this post was submitted on 02 Oct 2024
60 points (84.1% liked)

Ask Lemmy

26875 readers
2113 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions

Please don't post about US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

CBS refusing to fact check was a travesty, but at least they still called Vance out on the immigrant bullshit.

top 23 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Linktank@lemmy.today 31 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Walz came across like a human, while Vance pulled off an amazing impression of one.

[–] JusticeForPorygon@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Honestly that's a great way of putting it. He doesn't freak out on TV the way Trump does but imo that makes his goals seem a lot scarier than Trump's.

[–] Linktank@lemmy.today 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

You can tell the difference in their sincerity simply in the way they react to each other while speaking. Walz is listening and you can see him nod when the leather puppet makes a point that actually has some validity and then shake his head or turn it to face him dramatically when he says something ridiculous.

On the other hand you can see the cogs turning behind Vance's mask while Walz is talking trying to connect it to some conspiracy or figure out how to spin it to mean that America is bad unless there's an orange dictator at the wheel.

[–] JusticeForPorygon@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

"Pass the bill, James!"

[–] InverseParallax@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Amazing impression?

Terrifying impression.

Donald J Trump and his quasar sized ego are the only thing standing between us and a Vance presidency. 2028 will be horrifying.

[–] avguser@lemmy.world 18 points 1 month ago (2 children)

It was refreshing to have a civil debate without yelling and name calling. Compared to the previous debate it's night and day.

[–] Kaiyoto@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

Omg yes, I was beginning to forget what a debate between two adults looked like.

[–] sigmaklimgrindset@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Yeah, honestly I tuned it for a bit and was shocked at how shocked I was about the debate being just a normal(ish) political debate.

It's bothering me how desensitized I've become to Trumpian rhetoric in politics, not only in the USA, but globally. Almost a decade of this shit in the public, and a whole new generation of voters who think it's normal, too. It's pissing me off.

[–] tomi000@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Im shocked at how shocked you were at being shocked

[–] Kellamity@sh.itjust.works 18 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

For anyone who is politically involved and knows the issues, Walz won by having better and more consistent positions; as well as Vance saying some scary fascist level shit

But I fear that most undecided voters aren't in that camp, and for those people Vance did well just be being coherent and vaguely normal.

Vance lied and twisted the truth a bunch, but if you just tuned in without knowing all the facts and context, that wasn't necessarily clear

For me though I was pleasantly surprised by Walz actually making a moral case for immigration, you don't see that nearly enough

[–] MedicPigBabySaver@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

Yes. Vance was full on snake oil salesman and many Americans will buy.

[–] vovo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 15 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

One hour after the debate, I sorted lemmy posts by top of last hour. The first 5 posts were about Vance, the 6th about Trump. Not one with Walz in the headline.

[–] JusticeForPorygon@lemmy.world 25 points 1 month ago

I mean yeah because Walz pretty much just answered questions while Vance whined about being "fact checked"

[–] Nefara@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I like Walz so it was frustrating to hear him tripping over his words and misspeaking. I think I heard him say he was friends with a school shooter, when I know he meant to say people effected by shootings. I felt that unfortunately Vance sounded clear and authoritative which will sway some people, despite being full of shit. One question Walz handled excellently was the one on abortion and reproductive rights. I just wish he had been that solid and aggressive and confident throughout the whole debate.

[–] JusticeForPorygon@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

It's unfortunate that reds will use his stammering against him, (especially when their guy can say whatever the hell he wants w/o repercussions) but I thought it made him actually sound human, something we haven't heard in politics in a while. I myself have a minor stutter, so it annoys the hell out of me when people try to say that makes someone unfit for office.

[–] MedicPigBabySaver@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

Walz did fine. Unfortunately, that's definitely not enough to be impressive. In today's world he needed to be more aggressive and stern.

There were also a couple of times that were just bad optics for him. He looked pretty goofy nodding his head at Vance.

Of course I wanted better from Walz. Sadly, and worrisome that Vance came across as more than adequate.

[–] IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Same as the previous two debates - the candidate that is constrained by not being a massive fucking liar will always be at a disadvantage because the moderators have abdicated their responsibility to do their jobs and fact check.

I think Walz improved as the night went on, he seemed a little nervous and needed to slow down a bit but he came across as relatable and human. That's something Vance isn't able to do.

[–] JusticeForPorygon@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Was it the moderators decision to not fact check? Considering they still called out Vance that one time makes me wonder if they were just as annoyed by it as we were, but needed to keep their jobs

[–] IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

I'm sure the instruction came from higher up. Trump is great for business, he drives engagement, so more viewers, so more ad revenue.

If the moderators are OK with this, as in they're not speaking out, then I'd hesitate to call them journalists.

[–] Wahots@pawb.social 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I feel way better about Walz. Strong debate performance even if it isn't his forte. The ending where Vance got his leg in the beartrap of Jan 6 and could not answer why Mike Pence was not on stage instead of him (because Mike Pence is not a suck up) was shocking to see. Dude did not practice for that question at all, lmfao.

I also chuckled when Vance basically argued to Walz that the Infrastructure act and the inflation reduction act were good things. No shit shirlock, that's why Biden-Harris implemented them. It brought back American jobs and have rekindled diminished, rust belt states with new factories and infrastructure.

Vance came across as kinda whiny and petulant, Walz made strong points and really defined policy specifics.

Next debate, CBS needs to do way more aggressive fact-checking. ABC had way better fact-checking, but it still could have been way better. Vance walked all over CBS with his lying and taking credit for Biden and Obama administration Ws.

[–] JusticeForPorygon@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Absolutely. Unfortunately it doesn't look like there's gonna be another debate this time 'round (weird since they both seem to think they did so well)

Also, Good ol' Marjorie Taylor Greene tweeted that it was a 3 on 1 debate. Thought that was funny.

I almost agree with her lol

[–] JusticeForPorygon@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Obligatory:
"KAMALA WANTS TO CENSOR ME FOR LYING TO THE PUBLIC WAHHHH"

[–] JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

Lots of deluded wishful thinking in this thread. I would never vote for Vance either, but I recognize an impressive debate performance when I see one.