Why would this man sign a bill against helping aborted babies who are still alive, if it doesn’t happen? Or if women do not abort their babies late term? Where do those, who were aborted and now live and speak out, come from if late term abortions don’t happen? Why do liberals censer them from speaking out (just like they do those who are sorry for sex change surgery)? Why did Walz lie about this during the debate?
I was left saddened at the response of JD on abortion. Compassion and caring for women is good yet he failed to stand on the side of the child. “We need to do better” fell short.
I do disagree with the World view…I do believe this debate will not be forgotten by most. We remember the extreme bias of propagandized media again on full display last night. We remember the lies of the left. Those who actually critically think upon these things and care will not choose to sit this one out. There is too much at stake for our nation.
“Kamala Harris’s husband Doug Emhoff ‘forcefully slapped ex-girlfriend for flirting with another man’ in booze-fueled assault after date to star-studded gala
“When Margaret Brennan cut off Vance’s mic last night it was because she broke the debate rules and didn’t want to be humiliated on national TV because she was wrong on the merits.
But this person that insists on putting “Ph.D.” in their handle calls that mansplaining so…”
“Big Eva” Trump denouncements and Kamala endorsements aren’t new. But attaching them to a love for Jesus — as if the answer to “WWJD?” is “elect Kamala Harris” — is particularly egregious. @FDRLST”
Walz’s position and actions on abortion are logical based on his position – abortion is a health issue and as such is up to the individual and their doctor. Its a position that is generally well supported among Americans which is why Republicans are having trouble articulating a response that is both politically astute and responsive to their base. Republicans also have problems advocating gov’t intervention in health care when less than a decade ago that was their problem with the ACA.
Coercive government intervention rarely has an effect on actual abortion rates. World wide, abortion rates are lowest in Europe where health care, birth control and sex education are better than elsewhere. Canada, with no rules, ranks higher than most Europeans with 12 abortions per 1000 women (between 15 and 50) while the US, with rules, has a rate of 14 per 1000 women. Rules don’t make much of a difference. Data and history tells us the best way to reduce abortion rates is better health care, birth control etc.
There is a cultural element — countries with a Islamic-Christian background tend to have lower abortion rates but this is also correlated to countries with higher health care spending.
Late term abortions do happen. Nobody denies it but it is extremely rare and difficult to obtain. In Canada there are no prohibitions on abortion yet its almost impossible to obtain a late term abortion – some providers have their own term limits (around 20-22 weeks), OB/GYN insurance also limits providers as late term abortions are often deemed too risky.
Republicans often advocate private companies be allowed to regulate themselves, yet here where self regulation has limited late term abortions, Republicans want state intervention. Again, the Republicans are trapped by their previous rhetoric and the unpopularity of their position. Even Trump realizes it as he constantly stresses its about returning the decision to the state not about banning abortion.
“But the disdain for Donald Trump and his supporters is so deeply ingrained among Never Trump evangelicals like French and Ortlund that it’s become inextricable from their identities, ideas, and even theology. Like the lawyer challenging Jesus, they ask, “Who is my neighbor?” but conclude it must not be Trump-supporting Christians. Like the Pharisees, they proclaim that at least they aren’t like those white, election-denying conspiracy theorists.And don’t let French’s newfound “Can’t we all just be friends?” posture fool you. He’s like the child who punches his sibling and runs away before they can punch back. He’s spent years smearing the faithful and now wants a truce without repenting.”
—-
“We know French knows this because he tries to apply the “tool” logic to Harris, writing, “I’m going to vote for Kamala Harris in 2024 and — ironically enough — I’m doing it in part to try to save conservatism.” In other words, he argues Harris is the instrument to accomplish the purification of conservatism (however absurd that argument is).
The problem is that the policies for which Harris is the proxy are evil — far more evil than the alternative candidate.”
