ROBOPENCE ELECTROCUTE!

As the resident moderate, I need street cred with conservatives.

Yeah Pence had far better cards to play than russia grievance to top off his debate. I bet he was hoping he'd get to land his ISIS trump card with whatshernames family there at the end, instead of midway through. He stumbled on a few opportunities I think, like mentioning how Trump moved the embassy to jerusalem without mentioning the peace deals in the mideast, making it sound like a non-accomplishment. And Pence couldn't go into a room full of people without declaring the sanctity of all life created by god so that was the middle square on my bingo card.

As far as fracking: Its up to her to be clever and come up with something. I think any debate prep would have identified that Pence is going to attack her on fracking, and he's going to quote both her and biden against fossil fuels. She knew that she had explicitly supported banning fracking numerous times and the green new deal, and she knew Pence was going to come after her. And all she could manage was to just unabashedly flip flop on it and double down on her 'new' position. She needed to have some clever response. At a minimum, some cheap misdirection. Maybe some bullshit promises about building energy sector jobs. Maybe she could have some clever canned line retort she walks Pence into as a trap. But she had all the debate planning time in the world (this is the single most visible night of any VP's career) and yet this was the best she managed

Democrats don't have a great track record with vice presidents and this ones no exception

he voted against both of them. 12 consecutive years of icepeon wanting America and the President to fail.

Pence dodged because it was the smart thing to do. The left has bought and paid for MSM (and the moderators), and any that don't see that, or admit it... don't need a frontal lobotomy. They have nothing to lobotomize.






This post was edited by Ghot on Oct 7 2020 09:29pm

You like a strong leader and are totally unphased by their inability to back up their talk.

An Obama-Trump voter is not working off a consistent rational set of values, they're all gut.

Couldn't agree more.

Leftists screeching about cultists is a pretty weak argument.

Obama-Trump voters are by definition low-information voters, just going with whoever sends a thrill up their leg.

But healthcare and abortion are not helpful issues among this group for Trump. And focusing on the fictional "Russia hoax" is incredibly out of touch with less than a month until election day.



It's confusing to me, in the age of Trump, that Kamala needs some clever way to frame the fracking issue. Anyone capable of being influenced by a debate is a low-information voter who has no idea what her position was in the past... so why wouldn't she just say Biden won't ban fracking? Mounting some sophisticated defense just drags out the issue and makes it more memorable for viewers.

Trump has done this constantly. He's flip flopped on a metric ton of issues. He creates his own reality every day of the campaign(or at least he did in 2016). Kamala, in a small way, is following his lead.

Also, let's have some consistency with pinning positions on candidates. I don't know the history of the fracking positions for Joe and Kamala, but just because they advocated it before doesn't mean they do now. If candidates have advocated different positions on an issue, it's not honest to pick the most politically damaging no matter how long they've disavowed it.

Because pence was going to quote her saying she wants to ban fracking, which he did, repeatedly.
She has to know he's going to call her out on that







also 'how long she's disavowed it' is measured in weeks, or maybe hours, depending on how you want to define disavowing it
she was talking about banning fracking at her last debate

This post was edited by Goomshill on Oct 7 2020 09:39pm

Yeah, that's what I said. He can't defend Trump's record or his positions so he has to dodge.