October 7th, 2020 Vice Presidential Debate (Discussion)

[Juggs]

Just figured some would like to discuss this debate. I’m currently watching it on Hasan’s twitch channel. I know watching via a bias party is not the best way to do it, but there’s absolutely no way I could watch this on my own without falling asleep. And he’s one of the few streamers I watch who is streaming the debate on his channel.

Anyway, keep it civil as always.

 

[Lt. Boxy Angelman]

Kamala Harris is the political equivalent of Captain María LaGuerta from Dexter.

This is about to be a 13-0 and it isn't even close.

 

[Baconlord]

God every time the trump campaign talks about climate change I want to headbutt a fucking nail.

 

[Baconlord]

I really wish pence wasn't lying when he says biden is going to ban fracking

 

[The Slaj Jazz]

Moderators need to have a mute button. It's kinda ridiculous how this moderator isnt even enforcing time equally. Why do they keep picking people who barely...moderate?

 

[Dankster Morgan]

Kamala Harris is the political equivalent of Captain María LaGuerta from Dexter.

This is about to be a 13-0 and it isn't even close.

I never found LaGuerta to be particularly intelligent though. She went from just being horny for Dexter, oblivious to Dexter for 7 full years, she only took the initiative to look into what really happened to Doakes a million years later, was a cunt to Deb for no reason. I didn't watch the debate and I don't think I have it in me to watch any more of them after the first, but I do love Dexter lol

 

[Second Saint]

No one really wanted to answer questions directly, which I found pretty infuriating. They both straight up ignored the question of presidential disability. Kamala Harris could've pushed back more against the interruptions, but if she had then it could've been a repeat of last week. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

There wasn't much to learn from this debate if you're already politically involved. Pence misrepresents democrat positions, Harris refuses to answer the question of packing the courts because they can't take it off the table, Pence wouldn't commit to a peaceful transition of power, etc.

 

[CrimsonShadow]

It's at times like this that I really dislike politics on the whole. We're in the middle of a health crisis in the US, with nearly a thousand people dying per day. And the most that we can get from the people in charge is to talk around it, rather than speaking directly to the issue.

Saying "We did an amazing job and everything is fine" is great for politics, but is disastrous policy in terms of human lives. And the fact that you can be allowed to say that in two minutes and move on to the next topic doesn't actually do Americans one bit of good.

Politics is the art of saying things that sound good, and convincing people of what you want them to believe -- but I really believe that it's no way to run a country. We've gotta change something up.

 

[Juggs]

I really believe they need better moderators or they need to cut mics off. Also, these debates are a joke when you can dodge questions and just stick to your talking points that have absolutely nothing to do with the question(s). And unfortunately the American people, well a good portion, will fall for it. Which is insane to me. They either somehow don’t realize they aren’t answering the questions, or don’t care. It’s really dumb.

 

[Wigy]

debate format just doesnt work if your goal is to educate the people on policy and character; both debates they just fling unsubstantiated shit at each other and go for soundbites.

I think if the joe rogan debate had happened it would have been a million times more helpful for the american voter. Plus man can rear naked choke hold people who run over their 2 minutes lel

if anyone saw bernie on joe rogan that was such a good example of how to educate voters on their candidate.

 

[Zer0_h0ur]

If you really want to grasp why we are where we are, go to some conservative forums message boards and look at their responses.
The same exact things we think are dope like Kamala's expressions and demeanor they find disgusting, annoying, and hate worthy.
The same gaffes from Pence we see they see as haymakers of him showing her who is boss.

It's quite eye opening. There's a reason the male vote in America has been split near 50/50 the entire race, and women have been steadily polling more strongly for Biden.

Also notice how Pence went beyond the call to not say they'd overturn Rowe v Wade, which has literally been his entire political goal since day 1, and the majority of conservative voters desire. He can't say it in plain english bc they can't afford to ostracize that small sliver of moderate woman voter that is still on their side.

 

[Marlow]

I'm almost surprised that VP Pence kept bringing up the Trump tax cut as a positive thing. By and large it's been a pretty disastrous tax cut. It never really created much economic growth like it was supposed to, it created a huge drop in revenue and greatly added to the debt, and I didn't think it was actually that popular with voters.

My impression was that for the most part each candidate stuck to their own corner for most of the debate and simply played to their base. Also a fly landed on Pence.

 

[Zer0_h0ur]

I'm almost surprised that VP Pence kept bringing up the Trump tax cut as a positive thing. By and large it's been a pretty disastrous tax cut. It never really created much economic growth like it was supposed to, it created a huge drop in revenue and greatly added to the debt, and I didn't think it was actually that popular with voters.

My impression was that for the most part each candidate stuck to their own corner for most of the debate and simply played to their base. Also a fly landed on Pence.

It's the same with the trade war. Farmers in the midwest, blue collar workers in the michigan/ohio/wisconsin type states, they have not seen any net benefit and data shows a net negative with the trade war. Yet Pence talks about the trade war as a "Great victory" and that's it, done, it's a victory. gmab.

 

[Marlow]

It's the same with the trade war. Farmers in the midwest, blue collar workers in the michigan/ohio/wisconsin type states, they have not seen any net benefit and data shows a net negative with the trade war. Yet Pence talks about the trade war as a "Great victory" and that's it, done, it's a victory. gmab.