——
“Harris believes in zero protections for unborn children — or even for born children who survive attempts to kill them while they’re still in the womb, no matter how hard the ABC debate moderators lied to the contrary. Harris cosigns on abortions at any time in pregnancy for any reason whatsoever, including eugenic motives such as birth defects.”
“Harris also believes it’s moral to tell children, created in God’s image, that they were born into the wrong body and that irreversibly sterilizing themselves will make them happy. This often includes emotionally blackmailing parents with threats of suicide or even hiding children’s transgender delusions from parents, as her home state of California now does. Just days after a transgender-identifying shooter killed six Christians, including several children, at a Nashville school, Harris tweeted to “celebrate trans and non-binary Americans. We see you and will never stop fighting for you.”
“Debate PostmortemJ.D. Vance, as anticipated, easily won the debate on demeanor, facts, and analysis. But in fairness to a sometimes herky-jerky and nervous Tim Walz, he had the harder task of defending the temporary make-over of Harris, her co-culpability for the last three-and-a-half-years of the Biden disaster, and her unwillingness to implement her supposedly “change” agenda in the last months of her vice-presidential tenure.
The moderators, Nora O’Donnell, and, especially, Margaret Brennan, also as expected, ganged up on Vance. The had learned nothing, and forgot nothing from the last disastrous, and biased debate moderators—now proving the wisdom of Donald Trump’s refusal to do any more network debates other than on Fox.
The two moderators shamelessly broke their own rules by fact-checking (wrongly and solely) Vance. They ignored questions of the administration’s reactions to Hurricane Helene, the Ukraine war, the recent Trump assassination attempts, or crime, while only briefly touching on Iran and a Middle East on the brink of total war.
Instead, they concentrated, as also expected, on climate change, abortion, health care, and childcare. All were issues they thought might more easily embarrass Vance. And, of course, as also expected, the two ended the debate pressing Vance on January 6.
And yet Vance again won decisively. In doing so, he dispelled the smear that he was somehow “mean”, when, in fact, he proved calm and magnanimous as he dissected Walz.
The nation perhaps learned that Trump selected him to articulate his MAGA positions, and perhaps in a manner superior to Trump’s own. In contrast, Harris picked Walz. assuming he would not upstage her and perhaps by his limitations would make her look more competent in comparison.
The debate will give some momentum to Trump-Vance in the last month of the campaign.
It follows the lethargic Biden-Harris reaction to Hurricane Helene, whose toll in human life and property had been initially and vastly ignored by the media.
It follows the growing specter of a theater-wide Middle East war, as Israel faces off against Iran and its appendages (all empowered after 2020 by Biden-Harris).
It follows the chaos of a longshoremen’s strike intended to shut down the country.
And it follows Harris’s continued inability to survive serial soft-ball interviews without her memorized and banal answers.
As a result, the slow hemorrhaging of Harris-Walz will likely still continue in the last month of the election.”
I skipped the debate to walk Abby but saw discussions about it afterward and was glad to hear it was more substantive and civil than most displays we’ve seen in recent years. Good to hear.
Vance apparently did particularly well (this according to the Dispatch folks, btw); Walz, not so great.
And this via the WSJ editorial board:
~ Vance Makes a Better Case for Trump Than Trump; Both vice-presidential candidates put on a better, more informed, debate than their presidential running mates. ~
But it’s also true that (politically) it will be of little consequence. VPs typically don’t sway elections.
Still, sounds like a better example and higher bar was set for how many of us wish debates could be conducted.
~ The political cliche is that vice-presidential debates don’t matter to the ultimate election result. But even if that turns out to be true about Tuesday’s debate between Tim Walz and JD Vance, Americans were at least able to watch a substantive debate that came closer to revealing the election choice than anything their running mates have offered.
Mr. Vance in particular helped the ticket and himself. The sarcastic candidate of “childless cat ladies” fame was nowhere in sight. The Ohio Senator was respectful, well prepared, articulate, and relentless in reminding voters about the flaws of what he called “the Kamala Harris Administration.” This is a case Donald Trump was unable to make in his debate, or for that matter anywhere in the weeks since President Biden left the race.
