I don’t wish that. JD kicked ass at this debate because it’s pretty hard for Walz to defend the last 3.5 years. That’s, IMO, why Tim kept returning to what is going on in his own State of Minnesota, which was his safety blanket. But I’d rather have Trump at controls right now than Vance. Vance however has bright future 👍🏽
If I learned one thing from the 2016 race it's that you don't bring a policy discussion to a debate involving Donald Trump. His lies create an asymmetric contest where you either choose to discuss the merits or you spend precious time addressing his awful conduct and endless lies and distortions. And I'm tired of pretending that the electorate is a bunch of policy wonks. If that was the case, Donald Trump would be nowhere in sight. They are anything but.
This review is void of substance. The VP debate showed that Lance will lie on subjects such as Obamacare, immigration, January 6, and climate change, just to name a few. Walz proved that he's responsible for his own words, even when exaggerated or incorrect. No mention of Ukraine in this debate, which was strange since that is a primary front line of fascist expansion. This review didn't have a minimal level of detail on why either of these guys showed presidential talent. On the other hand, Harris had an easier time, all she had to do was prove that she can make Trump look like a fool, a strong indication that she will confront fascists of the world like Putin and Xi. I welcome a strong woman - bring on the next Maggie.
What makes you say it’s void of substance? Because Zaid didn’t list all the topics Tim and JD discussed in a substantive way? Zaid did point to the very nuanced discussion they tried to have on the Springfield migrants in which I think JD did a brilliant job decomposing the policies in a comprehensible way. Having watched the debate with two middle schoolers, I do think of Zaids audience were middle schoolers your critique would apply. But most of us are adults, heard the debate and don’t need Zaid to give examples to remember that the two candidates were remarkably substantive.
I visited this website because of Mr. Jilani, essay published by the NY Times titled “Defending Freedom of Speech”. When I saw his “Switheroo” piece on the VP debate, I was surprised. His bio says he is a journalist, and as a journalist with the goal of presenting news and commentary, what is his basis for a switcherroo? One candidate was a liar (which I think he knows and as a reporter, should point out) while the other was muddled but clear in his convictions. Present the facts as to why these two gentlemen should be running for president. So far, I am only impressed with Ms. Harris – she has backbone.
Concerning the NY Times essay: it was very good. I would add only this to your thinking. This American Republic was founded by the English, not white people. It was English barons who forced John I to sign the Magna Carta in 1215. It was the Members of Parliament that wrote the Bill of Rights in 1689 and forced William and Mary to just go along. At that time, a man or woman thought they had the divine right to be a King or queen. We can thank conservative Puritans for the English Civil War and chopping off Charles I head to straighten that out. All this led to American British subjects rebelling against British Parliament taxes (among other things) and the US Constitution in 1789 (with all its flaws) was added to great documents created by the English. Ms. Wax has no business speaking about white, brown, black, yellow or green. She should argue that we need more Englishmen – that would be humorous. This country is based on 600 years plus years of political thought. A lot of it ugly. It took France took more than 100 years to develop a republic. Germany, not until after WWII. Russian was the land of slavery in 1860. So – just keep rolling your eyes. We need as many cultures as we can get.
I don’t wish that. JD kicked ass at this debate because it’s pretty hard for Walz to defend the last 3.5 years. That’s, IMO, why Tim kept returning to what is going on in his own State of Minnesota, which was his safety blanket. But I’d rather have Trump at controls right now than Vance. Vance however has bright future 👍🏽
It was incredibly refreshing and engaging.
If I learned one thing from the 2016 race it's that you don't bring a policy discussion to a debate involving Donald Trump. His lies create an asymmetric contest where you either choose to discuss the merits or you spend precious time addressing his awful conduct and endless lies and distortions. And I'm tired of pretending that the electorate is a bunch of policy wonks. If that was the case, Donald Trump would be nowhere in sight. They are anything but.
"Trump is probably the funniest person who has ever held the presidency. He is, at times, an absolutely amazing speaker."
By what metric do you consider Trump an "absolutely amazing speaker." Word salad score?
This review is void of substance. The VP debate showed that Lance will lie on subjects such as Obamacare, immigration, January 6, and climate change, just to name a few. Walz proved that he's responsible for his own words, even when exaggerated or incorrect. No mention of Ukraine in this debate, which was strange since that is a primary front line of fascist expansion. This review didn't have a minimal level of detail on why either of these guys showed presidential talent. On the other hand, Harris had an easier time, all she had to do was prove that she can make Trump look like a fool, a strong indication that she will confront fascists of the world like Putin and Xi. I welcome a strong woman - bring on the next Maggie.
What makes you say it’s void of substance? Because Zaid didn’t list all the topics Tim and JD discussed in a substantive way? Zaid did point to the very nuanced discussion they tried to have on the Springfield migrants in which I think JD did a brilliant job decomposing the policies in a comprehensible way. Having watched the debate with two middle schoolers, I do think of Zaids audience were middle schoolers your critique would apply. But most of us are adults, heard the debate and don’t need Zaid to give examples to remember that the two candidates were remarkably substantive.
I visited this website because of Mr. Jilani, essay published by the NY Times titled “Defending Freedom of Speech”. When I saw his “Switheroo” piece on the VP debate, I was surprised. His bio says he is a journalist, and as a journalist with the goal of presenting news and commentary, what is his basis for a switcherroo? One candidate was a liar (which I think he knows and as a reporter, should point out) while the other was muddled but clear in his convictions. Present the facts as to why these two gentlemen should be running for president. So far, I am only impressed with Ms. Harris – she has backbone.
Concerning the NY Times essay: it was very good. I would add only this to your thinking. This American Republic was founded by the English, not white people. It was English barons who forced John I to sign the Magna Carta in 1215. It was the Members of Parliament that wrote the Bill of Rights in 1689 and forced William and Mary to just go along. At that time, a man or woman thought they had the divine right to be a King or queen. We can thank conservative Puritans for the English Civil War and chopping off Charles I head to straighten that out. All this led to American British subjects rebelling against British Parliament taxes (among other things) and the US Constitution in 1789 (with all its flaws) was added to great documents created by the English. Ms. Wax has no business speaking about white, brown, black, yellow or green. She should argue that we need more Englishmen – that would be humorous. This country is based on 600 years plus years of political thought. A lot of it ugly. It took France took more than 100 years to develop a republic. Germany, not until after WWII. Russian was the land of slavery in 1860. So – just keep rolling your eyes. We need as many cultures as we can get.
The moderators muted Vance's microphone when he spoke about Springfield, OH migrants.
Trump is a liar and a racist and so is Vance. Trump is not an amazing speaker and to portray them similarly in any fashion is beyond disingenuous.
Vance is so racist, he married an Indian-American women and had three mixed-raced children with her?