just to get a feel for how they do on debate stage but it doesn't mean much to me as a voter. I would much rather see Harris do a townhall (have said this many times - nobody is listening 🤣).
Good morning, Chris. I think JD might have had a worse week than you thought. His "rent a dog" thing was ridiculous. Maybe he'll have a "rent a cat" with him tonight. JD is just mean and awful and I expect him to be mean and awful toward Tim. I hope Tim does not respond in kind. Nerves can do that to a person. In any event, I can't wait for tonight to be over.
The thought comes to my mind when you mention that history says the vice presidential debates don’t move the needle. I wonder though if we have a history like this- a historically old presidential candidate linked with a historically highly disliked vice presidential running mate. Maybe if Walz can point out that since Trump is so DonOLD (and not even to mention the two assassination attempts already) , that there is a real possibility voters may actually be voting for Vance for president. Maybe that moves the needle a tiny bit. Sadly probably not.
Chris is just phoning this one in! Sure, the VP debates have not *traditionally* been very decisive in an election and sure, very little has significantly moved the needle in this election (other than subbing in Harris for Biden), so there’s certainly “precedent” for Chris’s comments, but I look to him for a more incisive look into issues and he’s simply not providing it now.
I agree with you, George, that the fact that Trump is the oldest person to run for President in our 247 year history and would be in his 80’s if he gains a second term, makes his VP choice even more significant, as there would be a *high* likelihood that Trump, as poor as his diet is and as little as we actually know about his health, would expire before the end of a second term, making an untested 40 year old with NO leadership ability the President of the United States. While that scenario *may* not cause more people to watch this debate, I would think it would be a topic to discuss, as *many* of the insightful pundits have done today (Gabe Fleischer, Dan Pfeiffer, etc.).
We *do* have a precedent for this sort of situation: at his advanced age, John McCain’s choice of Sarah Palin had a negative effect on his campaign, and at least SHE ran an entire State! And Vance? He wrote a book about a place he didn’t really grow up in, and cast aspersions on those Appalachians; became a venture capitalist; ran for office because his billionaire boss Peter Thiel bankrolled him; and won by a substantially *smaller* margin than literally EVERY OTHER REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE IN OHIO in that election.
At least a *little* conversation on this would have been smart for Chris…
Thank you for this Chris. I was nervous to watch the debate this evening, but the low bar along with not moving the needle no matter what happens, relieves me to watch.