Mr. Walz was likable and avuncular, though he sometimes seemed frenetic and overstuffed with too many facts and prepared attack lines. On presence and command, Mr. Vance won the debate going away.
The Senator was especially effective in sanding down the sharper edges of GOP policies that Democrats and the press portray as cruel. He addressed abortion policy by conceding that the voters of Ohio had chosen to pass a policy he opposed, but in a democracy that is what you have to accept. He also conceded that Republicans had to do more to win back the trust of Americans on the issue.
Mr. Walz offered the restoration of Roe v. Wade in a national law as the only possible answer. And he seems not to understand what the Minnesota law he signed actually says about what doctors can do with a late-term fetus who survives an abortion attempt. The law allows abortion at any stage in pregnancy if a doctor approves.
The press will focus on Mr. Vance’s refusal to say if Mr. Trump lost the 2020 election, and we wish he had. Holding on to the 2020 Trumpian fiction is a political loser and for many voters a deal-breaker. Mr. Vance tried to turn the tables by saying the greater threat to democracy is Democratic “censorship.” He would have done better to stress the overt Democratic threat, endorsed by Ms. Harris, to the independence of the Supreme Court. … ~
The reviews I read both American and international saw it as boring (which is good) and that Vance did what he had to – defend Trump. Walz apparently was a bit nervous to start and found his stride as it went on. Expectations for Walz were low anyway. He’s “suburban dad” not a Yale lawyer. In the end, it will matter little.
Complaints about Trump and Vance having to defend themselves are weird – Trump is after all a previous president and hence has to defend his record in the same manner as Harris defends Biden’s. Some here may disagree with my assessment but Harris has defended Biden fairly well while outlining what she would do differently. She’s been far more issues oriented than Trump who spends more time whining and selling his latest merchandise (I believe he’s moved on to watches now). I don’t particularly like Harris – too conservative for my liking – but she’s been far more articulate, policy oriented and has performed better than expected.
VD Hanson is either a deluded optimist or knowingly preaching delusions to a choir. There’s very little momentum to either campaign in the last month but especially to Trump’s. Polls have moved very little and its unlikely they will move regardless of Helene, strikes, or VP debates.
What I’ve noticed is Trump is continually frustrated and does not have the same confidence he did four years ago (despite doing better poll wise). He has definitely aged and his mental acuity is sporadic. He seems unsure how to handle Harris and her team has “trolled” him quite well as one can see at the debate.
The reason Trump and Vance get fact checked is they lie so easily. Trump claimed Kemp couldn’t get Biden on the phone. Kemp denied there was a problem and he had talked to Biden. Stuff like this smells of desperation. As he continues to sell merchandise, one wonders if his staff have told him to prepare to lose and so he’s going back to what he knows.
I’m not sure why Trump or his team choose to go to Georgia – they now risk seeming to politicise a natural disaster or even getting in the way of disaster relief. He’s ahead in Georgia by 1-2% why take the risk. Why not go to Pennsylvania where he’s behind 0 to 1%?
Another problem for the Republicans is the lack of a down ballot appeal. North Carolina will be a problem as the Democrats will win the governor race and the Republican candidate is so unappealing, many might just stay at home rather than vote. Meanwhile, Democrats will be motivated to vote and while there will also vote for Harris. This is just one state but there are others where Senators and Governors will bring in Democratic voters and help Harris.
In the end, with polls tight in the states that matter, its organisation and money which will bring out the vote and Democrats will have the edge there.
We watched the debate. I knew Art would be happier and pay closer attention than in the typical debates which make him disgusted because they totally sidestep the questions and don’t cover issues.
Walz seemed very nervous to start. He had a lot of hatred to cover in the first two minutes to please the loyal in their party. Vance had a much more cordial opening. Walz got better after Vance led the way indicating they could agree on some things. The dynamics on stage were interesting to watch. Walz did better than I thought he would, but of course I still don’t care for his positions. Art gave him credit for not lying as much as Biden.
