|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On October 05 2016 12:30 Sadist wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2016 12:28 Plansix wrote:On October 05 2016 12:25 Sadist wrote:On October 05 2016 12:22 KwarK wrote:On October 05 2016 12:21 Sadist wrote:
the punishing women angle is dumb.
If abortion were ever deemed illegal, it is entirely ridiculous that women who have abortions aren't prosecuted for having them. I know its a fight that most anti-abortion activists don't want to discuss and feel like its a non starter because they feel like it holds back their cause but I don't see how logically anyone can argue against charging women if abortion ever were to become illegal. On October 05 2016 11:39 KwarK wrote:
Also xDaunt the "he'd just be enforcing the law, he'd punish them because he believes in a nation of laws, not because he thinks women should be punished for abortions" doesn't really work when he's the one saying he'd overturn Roe vs Wade and make it against the law.
You can't go "my hands are tied, I'm just enforcing the law, I don't necessarily believe in this" when you wrote the damn law. I agree with you. The argument that his hands are tied is dumb when hes pushing to overturn the supreme court case. However, its equally as dumb not to prosecute women for having abortions. If you read up on the anti-abortion stance at all they know it is a non-starter for most people and they feel like it works against their cause and if it was pointed out to people roe v wade would never be overturned or some amendmant would eventually pass. The fact that people were surprised that he said it and acted like it was the worst thing ever is stupid is what bothers me. If you actually ever overturned it its only logical that women should be punished. Acting like that is some huge leap is pretty stupid imo. Slaver was legal, FYI. And freeing them was illegal. So by your argument, the only thing to do was hang people who freed slaves(yes the punishments were that harsh back then, they hung you for horse theft) So it isn't the only logical thing to do. I understand you could write the law to protect women so that only the doctor is punished. What im saying is that is completely fucking retarded if you consider it immoral to abort children. Of course you could pass a law like that, but its belittling to women IMO. People know its a non starter even though its only logical to punish the women as well. Man pushes woman downstairs or assaults woman and baby dies -> man is punished Woman tries to kill her unborn child with a coat hanger -> not punished? Wtf?
People consider it immoral to have sex before marriage or get divorced. We don't pass laws based on that and we don't send people to prison any more for trying.
Don't punish desperate women who don't have to have a child. Suicide is also illegal, FYI. We don't send people to prison for attempting suicide. This is why the entire discussion is garbage and Trump is an asshole
|
|
|
On October 05 2016 12:34 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2016 12:30 Sadist wrote:On October 05 2016 12:28 Plansix wrote:On October 05 2016 12:25 Sadist wrote:On October 05 2016 12:22 KwarK wrote:On October 05 2016 12:21 Sadist wrote:
the punishing women angle is dumb.
If abortion were ever deemed illegal, it is entirely ridiculous that women who have abortions aren't prosecuted for having them. I know its a fight that most anti-abortion activists don't want to discuss and feel like its a non starter because they feel like it holds back their cause but I don't see how logically anyone can argue against charging women if abortion ever were to become illegal. On October 05 2016 11:39 KwarK wrote:
Also xDaunt the "he'd just be enforcing the law, he'd punish them because he believes in a nation of laws, not because he thinks women should be punished for abortions" doesn't really work when he's the one saying he'd overturn Roe vs Wade and make it against the law.
You can't go "my hands are tied, I'm just enforcing the law, I don't necessarily believe in this" when you wrote the damn law. I agree with you. The argument that his hands are tied is dumb when hes pushing to overturn the supreme court case. However, its equally as dumb not to prosecute women for having abortions. If you read up on the anti-abortion stance at all they know it is a non-starter for most people and they feel like it works against their cause and if it was pointed out to people roe v wade would never be overturned or some amendmant would eventually pass. The fact that people were surprised that he said it and acted like it was the worst thing ever is stupid is what bothers me. If you actually ever overturned it its only logical that women should be punished. Acting like that is some huge leap is pretty stupid imo. Slaver was legal, FYI. And freeing them was illegal. So by your argument, the only thing to do was hang people who freed slaves(yes the punishments were that harsh back then, they hung you for horse theft) So it isn't the only logical thing to do. I understand you could write the law to protect women so that only the doctor is punished. What im saying is that is completely fucking retarded if you consider it immoral to abort children. Of course you could pass a law like that, but its belittling to women IMO. People know its a non starter even though its only logical to punish the women as well. Man pushes woman downstairs or assaults woman and baby dies -> man is punished Woman tries to kill her unborn child with a coat hanger -> not punished? Wtf? People consider it immoral to have sex before marriage or get divorced. We don't pass laws based on that and we don't send people to prison any more for trying. Don't punish desperate women who don't have to have a child. Suicide is also illegal, FYI. We don't send people to prison for attempting suicide. This is why the entire discussion is garbage and Trump is an asshole
omg I agree hes an asshole and I am pro-choice. I'm saying his argument that punishing the woman for having an abortion in the hypothetical world where abortion is illegal is not a stretch at all. Infact its another argument added to the pro choice column.
