Walz answer was really good.
this post was submitted on 01 Oct 2024
123 points (96.9% liked)
politics
24856 readers
2940 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I need Vance’s makeup artist
But seriously , why is he dodging the question?
Vance has only been speaking for a few minutes and it already looks like he has robot hands.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I think they're both full of shit about the ACA. Vance delivered lies and a nothing burger of a proposal. Walz said the system works. Pre and post trump it never worked. When it was mandatory, I was on the benefits cliff and couldn't afford the awful insurance that covered nothing (that also had an enormous deductible). I missed rent because of my state mandated health insurance. When trump made it voluntary, I had more money in my pocket and I still couldn't afford healthcare.
The ACA is fucked and needs to be replaced with a real socialized health system. Health insurance is corrupt and contrary to healthcare on a fundamental level. It should be abolished and outlawed.
load more comments
(1 replies)
And yet you somehow turned out to be a gross little shit
That was a weirdly meandering non-answer.
Walz seems really nice. And the VP doesn't usually matter that much. But it sure would be nice if that was Buttigieg or Shapiro up there. Buttigieg loves sparring with Republicans. He is a great attack dog, but thats not really what Walz's role seems to be, and that's OK, but considering the election is a coin flip, I just want every fraction of a percent of support Harris can get.
load more comments
(1 replies)
They’re both soft-balling this. Lean harder, Walz. He’s giving you ammunition!
Economics experts have PhDs don't have common sense?
I feel like there's a history of these VP debates being pretentiously "more civil" than the main event, because the stakes are lower, etc. So there was that, here, in vance and walz being so nice and agreeing with each other.
But this shit was boring crazy. Vance just lied and was unable to hold Walz to account.
load more comments
(1 replies)
We'll induce more people into child care!
(Aunt Lydia has entered the chat)
What is Vance talking about?
Vance probably has marching orders to attack Harris at the cost of making himself look bad. The question is whether he passes on the chance to change his own narrative.
Stiff and stumbly out of the gate. Nothing awful though.
as long as he concentrates on the fundamentals :)