I know that we are far removed from Walz, and I appreciate Kathaleena’s take on it from an insider’s view. I think since this was the most I ever have seen or known of him that he came across as more of a regular guy than I thought he would. I think he fits well with chameleon Kamala. For the young who just go by outward appearances, he does not look as presidential as Vance. And the youth of Vance will appeal to any who vote for the Vice President they like best because they don’t care for either Trump or Harris for President, but feel compelled to vote.. I have used that strategy before.
I also think there’s been little change in what’s been a very almost-evenly divided electorate in recent weeks, a few points here, a few points there, then the reverse, all within the margin of error; probably won’t be big shifts going forward either so look for another nail-biter?
Then again … there can be unpredictable surprises come Election Day.
I find myself questioning if there is a moral base when someone asserts this and only this on the matter of ending the life of a creation of our Lord:
abortion is a health issue and as such is up to the individual and their doctor
There is absolutely no mention nor thought of a baby within the womb of the mother. It is blatantly self serving and focused to consider it a “health issue”. Hate Republicans and conservatives and yes even Trump if you must but many value life…period. And no…”most” Americans are not so cold hearted when it comes to ending the life of a child as one might suppose
A Christian graphic artist who won a national freedom of speech case tied to her refusal to create websites for same-sex weddings will get a $1.5 million payout from the state of Colorado to cover her legal fees.
The U.S. Supreme Court in June 2023 ruled that the state of Colorado can’t apply its Anti-Discrimination Act to force Lorie Smith and her company 303 Creative “to speak in ways that … defy her conscience.”
Wandering Views 
https://www.mccl.org/post/walz-s-record-on-life-elderly-newborns-and-others-pay-the-price-for-absolutism-and-neglect?fbclid=IwY2xjawFqEe1leHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHWH3MV-HM471aOxJPjjV7uR_8bRxHmx_Ib7RdNzloIqBZ2kLv3qR00S9bw_aem_9JDFdt3T5PxvL-bo_UWOLg
LikeLiked by 4 people
Why would this man sign a bill against helping aborted babies who are still alive, if it doesn’t happen? Or if women do not abort their babies late term? Where do those, who were aborted and now live and speak out, come from if late term abortions don’t happen? Why do liberals censer them from speaking out (just like they do those who are sorry for sex change surgery)? Why did Walz lie about this during the debate?
LikeLiked by 6 people
I am disappointed about how poorly Republicans tend to frame the abortion issue, including in this debate.
LikeLiked by 3 people
LikeLiked by 3 people
https://wng.org/opinions/a-nice-and-mostly-meaningless-affair-1727866778?mkt_tok=NzEwLVFSUi0yMDkAAAGV7D1uwgLLgYFv4YQNEuXt8lIUeh-9-LhzAyjiKIg1bwKHzyitwhajksyYVID4BBnBZt3GrYz-1yve6qHKU9gx-hRqbel-wAjakwFf5UThoJx_
LikeLiked by 2 people
Good articles and insights Kathaleena.
I was left saddened at the response of JD on abortion. Compassion and caring for women is good yet he failed to stand on the side of the child. “We need to do better” fell short.
I do disagree with the World view…I do believe this debate will not be forgotten by most. We remember the extreme bias of propagandized media again on full display last night. We remember the lies of the left. Those who actually critically think upon these things and care will not choose to sit this one out. There is too much at stake for our nation.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Not the guy you want to see be the first, “first gentleman.”
https://x.com/mirandadevine/status/1841469077383958740?t=1OLKKro2lFWRMs0p0juS3g&s=19
“Kamala Harris’s husband Doug Emhoff ‘forcefully slapped ex-girlfriend for flirting with another man’ in booze-fueled assault after date to star-studded gala
trib.al/eRIGphK”
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13898791/Kamala-Harris-husband-Doug-Emhoff-accused-ex-girlfriend-slap.html?ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490&ito=social-twitter_dailymailus
LikeLike
Kevin and Debra – just a humorous reference to my status as a retired old white guy who sits on his porch.