Yeah, that's a bit of a pattern with this administration. Create a mess, partially clean up after said mess, then declare victory and take a victory lap.

 

[Marlow]

The "court packing" question is an interesting one. It's tricky, because if Democrats do pack the court it's going to continue to politicze the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court will start to lose credibility. On the other hand you could easily argue that conservatives have already politicized and packed the Supreme Court, so if Democrats do nothing they'll have to contend with a Supreme Court (and federal court system in general) that's going to lean heavily conservative and likely hamper them for the next 20-30 years.

 

[Zer0_h0ur]

The "court packing" question is an interesting one. It's tricky, because if Democrats do pack the court it's going to continue to politicze the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court will start to lose credibility. On the other hand you could easily argue that conservatives have already politicized and packed the Supreme Court, so if Democrats do nothing they'll have to contend with a Supreme Court (and federal court system in general) that's going to lean heavily conservative and likely hamper them for the next 20-30 years.

She was smart not to answer it, woulda pissed off plenty of moderates that are currently voting Dem.
Personally I think the dems have a track record of being such softies with no ability to go for the jugular, I can't see them having the will to pull it off even if they had the numbers.

 

[Marlow]

I think the smarter solution would be to simply change how laws are crafted so that they're less likely to be overturned by the court, although that's easier said than done. Court Packing just seems like a lose lose to me.

 

[Zer0_h0ur]

I think the smarter solution would be to simply change how laws are crafted so that they're less likely to be overturned by the court, although that's easier said than done. Court Packing just seems like a lose lose to me.

True. If they get the senate thats def a possibility.

 

[Obly]

That debate is probably the best we're going to get these days. They're kind of historical relics really, and don't have a lot of modern value. The news cycle is 24/7, information is cheap to produce and instantly available, and all of it is archived forever on the internet, so no one really needs these debates to "learn" anything about the candidates or platforms. 99% of the electorate had already made up its mind before any debates began.

It's just about appearances now: Trying to look tough, confident, and in control on camera, to soothe your donors, keep money coming in, get your "debate bounce" in the polls, and move on. Clearly no one feels the need to take a risk and answer real questions any more; they just repeat the same talking points and criticisms we've heard a million times already. That debate was so by the books that the fly that landed on Pence's head for ten minutes is getting more public attention than anything the candidates actually said.

Oh well.

 

[Obly]

The "court packing" question is an interesting one. It's tricky, because if Democrats do pack the court it's going to continue to politicze the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court will start to lose credibility. On the other hand you could easily argue that conservatives have already politicized and packed the Supreme Court, so if Democrats do nothing they'll have to contend with a Supreme Court (and federal court system in general) that's going to lean heavily conservative and likely hamper them for the next 20-30 years.

The SCOTUS is already extremely politicized though, almost to the point of absurdity. The only real purpose of the Federalist society is to pack the whole judiciary with arch-conservative judges who will stop the progressive legal agenda. You can pretty much predict 99% of SCOTUS decisions these days (including the one that forced the G.W. Bush presidency down the country's throat) just by knowing which political party supports each side. Political campaigns obviously use the SCOTUS and federal judges in general as a major part of their platform. Even in the middle of a raging pandemic, getting relief legislation passed is taking a backseat to rushing through a SCOTUS nomination as quickly as humanly possible.

Rather than packing SCOTUS with additional justices though, I wish we were having a serious national discussion about ending lifetime appointments and imposing a term limit. It's arguably within the scope of the Constitution and wouldn't require an amendment: https://fixthecourt.com/fix/term-limits/. Just seems to make sense on every level, considering what the SCOTUS has become. Sure it would be a political gamble for the Democratic Party, but I think their base would generally support it.

 

[Marlow]

Rather than packing SCOTUS with additional justices though, I wish we were having a serious national discussion about ending lifetime appointments and imposing a term limit. It's arguably within the scope of the Constitution and wouldn't require an amendment: https://fixthecourt.com/fix/term-limits/. Just seems to make sense on every level, considering what the SCOTUS has become. Sure it would be a political gamble for the Democratic Party, but I think their base would generally support it.

I like that solution.

 

[Zer0_h0ur]

The SCOTUS is already extremely politicized though, almost to the point of absurdity. The only real purpose of the Federalist society is to pack the whole judiciary with arch-conservative judges who will stop the progressive legal agenda. You can pretty much predict 99% of SCOTUS decisions these days (including the one that forced the G.W. Bush presidency down the country's throat) just by knowing which political party supports each side. Political campaigns obviously use the SCOTUS and federal judges in general as a major part of their platform. Even in the middle of a raging pandemic, getting relief legislation passed is taking a backseat to rushing through a SCOTUS nomination as quickly as humanly possible.

Rather than packing SCOTUS with additional justices though, I wish we were having a serious national discussion about ending lifetime appointments and imposing a term limit. It's arguably within the scope of the Constitution and wouldn't require an amendment: https://fixthecourt.com/fix/term-limits/. Just seems to make sense on every level, considering what the SCOTUS has become. Sure it would be a political gamble for the Democratic Party, but I think their base would generally support it.

Agreed. The McConnell era has taught us that lifetime appointments are an obsolete concept in today's world.
The entire judiciary branch has lost all credibility in the Trump term imo. Talk about needing to drain a swamp.