Im saying his statement on that wasn't all that dumb if you think about abortion ever becoming illegal.
|
48%-42% Pence according to CNN's debate watcher poll. With a "slightly" skewed audience toward Democrats.
|
On October 05 2016 12:39 GreenHorizons wrote:
48%-42% Pence according to CNN's debate watcher poll. With a "slightly" skewed audience toward Democrats.
Sounds about right. Pence performed slightly better (especially if you didn't watch it in split screen where his ... odd facial movements could be seen), but his constant dodging and deflecting aren't really going to help Trump at all. And the abortion thing definitely won't help him. On the other hand, Kaine's constant attacks seemed totally ineffectual but it really doesn't matter.
In short - they were both awful, but Pence was slightly less awful. It's pretty obvious why neither is at the top of the ticket at this point.
|
United States42008 Posts
On October 05 2016 12:30 Sadist wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2016 12:28 Plansix wrote:On October 05 2016 12:25 Sadist wrote:On October 05 2016 12:22 KwarK wrote:On October 05 2016 12:21 Sadist wrote:
the punishing women angle is dumb.
If abortion were ever deemed illegal, it is entirely ridiculous that women who have abortions aren't prosecuted for having them. I know its a fight that most anti-abortion activists don't want to discuss and feel like its a non starter because they feel like it holds back their cause but I don't see how logically anyone can argue against charging women if abortion ever were to become illegal. On October 05 2016 11:39 KwarK wrote:
Also xDaunt the "he'd just be enforcing the law, he'd punish them because he believes in a nation of laws, not because he thinks women should be punished for abortions" doesn't really work when he's the one saying he'd overturn Roe vs Wade and make it against the law.
You can't go "my hands are tied, I'm just enforcing the law, I don't necessarily believe in this" when you wrote the damn law. I agree with you. The argument that his hands are tied is dumb when hes pushing to overturn the supreme court case. However, its equally as dumb not to prosecute women for having abortions. If you read up on the anti-abortion stance at all they know it is a non-starter for most people and they feel like it works against their cause and if it was pointed out to people roe v wade would never be overturned or some amendmant would eventually pass. The fact that people were surprised that he said it and acted like it was the worst thing ever is stupid is what bothers me. If you actually ever overturned it its only logical that women should be punished. Acting like that is some huge leap is pretty stupid imo. Slaver was legal, FYI. And freeing them was illegal. So by your argument, the only thing to do was hang people who freed slaves(yes the punishments were that harsh back then, they hung you for horse theft) So it isn't the only logical thing to do. I understand you could write the law to protect women so that only the doctor is punished. What im saying is that is completely fucking retarded if you consider it immoral to abort children. Of course you could pass a law like that, but its belittling to women IMO. People know its a non starter even though its only logical to punish the women as well. Man pushes woman downstairs or assaults woman and baby dies -> man is punished (in hypothetical world where abortion is illegal for doctors to perform) Woman asks Doctor to help her abort her child -> doctor punished Woman tries to kill her unborn child with a coat hanger -> not punished? Wtf?
Because it's her body. If you don't understand the abortion is about bodily autonomy you don't understand abortion.
|
A lot of it was like watching 2 children. "You or Trump said X"! "Nu uh no we didn't".
|
United States42008 Posts
I think Pence did a better job but all Kaine had to do was throw shit until something stuck and the abortion thing stuck.
|
On October 05 2016 12:45 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2016 12:30 Sadist wrote:On October 05 2016 12:28 Plansix wrote:On October 05 2016 12:25 Sadist wrote:On October 05 2016 12:22 KwarK wrote:On October 05 2016 12:21 Sadist wrote:
the punishing women angle is dumb.