Eight weeks of travelling does have stressful times but I’m well rested.
LikeLiked by 3 people
“When Margaret Brennan cut off Vance’s mic last night it was because she broke the debate rules and didn’t want to be humiliated on national TV because she was wrong on the merits.
But this person that insists on putting “Ph.D.” in their handle calls that mansplaining so…”
https://x.com/Heminator/status/1841468992059216126?t=0T3lwNkCJ0NWI963mtXjBA&s=19
LikeLiked by 1 person
Let’s check in on David French and his pals.
https://x.com/kyleezempel/status/1841467489319780561?t=u_8dyBkYs72An1q30QFQwA&s=19
“Big Eva” Trump denouncements and Kamala endorsements aren’t new. But attaching them to a love for Jesus — as if the answer to “WWJD?” is “elect Kamala Harris” — is particularly egregious. @FDRLST”
—–
https://thefederalist.com/2024/10/02/no-endorsing-kamala-harris-for-president-isnt-what-jesus-would-do/
“Christians should reject the backward theology of teachers who twist the character of Christ to punish their political enemies.”
LikeLiked by 2 people
Walz’s position and actions on abortion are logical based on his position – abortion is a health issue and as such is up to the individual and their doctor. Its a position that is generally well supported among Americans which is why Republicans are having trouble articulating a response that is both politically astute and responsive to their base. Republicans also have problems advocating gov’t intervention in health care when less than a decade ago that was their problem with the ACA.
Coercive government intervention rarely has an effect on actual abortion rates. World wide, abortion rates are lowest in Europe where health care, birth control and sex education are better than elsewhere. Canada, with no rules, ranks higher than most Europeans with 12 abortions per 1000 women (between 15 and 50) while the US, with rules, has a rate of 14 per 1000 women. Rules don’t make much of a difference. Data and history tells us the best way to reduce abortion rates is better health care, birth control etc.
There is a cultural element — countries with a Islamic-Christian background tend to have lower abortion rates but this is also correlated to countries with higher health care spending.
Late term abortions do happen. Nobody denies it but it is extremely rare and difficult to obtain. In Canada there are no prohibitions on abortion yet its almost impossible to obtain a late term abortion – some providers have their own term limits (around 20-22 weeks), OB/GYN insurance also limits providers as late term abortions are often deemed too risky.
Republicans often advocate private companies be allowed to regulate themselves, yet here where self regulation has limited late term abortions, Republicans want state intervention. Again, the Republicans are trapped by their previous rhetoric and the unpopularity of their position. Even Trump realizes it as he constantly stresses its about returning the decision to the state not about banning abortion.
LikeLike
“But the disdain for Donald Trump and his supporters is so deeply ingrained among Never Trump evangelicals like French and Ortlund that it’s become inextricable from their identities, ideas, and even theology. Like the lawyer challenging Jesus, they ask, “Who is my neighbor?” but conclude it must not be Trump-supporting Christians. Like the Pharisees, they proclaim that at least they aren’t like those white, election-denying conspiracy theorists.And don’t let French’s newfound “Can’t we all just be friends?” posture fool you. He’s like the child who punches his sibling and runs away before they can punch back. He’s spent years smearing the faithful and now wants a truce without repenting.”
—-
“We know French knows this because he tries to apply the “tool” logic to Harris, writing, “I’m going to vote for Kamala Harris in 2024 and — ironically enough — I’m doing it in part to try to save conservatism.” In other words, he argues Harris is the instrument to accomplish the purification of conservatism (however absurd that argument is).
The problem is that the policies for which Harris is the proxy are evil — far more evil than the alternative candidate.”
——
“Harris believes in zero protections for unborn children — or even for born children who survive attempts to kill them while they’re still in the womb, no matter how hard the ABC debate moderators lied to the contrary. Harris cosigns on abortions at any time in pregnancy for any reason whatsoever, including eugenic motives such as birth defects.”
