Current Affairs 2024 POTUS race

Status
Not open for further replies.
davek said:
Whatever mate. There are sound reasons to now conclude that Walz's promotion to VP candidate was a mistake. To say thee aren't is just burying your head in there sand.

Yes, I read it back and it does come across like I claim Harris ducked a second session...but in any case that didn't tally with what I'd stated a little earlier to that about her making Trump clumsy in the debate they did have.

For clarity: it was Trump who ducked out of any second debate.
Click to expand...
The way you simp after Trump is disgusting, but then its to be expected from somebody like you.
 
davek said:
WTaF?!
Click to expand...
Dave, you're a clue merchant. you hadn't heard of Walz a few weeks ago, now you try to come across as the authority on his suitability as VP.
You pipe up with glee when Walz isnt stellar in a debate, itching for an 'I told you so'.
It's nauseating, even more nauseating than dyslexicbleu or Emir because you should know better.
 
davek said:
Whatever mate. There are sound reasons to now conclude that Walz's promotion to VP candidate was a mistake. To say thee aren't is just burying your head in there sand.

Yes, I read it back and it does come across like I claim Harris ducked a second session...but in any case that didn't tally with what I'd stated a little earlier to that about her making Trump clumsy in the debate they did have.

For clarity: it was Trump who ducked out of any second debate.
Click to expand...
No. Burying one's head in the sand would be to say that Walz is perfect. He's far from it. I'll let the Republicans play that game, where Trump and Vance are perfect in every regard.

Walz is what he is. An everyman dude from the midwest that actual people that didn't go to law school understand. A people person. A guy that you might run into at your diner. Like literally hundreds of millions of Americans. No one has ever denied he has the polish of someone that YOU perceive needs to be considered to be a VP candidate. JD Vance is closer to that person. And he is vile.

There are a number of ways to lead. I get it, you prefer the polished nature of a Gavin Newsom, substance or not. It's why you feel Vance slaughtered Walz in a debate. I get it.

But you know one thing the slick Vance didn't do? He didn't say he thought Trump lost the 2020 election. Or come up with any sane response to his abortion views. He didn't effectively slime his way out of those issues. Which Walz hammered him on, particularly the election denialism, which most people thought was effective. Real people thought that
 
davek said:
Walz comes across as evasive. The claims he's made have been ripped apart - how he ever thought he could get away with his fibs is amazing. It speaks to a lack of judgement.

Vance - let's not forget - was there to be torn apart for all the utter bunkum he's been spouting. An open goal waiting to be slotted. But Walz was seduced by the occasion. Where was all the bravado of calling out the 'weird' guys last night? He looked like a rabbit caught in the headlights most of the time.

Bad call made by Harris/the Democrats on the VP running mate. Very bad.
Click to expand...
Imagine making the claim that "Walz comes across as evasive".

When the guy he was debating answered virtually no questions and is the textbook definition of "evasive"

Gimme a break, man
 
Ruairi77 said:
Dave, you're a clue merchant. you hadn't heard of Walz a few weeks ago, now you try to come across as the authority on his suitability as VP.
You pipe up with glee when Walz isnt stellar in a debate, itching for an 'I told you so'.
It's nauseating, even more nauseating than dyslexicbleu or Emir because you should know better.
Click to expand...
Ruairi, we're in the choir but not singing in harmony from the same hymnsheet.

You're right - Walz was an unknown to me up until his shortlisting for VP candidate. However, that doesn't invalidate an opinion on him. My first instincts about him were correct. And my first instincts about Newsom being a better choice is also correct.

As said above: heading down the final stretch such a mistake could prove decisive.
 
davek said:
Ruairi, we're in the choir but not singing in harmony from the same hymnsheet.

You're right - Walz was an unknown to me up until his shortlisting for VP candidate. However, that doesn't invalidate an opinion on him. My first instincts about him were correct. And my first instincts about Newsom being a better choice is also correct.

As said above: heading down the final stretch such a mistake could prove decisive.
Click to expand...
Yet you continue to fail to understand why Newsom was NEVER going to be the VP choice.

EVER

In addition to the fact it's unlikely he would want the VP gig in the first place. For similar reasons to Shapiro

You're like a child that just wants to continue to eat candy, without understanding you cannot eat only candy for breakfast, lunch and dinner.
 
davek said:
Ruairi, we're in the choir but not singing in harmony from the same hymnsheet.

You're right - Walz was an unknown to me up until his shortlisting for VP candidate. However, that doesn't invalidate an opinion on him. My first instincts about him were correct. And my first instincts about Newsom being a better choice is also correct.

As said above: heading down the final stretch such a mistake could prove decisive.
Click to expand...
newsom was never in the running for VP.
And for a myriad of reasons we've been over a million times, he was never seriously considered to head the ticket.
And I'd wager, bar a couple of articles you've read, you know little about Newsom too.
If you want to know what'll scupper Harris in November (if she is scuppered).
It'd likely be her sex followed by her race followed by poor democratic messaging, followed by high inflation, followed by foreign policy.
To suggest that picking Walz as VP is a mistake that could prove decisive in November is laughable.
You're instincts on American politics kinda read like someone from Nebraska waxing lyrical about Joe Anderson because they read an article about corruption once.
 
Ruairi77 said:
newsom was never in the running for VP.
And for a myriad of reasons we've been over a million times, he was never seriously considered to head the ticket.
And I'd wager, bar a couple of articles you've read, you know little about Newsom too.
If you want to know what'll scupper Harris in November (if she is scuppered).
It'd likely be her sex followed by her race followed by poor democratic messaging, followed by high inflation, followed by foreign policy.
To suggest that picking Walz as VP is a mistake that could prove decisive in November is laughable.
You're instincts on American politics kinda read like someone from Nebraska waxing lyrical about Joe Anderson because they read an article about corruption once.
Click to expand...
Hold on a second. I stated 'a Newsom' type VP candidate - not necessarily him. I meant by that someone a bit more polished.

You will concede, I hope, that someone like Shapiro would have been more useful to Harris given the knife edge race in Pennsylvania - current polling showing a tie on 48%-48%?

Walz just seems like a waste of a VP nomination to me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

→ Log in 🔑 Register
🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top