If abortion were ever deemed illegal, it is entirely ridiculous that women who have abortions aren't prosecuted for having them. I know its a fight that most anti-abortion activists don't want to discuss and feel like its a non starter because they feel like it holds back their cause but I don't see how logically anyone can argue against charging women if abortion ever were to become illegal. On October 05 2016 11:39 KwarK wrote:
Also xDaunt the "he'd just be enforcing the law, he'd punish them because he believes in a nation of laws, not because he thinks women should be punished for abortions" doesn't really work when he's the one saying he'd overturn Roe vs Wade and make it against the law.
You can't go "my hands are tied, I'm just enforcing the law, I don't necessarily believe in this" when you wrote the damn law. I agree with you. The argument that his hands are tied is dumb when hes pushing to overturn the supreme court case. However, its equally as dumb not to prosecute women for having abortions. If you read up on the anti-abortion stance at all they know it is a non-starter for most people and they feel like it works against their cause and if it was pointed out to people roe v wade would never be overturned or some amendmant would eventually pass. The fact that people were surprised that he said it and acted like it was the worst thing ever is stupid is what bothers me. If you actually ever overturned it its only logical that women should be punished. Acting like that is some huge leap is pretty stupid imo. Slaver was legal, FYI. And freeing them was illegal. So by your argument, the only thing to do was hang people who freed slaves(yes the punishments were that harsh back then, they hung you for horse theft) So it isn't the only logical thing to do. I understand you could write the law to protect women so that only the doctor is punished. What im saying is that is completely fucking retarded if you consider it immoral to abort children. Of course you could pass a law like that, but its belittling to women IMO. People know its a non starter even though its only logical to punish the women as well. Man pushes woman downstairs or assaults woman and baby dies -> man is punished (in hypothetical world where abortion is illegal for doctors to perform) Woman asks Doctor to help her abort her child -> doctor punished Woman tries to kill her unborn child with a coat hanger -> not punished? Wtf? Because it's her body. If you don't understand the abortion is about bodily autonomy you don't understand abortion.
I can't believe there was this wide of a chasm in understanding between us on this issue  .
|
United States42008 Posts
On October 05 2016 12:47 Sadist wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2016 12:45 KwarK wrote:On October 05 2016 12:30 Sadist wrote:On October 05 2016 12:28 Plansix wrote:On October 05 2016 12:25 Sadist wrote:On October 05 2016 12:22 KwarK wrote:On October 05 2016 12:21 Sadist wrote:
the punishing women angle is dumb.
If abortion were ever deemed illegal, it is entirely ridiculous that women who have abortions aren't prosecuted for having them. I know its a fight that most anti-abortion activists don't want to discuss and feel like its a non starter because they feel like it holds back their cause but I don't see how logically anyone can argue against charging women if abortion ever were to become illegal. On October 05 2016 11:39 KwarK wrote:
Also xDaunt the "he'd just be enforcing the law, he'd punish them because he believes in a nation of laws, not because he thinks women should be punished for abortions" doesn't really work when he's the one saying he'd overturn Roe vs Wade and make it against the law.
You can't go "my hands are tied, I'm just enforcing the law, I don't necessarily believe in this" when you wrote the damn law. I agree with you. The argument that his hands are tied is dumb when hes pushing to overturn the supreme court case. However, its equally as dumb not to prosecute women for having abortions. If you read up on the anti-abortion stance at all they know it is a non-starter for most people and they feel like it works against their cause and if it was pointed out to people roe v wade would never be overturned or some amendmant would eventually pass. The fact that people were surprised that he said it and acted like it was the worst thing ever is stupid is what bothers me. If you actually ever overturned it its only logical that women should be punished. Acting like that is some huge leap is pretty stupid imo. Slaver was legal, FYI. And freeing them was illegal. So by your argument, the only thing to do was hang people who freed slaves(yes the punishments were that harsh back then, they hung you for horse theft) So it isn't the only logical thing to do. I understand you could write the law to protect women so that only the doctor is punished. What im saying is that is completely fucking retarded if you consider it immoral to abort children. Of course you could pass a law like that, but its belittling to women IMO. People know its a non starter even though its only logical to punish the women as well. Man pushes woman downstairs or assaults woman and baby dies -> man is punished (in hypothetical world where abortion is illegal for doctors to perform) Woman asks Doctor to help her abort her child -> doctor punished Woman tries to kill her unborn child with a coat hanger -> not punished? Wtf? Because it's her body. If you don't understand the abortion is about bodily autonomy you don't understand abortion. I can't believe there was this wide of a chasm in understanding between us on this issue .