“Harris also believes it’s moral to tell children, created in God’s image, that they were born into the wrong body and that irreversibly sterilizing themselves will make them happy. This often includes emotionally blackmailing parents with threats of suicide or even hiding children’s transgender delusions from parents, as her home state of California now does. Just days after a transgender-identifying shooter killed six Christians, including several children, at a Nashville school, Harris tweeted to “celebrate trans and non-binary Americans. We see you and will never stop fighting for you.”
LikeLiked by 2 people
“If you’re looking for a quick summary of tonight’s debate moderation:
Almost all questions to Tim Walz were about Tim Walz.
Almost all questions to JD Vance were about what Trump said.
Moderators never asked Tim Walz to justify or defend a single Harris statement or policy.”
https://x.com/TheTonus/status/1841304369528012958?t=DSqN-Hz35O5X31S6du1www&s=19
LikeLiked by 4 people
VDH gives his take.
https://x.com/VDHanson/status/1841478572780990584?t=rT9p-dF_KKcY4HEfDB77Vg&s=19
“Debate PostmortemJ.D. Vance, as anticipated, easily won the debate on demeanor, facts, and analysis. But in fairness to a sometimes herky-jerky and nervous Tim Walz, he had the harder task of defending the temporary make-over of Harris, her co-culpability for the last three-and-a-half-years of the Biden disaster, and her unwillingness to implement her supposedly “change” agenda in the last months of her vice-presidential tenure.
The moderators, Nora O’Donnell, and, especially, Margaret Brennan, also as expected, ganged up on Vance. The had learned nothing, and forgot nothing from the last disastrous, and biased debate moderators—now proving the wisdom of Donald Trump’s refusal to do any more network debates other than on Fox.
The two moderators shamelessly broke their own rules by fact-checking (wrongly and solely) Vance. They ignored questions of the administration’s reactions to Hurricane Helene, the Ukraine war, the recent Trump assassination attempts, or crime, while only briefly touching on Iran and a Middle East on the brink of total war.
Instead, they concentrated, as also expected, on climate change, abortion, health care, and childcare. All were issues they thought might more easily embarrass Vance. And, of course, as also expected, the two ended the debate pressing Vance on January 6.
And yet Vance again won decisively. In doing so, he dispelled the smear that he was somehow “mean”, when, in fact, he proved calm and magnanimous as he dissected Walz.
The nation perhaps learned that Trump selected him to articulate his MAGA positions, and perhaps in a manner superior to Trump’s own. In contrast, Harris picked Walz. assuming he would not upstage her and perhaps by his limitations would make her look more competent in comparison.
The debate will give some momentum to Trump-Vance in the last month of the campaign.
It follows the lethargic Biden-Harris reaction to Hurricane Helene, whose toll in human life and property had been initially and vastly ignored by the media.
It follows the growing specter of a theater-wide Middle East war, as Israel faces off against Iran and its appendages (all empowered after 2020 by Biden-Harris).
It follows the chaos of a longshoremen’s strike intended to shut down the country.
And it follows Harris’s continued inability to survive serial soft-ball interviews without her memorized and banal answers.
As a result, the slow hemorrhaging of Harris-Walz will likely still continue in the last month of the election.”
LikeLiked by 4 people
I skipped the debate to walk Abby but saw discussions about it afterward and was glad to hear it was more substantive and civil than most displays we’ve seen in recent years. Good to hear.
Vance apparently did particularly well (this according to the Dispatch folks, btw); Walz, not so great.
And this via the WSJ editorial board:
~ Vance Makes a Better Case for Trump Than Trump; Both vice-presidential candidates put on a better, more informed, debate than their presidential running mates. ~
But it’s also true that (politically) it will be of little consequence. VPs typically don’t sway elections.
Still, sounds like a better example and higher bar was set for how many of us wish debates could be conducted.
