US Politics Mega-thread - Page 4425
Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
DarkPlasmaBall
United States42964 Posts
| ||
Belisarius
Australia6191 Posts
Both of them have come off as moderating influences pitching their candidate to the middle. That's fully expected for Walz, that's the entire point of his existence on the ticket, but it's a surprise for Vance. He was supposed to go wildly off the deep end and he did the opposite. Imo a lot of people would have walked away going "he's not as bad as I thought..." It won't move the needle, of course, but it's still a win for a guy who was absolutely toxic to the average voter beforehand. | ||
Falling
Canada11116 Posts
On October 02 2024 12:43 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Trump wrote a series of pissed-off social media posts about how unfair the moderators were being, even though JD Vance literally interrupted them, so I get the feeling that Trump realizes that the VP debate didn't go as well as he would have hoped. When asked, I'm sure he'll say that Vance won though (just like how Trump pretended that Trump beat Harris in their debate). To be fair, there's one round of back and forths where I lost track but I'm pretty sure Walz went first but then they tried to end with Walz, and I think it was appropriate for Vance to be allowed to give a rebuttal before moving on. So in that instance, I was okay with Vance trying to cut in to say his piece. Generally speaking both candidates respected the rules of the debate, and I think it was far more substantive than the gong show of the presidential debate where Trump cut in to get the last word on absolutely everything. I said it before, but my favourite part of this debate is the moderaters had the discretion to stay on a topic a little longer if it seemed like the candidates had more to say. That is far superior to the last one where it was short statement, short statement, tiny rebuttal, tiny rebuttal, Trump interruption. NEXT TOPIC. Rinse repeat. Stupid format. Give it to CBS again. ABC was garbage even without Trump's shenanigans. | ||
EnDeR_
Spain2420 Posts
As the hurricane continued to ravage the region over the weekend, the former president dismissed global warming in a Saturday speech, and the following day referred to the climate crisis as “one of the great scams of all time”. He had been quiet about this for a while, claiming that the way Harris/Biden were implementing policy to address climate change was a disaster, which was an effective attack line as it is hard to convince people to change. I wonder why he thinks outright denying climate change would be more effective? It undermines his points with anyone remotely concerned with preserving the planet for future generations. | ||
DarkPlasmaBall
United States42964 Posts
On October 02 2024 13:21 Falling wrote: To be fair, there's one round of back and forths where I lost track but I'm pretty sure Walz went first but then they tried to end with Walz, and I think it was appropriate for Vance to be allowed to give a rebuttal before moving on. So in that instance, I was okay with Vance trying to cut in to say his piece. Generally speaking both candidates respected the rules of the debate, and I think it was far more substantive than the gong show of the presidential debate where Trump cut in to get the last word on absolutely everything. Agreed. Apparently, I totally missed a line where JD Vance complained about having fact-checking during the debate - he said something like "I thought the rules were that we wouldn't be fact-checked" when he got caught lying in the middle of the debate, which went viral (along with his non-answer about Trump losing). I said it before, but my favourite part of this debate is the moderaters had the discretion to stay on a topic a little longer if it seemed like the candidates had more to say. That is far superior to the last one where it was short statement, short statement, tiny rebuttal, tiny rebuttal, Trump interruption. NEXT TOPIC. Rinse repeat. Stupid format. Give it to CBS again. ABC was garbage even without Trump's shenanigans. More debates would be cool, but Trump has understandably refused to get his ass whooped again. We probably won't see any more debates unless Trump gets really desperate. | ||
DarkPlasmaBall
United States42964 Posts
On October 02 2024 16:02 EnDeR_ wrote: Trump is back to denying climate change He had been quiet about this for a while, claiming that the way Harris/Biden were implementing policy to address climate change was a disaster, which was an effective attack line as it is hard to convince people to change. I wonder why he thinks outright denying climate change would be more effective? It undermines his points with anyone remotely concerned with preserving the planet for future generations. I think he's going to continue peddling anti-science propaganda, like a denial of climate change / human-accelerated climate change, because he's not being effectively called out for it and his supporters really don't care that much. Despite it being an extremely serious issue, his ignorance and rhetoric and dangerous actions during his presidency and dangerous proposals in Project 2025 never seemed to make-or-break how undecided voters feel about him, either. | ||
| ||