If a woman drives her car to work it's fine. But suddenly if a man drives that woman's car to work it's theft? Can't explain that!
|
On October 05 2016 12:44 Nevuk wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2016 12:39 GreenHorizons wrote:
48%-42% Pence according to CNN's debate watcher poll. With a "slightly" skewed audience toward Democrats. Sounds about right. Pence performed slightly better (especially if you didn't watch it in split screen where his ... odd facial movements could be seen), but his constant dodging and deflecting aren't really going to help Trump at all. And the abortion thing definitely won't help him. On the other hand, Kaine's constant attacks seemed totally ineffectual but it really doesn't matter. In short - they were both awful, but Pence was slightly less awful. It's pretty obvious why neither is at the top of the ticket at this point.
It'll be interesting to see the post debate stuff changes things. Kaine lost the debate itself, but he did coax out a few good Pence sound bites & moments of Pence not defending Trump. I think that sort of thing could have more lasting impact than the debate performance itself.
|
On October 05 2016 12:47 Sadist wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2016 12:45 KwarK wrote:On October 05 2016 12:30 Sadist wrote:On October 05 2016 12:28 Plansix wrote:On October 05 2016 12:25 Sadist wrote:On October 05 2016 12:22 KwarK wrote:On October 05 2016 12:21 Sadist wrote:
the punishing women angle is dumb.
If abortion were ever deemed illegal, it is entirely ridiculous that women who have abortions aren't prosecuted for having them. I know its a fight that most anti-abortion activists don't want to discuss and feel like its a non starter because they feel like it holds back their cause but I don't see how logically anyone can argue against charging women if abortion ever were to become illegal. On October 05 2016 11:39 KwarK wrote:
Also xDaunt the "he'd just be enforcing the law, he'd punish them because he believes in a nation of laws, not because he thinks women should be punished for abortions" doesn't really work when he's the one saying he'd overturn Roe vs Wade and make it against the law.
You can't go "my hands are tied, I'm just enforcing the law, I don't necessarily believe in this" when you wrote the damn law. I agree with you. The argument that his hands are tied is dumb when hes pushing to overturn the supreme court case. However, its equally as dumb not to prosecute women for having abortions. If you read up on the anti-abortion stance at all they know it is a non-starter for most people and they feel like it works against their cause and if it was pointed out to people roe v wade would never be overturned or some amendmant would eventually pass. The fact that people were surprised that he said it and acted like it was the worst thing ever is stupid is what bothers me. If you actually ever overturned it its only logical that women should be punished. Acting like that is some huge leap is pretty stupid imo. Slaver was legal, FYI. And freeing them was illegal. So by your argument, the only thing to do was hang people who freed slaves(yes the punishments were that harsh back then, they hung you for horse theft) So it isn't the only logical thing to do. I understand you could write the law to protect women so that only the doctor is punished. What im saying is that is completely fucking retarded if you consider it immoral to abort children. Of course you could pass a law like that, but its belittling to women IMO. People know its a non starter even though its only logical to punish the women as well. Man pushes woman downstairs or assaults woman and baby dies -> man is punished (in hypothetical world where abortion is illegal for doctors to perform) Woman asks Doctor to help her abort her child -> doctor punished Woman tries to kill her unborn child with a coat hanger -> not punished? Wtf? Because it's her body. If you don't understand the abortion is about bodily autonomy you don't understand abortion. I can't believe there was this wide of a chasm in understanding between us on this issue .
Because you are attempting to separate the act of making it illegal from punishment. Thing are not crimes if there is no penalty.
|
On October 05 2016 12:49 Logo wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2016 12:44 Nevuk wrote:On October 05 2016 12:39 GreenHorizons wrote:
48%-42% Pence according to CNN's debate watcher poll. With a "slightly" skewed audience toward Democrats. Sounds about right. Pence performed slightly better (especially if you didn't watch it in split screen where his ... odd facial movements could be seen), but his constant dodging and deflecting aren't really going to help Trump at all. And the abortion thing definitely won't help him. On the other hand, Kaine's constant attacks seemed totally ineffectual but it really doesn't matter. In short - they were both awful, but Pence was slightly less awful. It's pretty obvious why neither is at the top of the ticket at this point. It'll be interesting to see the post debate stuff changes things. Kaine lost the debate itself, but he did coax out a few good Pence sound bites & moments of Pence not defending Trump. I think that sort of thing could have more lasting impact than the debate performance itself.