LikeLiked by 2 people
From the WSJ editorial:
~ The political cliche is that vice-presidential debates don’t matter to the ultimate election result. But even if that turns out to be true about Tuesday’s debate between Tim Walz and JD Vance, Americans were at least able to watch a substantive debate that came closer to revealing the election choice than anything their running mates have offered.
Mr. Vance in particular helped the ticket and himself. The sarcastic candidate of “childless cat ladies” fame was nowhere in sight. The Ohio Senator was respectful, well prepared, articulate, and relentless in reminding voters about the flaws of what he called “the Kamala Harris Administration.” This is a case Donald Trump was unable to make in his debate, or for that matter anywhere in the weeks since President Biden left the race.
Mr. Walz was likable and avuncular, though he sometimes seemed frenetic and overstuffed with too many facts and prepared attack lines. On presence and command, Mr. Vance won the debate going away.
The Senator was especially effective in sanding down the sharper edges of GOP policies that Democrats and the press portray as cruel. He addressed abortion policy by conceding that the voters of Ohio had chosen to pass a policy he opposed, but in a democracy that is what you have to accept. He also conceded that Republicans had to do more to win back the trust of Americans on the issue.
Mr. Walz offered the restoration of Roe v. Wade in a national law as the only possible answer. And he seems not to understand what the Minnesota law he signed actually says about what doctors can do with a late-term fetus who survives an abortion attempt. The law allows abortion at any stage in pregnancy if a doctor approves.
The press will focus on Mr. Vance’s refusal to say if Mr. Trump lost the 2020 election, and we wish he had. Holding on to the 2020 Trumpian fiction is a political loser and for many voters a deal-breaker. Mr. Vance tried to turn the tables by saying the greater threat to democracy is Democratic “censorship.” He would have done better to stress the overt Democratic threat, endorsed by Ms. Harris, to the independence of the Supreme Court. … ~
The rest here:
https://www.wsj.com/opinion/vp-debate-jd-vance-tim-walz-cbs-2024-election-519c8d37?st=ApbFus&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink
LikeLiked by 1 person
The reviews I read both American and international saw it as boring (which is good) and that Vance did what he had to – defend Trump. Walz apparently was a bit nervous to start and found his stride as it went on. Expectations for Walz were low anyway. He’s “suburban dad” not a Yale lawyer. In the end, it will matter little.
Complaints about Trump and Vance having to defend themselves are weird – Trump is after all a previous president and hence has to defend his record in the same manner as Harris defends Biden’s. Some here may disagree with my assessment but Harris has defended Biden fairly well while outlining what she would do differently. She’s been far more issues oriented than Trump who spends more time whining and selling his latest merchandise (I believe he’s moved on to watches now). I don’t particularly like Harris – too conservative for my liking – but she’s been far more articulate, policy oriented and has performed better than expected.
VD Hanson is either a deluded optimist or knowingly preaching delusions to a choir. There’s very little momentum to either campaign in the last month but especially to Trump’s. Polls have moved very little and its unlikely they will move regardless of Helene, strikes, or VP debates.
What I’ve noticed is Trump is continually frustrated and does not have the same confidence he did four years ago (despite doing better poll wise). He has definitely aged and his mental acuity is sporadic. He seems unsure how to handle Harris and her team has “trolled” him quite well as one can see at the debate.
The reason Trump and Vance get fact checked is they lie so easily. Trump claimed Kemp couldn’t get Biden on the phone. Kemp denied there was a problem and he had talked to Biden. Stuff like this smells of desperation. As he continues to sell merchandise, one wonders if his staff have told him to prepare to lose and so he’s going back to what he knows.
I’m not sure why Trump or his team choose to go to Georgia – they now risk seeming to politicise a natural disaster or even getting in the way of disaster relief. He’s ahead in Georgia by 1-2% why take the risk. Why not go to Pennsylvania where he’s behind 0 to 1%?
Another problem for the Republicans is the lack of a down ballot appeal. North Carolina will be a problem as the Democrats will win the governor race and the Republican candidate is so unappealing, many might just stay at home rather than vote. Meanwhile, Democrats will be motivated to vote and while there will also vote for Harris. This is just one state but there are others where Senators and Governors will bring in Democratic voters and help Harris.
In the end, with polls tight in the states that matter, its organisation and money which will bring out the vote and Democrats will have the edge there.
HRW
LikeLike
I found these two articles about the gender divide among young Americans interesting
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/23/us/young-men-religion-gen-z.html?fbclid=IwY2xjawFqWQBleHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHVhiCyQfi6qjhO8C_dlBFwtz0R8gfpnJH0BLr5odf8-B_ZQSKqELL3O_qw_aem_CPkSzSpuIR63X9GNN1njfw
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/sep/27/donald-trump-kamala-harris-men-women-us-election?fbclid=IwY2xjawFqWIRleHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHSN2tX6UKr7zE5AUXRUOPl_14_StVF5mBlb0FR1q4bFdhDkhor0FhDY3ig_aem_cJI0UcwepsDX5Y-GqICbsQ
LikeLiked by 1 person
Good post, HRW.
(I had to laugh at the phrase “mental acuity is sporadic” thinking, hmm, I have days like that!)
LikeLiked by 1 person
We watched the debate. I knew Art would be happier and pay closer attention than in the typical debates which make him disgusted because they totally sidestep the questions and don’t cover issues.
Walz seemed very nervous to start. He had a lot of hatred to cover in the first two minutes to please the loyal in their party. Vance had a much more cordial opening. Walz got better after Vance led the way indicating they could agree on some things. The dynamics on stage were interesting to watch. Walz did better than I thought he would, but of course I still don’t care for his positions. Art gave him credit for not lying as much as Biden.
I know that we are far removed from Walz, and I appreciate Kathaleena’s take on it from an insider’s view. I think since this was the most I ever have seen or known of him that he came across as more of a regular guy than I thought he would. I think he fits well with chameleon Kamala. For the young who just go by outward appearances, he does not look as presidential as Vance. And the youth of Vance will appeal to any who vote for the Vice President they like best because they don’t care for either Trump or Harris for President, but feel compelled to vote.. I have used that strategy before.
LikeLiked by 3 people
She’s been far more issues oriented than Trump… Nope, not even close.
I don’t particularly like Harris – too conservative for my liking… The “most liberal US Senator” is too conservative for you?
she’s been far more articulate, policy oriented… Same response as the first one.
There’s very little momentum to either campaign… The momentum is all moving in one direction…
LikeLiked by 4 people
I also think there’s been little change in what’s been a very almost-evenly divided electorate in recent weeks, a few points here, a few points there, then the reverse, all within the margin of error; probably won’t be big shifts going forward either so look for another nail-biter?
Then again … there can be unpredictable surprises come Election Day.
LikeLike
I find myself questioning if there is a moral base when someone asserts this and only this on the matter of ending the life of a creation of our Lord:
abortion is a health issue and as such is up to the individual and their doctor
There is absolutely no mention nor thought of a baby within the womb of the mother. It is blatantly self serving and focused to consider it a “health issue”. Hate Republicans and conservatives and yes even Trump if you must but many value life…period. And no…”most” Americans are not so cold hearted when it comes to ending the life of a child as one might suppose
LikeLiked by 4 people
Some good news….
A Christian graphic artist who won a national freedom of speech case tied to her refusal to create websites for same-sex weddings will get a $1.5 million payout from the state of Colorado to cover her legal fees.
The U.S. Supreme Court in June 2023 ruled that the state of Colorado can’t apply its Anti-Discrimination Act to force Lorie Smith and her company 303 Creative “to speak in ways that … defy her conscience.”
LikeLiked by 5 people
So glad to hear that case went the way it should have, NJ!
LikeLiked by 1 person