***Official Political Discussion Thread***

[kdawg]

A couple of the big positives for Walz were getting Vance to admit (or at least not deny) some crazy stuff - that’s the sound bite from this whole thing - and the “fire in a crowded theatre” line. He was so close to saying the right answer on that one - “Kamala Harris and I both entirely support and will defend the right to free speech, but that doesn’t mean there are no consequences”.

 

[nonnative]

Walz did completely fine and was actually pretty good for large parts. He did well using his experience and record in MN, spoke directly to the people, and gave off more of the Midwest dad vibe that people like. Definitely fumbled a few things like the weird Tianamen square question but he baited Vance a few times too.

It feels like the people that are criticizing him the most are people that have had their brains fried by so many Trump debates and videos of "Watch me DESTROY a liberal/feminist/whatever" and judge debates on who can fire off the most rapid lines and get the good sound bites and can look calm while the other person stresses.