I don't think it'll have an impact at all. Few people care about the VP's and the next presidential debate will overshadow this one easily.
|
On October 05 2016 12:50 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2016 12:47 Sadist wrote:On October 05 2016 12:45 KwarK wrote:On October 05 2016 12:30 Sadist wrote:On October 05 2016 12:28 Plansix wrote:On October 05 2016 12:25 Sadist wrote:On October 05 2016 12:22 KwarK wrote:On October 05 2016 12:21 Sadist wrote:
the punishing women angle is dumb.
If abortion were ever deemed illegal, it is entirely ridiculous that women who have abortions aren't prosecuted for having them. I know its a fight that most anti-abortion activists don't want to discuss and feel like its a non starter because they feel like it holds back their cause but I don't see how logically anyone can argue against charging women if abortion ever were to become illegal. On October 05 2016 11:39 KwarK wrote:
Also xDaunt the "he'd just be enforcing the law, he'd punish them because he believes in a nation of laws, not because he thinks women should be punished for abortions" doesn't really work when he's the one saying he'd overturn Roe vs Wade and make it against the law.
You can't go "my hands are tied, I'm just enforcing the law, I don't necessarily believe in this" when you wrote the damn law. I agree with you. The argument that his hands are tied is dumb when hes pushing to overturn the supreme court case. However, its equally as dumb not to prosecute women for having abortions. If you read up on the anti-abortion stance at all they know it is a non-starter for most people and they feel like it works against their cause and if it was pointed out to people roe v wade would never be overturned or some amendmant would eventually pass. The fact that people were surprised that he said it and acted like it was the worst thing ever is stupid is what bothers me. If you actually ever overturned it its only logical that women should be punished. Acting like that is some huge leap is pretty stupid imo. Slaver was legal, FYI. And freeing them was illegal. So by your argument, the only thing to do was hang people who freed slaves(yes the punishments were that harsh back then, they hung you for horse theft) So it isn't the only logical thing to do. I understand you could write the law to protect women so that only the doctor is punished. What im saying is that is completely fucking retarded if you consider it immoral to abort children. Of course you could pass a law like that, but its belittling to women IMO. People know its a non starter even though its only logical to punish the women as well. Man pushes woman downstairs or assaults woman and baby dies -> man is punished (in hypothetical world where abortion is illegal for doctors to perform) Woman asks Doctor to help her abort her child -> doctor punished Woman tries to kill her unborn child with a coat hanger -> not punished? Wtf? Because it's her body. If you don't understand the abortion is about bodily autonomy you don't understand abortion. I can't believe there was this wide of a chasm in understanding between us on this issue . Because you are attempting to separate the act of making it illegal from punishment. Thing are not crimes if there is no penalty.
Edit: Double post.
|
On October 05 2016 12:47 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2016 12:47 Sadist wrote:On October 05 2016 12:45 KwarK wrote:On October 05 2016 12:30 Sadist wrote:On October 05 2016 12:28 Plansix wrote:On October 05 2016 12:25 Sadist wrote:On October 05 2016 12:22 KwarK wrote:On October 05 2016 12:21 Sadist wrote:
the punishing women angle is dumb.
If abortion were ever deemed illegal, it is entirely ridiculous that women who have abortions aren't prosecuted for having them. I know its a fight that most anti-abortion activists don't want to discuss and feel like its a non starter because they feel like it holds back their cause but I don't see how logically anyone can argue against charging women if abortion ever were to become illegal. On October 05 2016 11:39 KwarK wrote:
Also xDaunt the "he'd just be enforcing the law, he'd punish them because he believes in a nation of laws, not because he thinks women should be punished for abortions" doesn't really work when he's the one saying he'd overturn Roe vs Wade and make it against the law.
