Debate formats are so stupid. They need to be long-form. I want to hear each candidate elaborate on each subject more than just their rehearsed talking points. It would be far more beneficial to hear how they really think about a subject, how they plan to solve an issue and what the potential impacts can be. They exist in their current form to maximize benefit for whatever news outlet is hosting the event, certainly not to the benefit of the voters.
I agree. I’ve said it before but the way national politics has turned into professional wrestling doesn’t actually serve anyone. People watch debates to see someone they don’t like humiliated. How many moments can be cut and turned into ads. Whoever has the smoothest delivery wins even if the substance is horseshit. Neither one had a bad night. If anything, it was a little boring. I think Walz missed opportunities to take some shots at Vance. But I don’t think it’s in his nature to go super negative. Either way, it’ll be forgotten about by mid morning.
would trump have won without fox? Serious question because I don't have an immediate answer, though my gut reaction is "no way in hell." Not enough coffee yet to think this one through
What difference does the format make for VP? Or have I missed where the VP ever does anything while they're in office?
So here’s the context, because this is the moment I was talking about. the moderator, at the very end of this subject, said, “and just to clarify, Springfield’s migrants do have legal status,” and then immediately went on to the next subject. Vance jumped in with this, after pushing through about 30 seconds of “gentleman we have a lot to cover” until they were forced to let him continue, and he explained that the program these migrants are using allows for illegal immigrants to have a protected status without going through the green card program, and then he tried to say that was a horrible program of the “Harris administration.” Now, I’m not agreeing with him. And I liked that after that, Walz pushed back against the moderators trying to plow on, by adding that the program they were taking advantage of had been created in 1990. It was just a nice moment, to me, of “oh hey let’s actually fucking learn something, as citizens watching this!” Not that we learned much.
Is that from a news source directly? If so, that's the exact type of shit that's a huge issue. His statement wasn't exactly that big a deal, but the messaging is "HE SAID SOMETHING RACIST" instead of just telling us what the fuck he said unless we drill down into it. That's modern news media for you. The rage bait clicks are more important than the content. Tell us what the fact check is instead of skipping to the moral appraisal. And journalists using trending tweets as a source of content is asinine.
My comment was based on how shit is being thrown out there without proper context. Much like my post, apparently.
No I understand what you meant, I was speaking towards (my assumption) that a news org puts content that forward as a headline and then I went on an extrapolation journey about media in general.
from from a purely entertainment standpoint, that "you said we weren't gonna factcheck" statement came across exactly like how you thought it would. I turned it off shortly thereafter. I already know who I'm voting for, fuck that creep
The debate, and the state of the media, was pretty much summed up by the Drudge Report links I saw: “VP DEBATE DULL… Policy-heavy…”
I don't think the country comes back together until we fix the media. I got in my truck and Sean Hannity was on the radio. I never listen to him but what he was saying made me pause on changing the station. Ended up listening to ~15 mins of his show and whoa, dudes claims are bonkers but if that's all you listen to, I can completely understand why you think everyone crossing the border is either a rapist, murderer, terrorist or all three. Much more egregious than the Left but they're guilty also. Big story today was Vance crying about being fact checked. She fact checked him, and he said "Margaret, the rules were that you guys weren’t going to fact check,” he said. “And since you’re fact checking me, I think it’s important to say what’s actually going on." at which point they muted his mic. The bolded part is what the Left is deliberately leaving out.
I thought Walz was supposed to be the affable boomer football coach. His performance was nervously odd. He still came off as a stronger candidate than Kamala did in her debate performance.