93
submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 49 minutes ago) by jordanlund@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

Final (?) Debate thread before the election in 35 days.

Debate begins at 9 PM Eastern, 6 PM Pacific and runs 90 minutes.

Vice Presidential debates are always tricky since nobody has voted for Vice President in living memory.

Expect Vance to attack Walz on his military service.

Expect Walz to attack Vance on the whole "immigrants eating cats and dogs" thing.

Expect Vance to attack Walz on being an assistant coach, at best.

Expect Walz to roll out "Weird!" at least once.

CBS has announced the burden of fact checking will be on the candidates themselves.

https://apnews.com/article/cbs-debate-vice-president-fact-check-7a3b31c98ab092dd44915df57a359d10

How to watch here:

https://apnews.com/article/cbs-debate-vice-president-fact-check-7a3b31c98ab092dd44915df57a359d10

"How can you watch the VP debate on cable? 

CBS will air debate coverage starting at 8 p.m. ET on CBS broadcast stations and affiliates. Find your local station here.

How can you stream the VP debate without cable? 

The debate can be streamed on the free CBS News app on your connected TV or smartphone, on Paramount+, and all platforms where CBS News 24/7 is available, including CBSNews.com and YouTube. 

Debate coverage on CBS News 24/7 begins at 4 p.m. ET."

Edit Impressive how a debate can go when one participant doesn't have mental health issues! Thanks for coming everybody!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 21 points 5 hours ago

To Vance's credit, he's doing a monumental amount of damage control and sanewashing for Donald Trump and is doing a decent job at it. Yes Vance is lying through his teeth with each answer but he is markedly better at keeping his cool compared to the former Narcissist-in-Chief against VP Harris. It's a position Walz wouldn't envy. So overall I think this is within the best range of events Vance could expect.

They both did well at acknowledging each other and keeping this like a somewhat normal debate, can you imagine. That said, if any viewer can hold a thought without focusing solely on whatever deflection each candidate is doing, Walz is giving better answers, and Vance is putting way more false equivalencies in.

Walz is doing very well with his answers, he's not as calculated and rehearsed as Harris, and you know having a heart makes you mess up more than the recently changed telephone options menu, but he is doing a fantastically better job at connecting with voters than Vance did. Walz's jabs are quick and easily missed ("Wharton") but even with apolitical people, if they understand Walz's language then they'll get when he is jabbing at Vance.

Obviously I was hoping Vance would fold up into a chair and was disappointed for that to not happen. More than that though is that I'm crossing my fingers the news cycle doesn't begin pretending it's a normal election cycle just because the VP candidates could actually look each other in the eye for a night. Idk, give it 48hours and Trump will be starved enough of attention to break the spell and make people glare at him again in disgust.

Yep, to put it succinctly, Vance won on superficial polish, and Walz won on substance, meaning both won on the most important part to each of their bases.

this post was submitted on 01 Oct 2024
93 points (97.0% liked)

politics

18956 readers
5224 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS