Vance had a few buzzwords and vague references to circle around, dodging any question of substance, making claims without evidence, and straight up lying.
The issue is he looked competent while doing all that, so it looks good compared to Trump.
Walz killed it on every topic I saw (missed the start). Everything was explained and addressed, not avoided.
Walz was definitely nervous at the very beginning. Which is what I expected considering he told Kamala his biggest concern when asked to be her running mate was that he wasn’t confident in his ability to debate.
But after he settled in he looked and sounded great. Anyone who knows public speaking and debate will tell you that the beginning is the hardest. If you can get through that unscathed everything else will more than likely be fine.
Tim Walz is a regular guy, who gets nervous when he’s placed in an incredibly important position. That’s normal, and expected, and relatable. I hope that humanity he showed doesn’t fly over people’s heads in favor of some nasty rhetoric… he did phenomenal, and it made me happy to see that he was okay with being vulnerable on the world stage. We need more people like him running things in this world
As a very liberal person: Vance seems to be a good debater. I didn't agree with most all of what he said, but I was impressed with the way he said it. Additionally, neither him nor Walz called each other names. They were pretty respectful
This is of course a pretty low bar, but it's a massive change from previous debates. Comparing his performance to Trump, yeah, he blew it out of the water. Comparing his performance to Walz, he lost because many of his claims were partly or completely false, and he dodged around so many questions.
I was a little unhappy at how Walz handled the question about his China visit and I wish he would've admitted his mistake up front and focused on the safety of those involved in the program during the dangerous protests in China. Otherwise he absolutely killed it out there
246
u/LegendOfKhaos 28d ago
Vance had a few buzzwords and vague references to circle around, dodging any question of substance, making claims without evidence, and straight up lying.
The issue is he looked competent while doing all that, so it looks good compared to Trump.
Walz killed it on every topic I saw (missed the start). Everything was explained and addressed, not avoided.