A good debate is where both sides have some points to try and establish evidence for. That’s a rarity in today’s political election cycles. Here, Harris just had to show who was the adult in the room and maybe get some talking points out to anyone who hadn’t heard them yet. It could have been a town hall or campaign rally with a screaming toddler in the background, same effect.
A good debate is one that informs voters and helps undecided folk decide
What you are describing is an entertaining episode of the West Wing
Harris did a good job showing everyone why they shouldn’t vote for Trump. She did very little to show why people should vote for her. People may prefer her over Trump, but if they don’t show up to vote, she will lose.
Other than the abortion issue, which only affects you in a deep red state, she had no energizing policy positions.
Bad on the economy. Terrible on social issues, health care. Awful on immigration. Dogshit on Gaza.
Choosing not to vote is an option if both candidates aren’t going to improve people’s lives, especially considering that voting is made such a burden.
You go right ahead and ignore the lever, I’m sure all the people on both sets of tracks understand you not wanting to get involved since it doesn’t benefit you to pull it.
Two levers installed by the capitalist ruling class. Go ahead and pull one to pretend it makes a difference.
Corporations are donors to both parties.
Opinions on the policies aside, I agree with your point, votes are the only way she can win. That we have such low turnouts in a country founded on the idea of voting in representation is a travesty, no matter what party you prefer.
I disagree that not voting is a valid option, as there are plenty of ways to vote even if you hate both main Presidential candidates. At least the Green/Communist party voters are trying to make a statement, even if it’s not going to change anything (my opinion). And down ticket you can vote for local people that will affect you more directly, so not voting at all is a loss of your voice.
As for voting being a burden, you can thank Republicans for that. It’s their best way of ensuring seats and power.
Trump: incoherent rambling about immigrants stealing then eating pets and Democrat governors aborting newborns
Kamala: “He lost the election, and he’s clearly having a hard time processing that.”
Trump was abysmal… and it frustrates me that it probably didn’t hurt him all that much. Yes, he looked like an angry incoherent buffoon and a spoiled pouting baby. He probably lost a few votes.
But that same performance from anyone else would have tanked their campaign. If Harris had been even slightly “off” or had a cold or made any significant mistakes, that’s all the fucking MSM would be talking about today. Thank the stars she completely kicked his ass and looked good doing it.
But it’s batshit that Trump can be so unhinged and still be in the running. He talks like the idiots who vote for him. His freakshow antics are good for ratings. That’s it. That’s the magic formula. It’s dumb, it’s dangerous, it’s simple, and it works.
It’s almost enough to make me think citizens should have to pass a basic civics exam to vote. I am not really there yet, but I can see some good arguments for it.
I talked to some friends after the debate who claim to be independent and they said they still thought they both were terrible. I don’t understand how anyone could equate Harris with Trump, especially after Jan 6
I guess with the constant outrage machine and fear mongering that goes on 24x7 now, some people have just grown numb. It just doesn’t register with them that democracy itself is on the line right now. If Trump wins, people could get put into camps. The very real possibility of that just doesn’t sink in. They have forgotten that our nation has been to these dark places before. Our history is stained with that sort of regressive authoritarian nightmare stuff.
It’s not that they have forgotten. It’s that they are privileged enough to not need to be aware of it or feel the dark effects as they creep in. Even non rich people can be privileged to a certain degree.
I have a bud who is basically a neet because of health conditions and he’s like that, ‘both sides are the sameish’. His family isn’t rich but his mom has a decent middle class work from home job and they moved to a cheap AF state so they do alright. He’s basically shielded from anything that could happen since he’s a white, straight, male with health insurance through his mom.
She was coached very well and must have come across presidential to undecideds.
She absolutely did, and it showed. Being a prosecutor and debating on live TV are very different, least of all because you are trying to appeal to millions. She reduced her fillers, her laugh, and other bits which could have come across as patronising.
I doubt he will be participating in another one. He will stick to his “old man yells at cloud” gig until November.
Controversial but I was surprised at how well trump did for himself.
He managed to dial down the lies and rhetoric from “how stupid does he think the audience is” to “obviously bullshit”.
Well done to Harris of course, in particular for calling his playbook tactics out at the start, then repeatedly calling out the lies and dog whistling each time - the way to beat a manipulating bully is to shine a light on their behaviour plainly in public and she nailed it.
Bonus points to Harris as well for laughing at him whilst maintaining class.
I thought he would lose control more but he did go into several crazy rants.
Harris I thought did a good job but I wanted her to point out not just his lies but his constant hyperbole and wild exaggerations.
Yeah, I wanted Harris to completely eviscerate Trump, which didn’t exactly happen. But I don’t think that’s because she did poorly — it’s because I know who I’m voting for, and I’m not the target audience.
Had it been the proverbial bloodbath that I wanted to see, it might not have played well with independents/those on the fence (which I blame largely on sexism — a ruthless woman is “a bitch,” but a ruthless man is “strong,” etc.).
Judging from the headlines and conversations I’m seeing, I think she really threaded the needle — came across as strong, intelligent, leader-like, all the while giving Trump enough rope to hang himself. More might have alienated voters, and less might have come across as too soft. Really good stuff from her and her campaign.