You can't go "my hands are tied, I'm just enforcing the law, I don't necessarily believe in this" when you wrote the damn law. I agree with you. The argument that his hands are tied is dumb when hes pushing to overturn the supreme court case. However, its equally as dumb not to prosecute women for having abortions. If you read up on the anti-abortion stance at all they know it is a non-starter for most people and they feel like it works against their cause and if it was pointed out to people roe v wade would never be overturned or some amendmant would eventually pass. The fact that people were surprised that he said it and acted like it was the worst thing ever is stupid is what bothers me. If you actually ever overturned it its only logical that women should be punished. Acting like that is some huge leap is pretty stupid imo. Slaver was legal, FYI. And freeing them was illegal. So by your argument, the only thing to do was hang people who freed slaves(yes the punishments were that harsh back then, they hung you for horse theft) So it isn't the only logical thing to do. I understand you could write the law to protect women so that only the doctor is punished. What im saying is that is completely fucking retarded if you consider it immoral to abort children. Of course you could pass a law like that, but its belittling to women IMO. People know its a non starter even though its only logical to punish the women as well. Man pushes woman downstairs or assaults woman and baby dies -> man is punished (in hypothetical world where abortion is illegal for doctors to perform) Woman asks Doctor to help her abort her child -> doctor punished Woman tries to kill her unborn child with a coat hanger -> not punished? Wtf? Because it's her body. If you don't understand the abortion is about bodily autonomy you don't understand abortion. I can't believe there was this wide of a chasm in understanding between us on this issue . If a woman drives her car to work it's fine. But suddenly if a man drives that woman's car to work it's theft? Can't explain that!
If someone provides you a service(that you knowingly asked for) that is illegal because people are essentially arguing its murder. How is it not murder if you commit that service on yourself with the intent to murder?
I am pro choice! Im saying its fucking dumb to treat women with Kid gloves in a hypothetical world where abortion were illegal.
Its legal now and I understand the arguments for it being legal now and I am for it.
I guess this is why its pointless for any politician to bring this up because the understanding when discussing the repercussions for making it illegal are too difficult for people to grasp.
|
On October 05 2016 12:13 Nevuk wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2016 12:10 Plansix wrote:On October 05 2016 12:08 Stratos_speAr wrote:On October 05 2016 12:03 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 05 2016 11:58 LegalLord wrote:
Pence came out of this one less stupid. I don't think this debate changed my opinion of either candidate or either VP, at all. They basically were what I thought they were. Thanks Coach Green ;P Yeah, was basically a preview for 2020 if Hillary isn't politically palatable, 2024 if she is. Democrats are heading toward Kaine not Warren or Brown, Unless progressives drag them back that is. I don't see how you can possibly say that the Democratic party is heading toward the likes of Kaine, an older white male that is most definitely a politician out of prior generations that also isn't very well-known or particularly liked. And its not like the hard line, accept no compromise progressives are a large enough voting block at this point. In 4-8 years they probably will be. Sanders did come pretty close to winning the democratic nomination with them.
Sanders did win the nomination... lol
|
On October 05 2016 12:49 Logo wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2016 12:44 Nevuk wrote:On October 05 2016 12:39 GreenHorizons wrote:
48%-42% Pence according to CNN's debate watcher poll. With a "slightly" skewed audience toward Democrats. Sounds about right. Pence performed slightly better (especially if you didn't watch it in split screen where his ... odd facial movements could be seen), but his constant dodging and deflecting aren't really going to help Trump at all. And the abortion thing definitely won't help him. On the other hand, Kaine's constant attacks seemed totally ineffectual but it really doesn't matter. In short - they were both awful, but Pence was slightly less awful. It's pretty obvious why neither is at the top of the ticket at this point. It'll be interesting to see the post debate stuff changes things. Kaine lost the debate itself, but he did coax out a few good Pence sound bites & moments of Pence not defending Trump. I think that sort of thing could have more lasting impact than the debate performance itself.
Yeah, the strategy they used had to be intentional, those interruptions were from the start. They weren't trying to win the debate, they were going fishing
|
I don't know how trustworthy that can be when Trump is winning OH / IA by a good margin. Also, in current balloting in Florida, he is ahead as well.
|
On October 05 2016 12:54 Titan107 wrote:I don't know how trustworthy that can be when Trump is winning OH / IA by a good margin. Also, in current balloting in Florida, he is ahead as well.
This does not match reality in any way.
|
On October 05 2016 12:54 Titan107 wrote:Also, in current balloting in Florida, he is ahead as well.
Source?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
