Re: 2024
Posted: Thu Oct 03, 2024 8:56 am
Did they show the moderators explaining the rules before the debate? They did exactly as promised. Vance claims that was a fact check of him, but that was a prepared tactic to make the moderators an issue because Vance and the Campaign didn’t want any facts stated by the moderators though that wasn’t what their rules actually were. Imagine a fact free environment…sorry JD, the moderators are going to state facts, though not directly arguing with a candidate. Facts matter.cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu Oct 03, 2024 7:54 amThe reports have to be correct. You yourself have given NBC News your full support as an MD lax fan approved source of news. They showed the clip of JD Vance correcting the moderators as they attempted to fact check him in real time. There was no ambiguity that doing so was against the rules. Then the moderators chose to mute candidates microphones and lecture the candidates that they were talking over one another. I'm assuming you watched the debate and were aware of the ground rules? I don't believe I'm talking about anything that you don't already know. I'm being criticized for expressing an opinion because I didn't watch the debate. I was up the next morning at 4am as I usually am. I started watching reports after viewing Rick Steves Europe and The Joy of Painting with Bob Ross. The talking heads agreed that by and large it was a civil debate that went off more in line like a debate should.. What was your opinion of the debate?MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 03, 2024 7:28 amAs we did not watch the morning show, we have no idea whether you are correctly reporting what they said or not, nor whether their reporting was accurate.cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu Oct 03, 2024 7:13 amNope, my bedtime is 9 pm. I didn't have to watch it moron. This might come as a shock to you but The NBC Morning News with Savannah Guthrie and Hoda Kobe had lengthy reports about the debate. Were those reports inaccurate in any way? They were broadcast by an MD lax fan approved news source which is NBC News. Did the moderators break the debate rules when they attempted to fact check? I was only spewing the information that NBC News broadcast to the American people. If your going to criticize me your actually criticizing NBC as well.ggait wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2024 8:39 pmSo you didn’t watch it. But that doesn’t stop you from commenting and spewing your fact free opinions?cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2024 5:16 pm Not much chatter about last nights debate. I heard it was civil and respectful and resembled what a debate should be. The only problem was with the moderators. They chose to ignore their own rules. JD Vance had to remind them there would be no fact checking during the debate. The moderators also chose to mute the microphones when they chose to do so. They did a good job proving they have Harris securely on lockdown in their own candidate protection program. They make the debate rules then throw them out the window.
Boycott stupid!!!!!
We DID watch the debate and the moderators told the candidates and the audience how they were going to handle the debate, including turning off microphones if necessary to control the flow of the debate given time constraints. They did exactly as they said they would when Vance refused to stop talking when his time was up. They turned off both microphones in order to reassert control. As it was, Vance succeeded in not having to have a question about Ukraine even asked. He did not answer directly most any questions but he did have the more polished rap and came off much better than his stump demeanor. Mission accomplished from his perspective. They did not fact check him directly but they did make factual statements. Not the same thing unless one is uncomfortable with facts being stated. And yet, oh my he’s a victim of the moderators. It’s all so unfair.
I thought the debate was a win for Vance as, unlike the Presidential debate, we didn’t have an addled nitwit being taken apart by an experienced prosecutor.
Vance presented himself entirely differently than his stump and podcast persona, without much challenge from “Minnesota nice” Walz. He was exposed in only a couple of areas, though these are really big matters. And they didn’t even get to Ukraine. But on style, he did well. On style, Walz was outclassed, though he came across as a regular person not slick. He had one super bad section but recovered.
So, net plus for Vance, at least for those who don’t actually follow the issues. But very few such would have been watching.
Arguably, Vance won the first 88 minutes but lost the debate at the very end by revealing who he really is.