How We Know Tim Walz Did Poorly in the Debate

excalibur

Diamond Member
Mar 19, 2015
21,714
41,969
2,290
Simple, the talking points are still being written and no board leftoid has posted a thread telling us Walz was great.

Easy-peasy.

They're working their little brains overtime in some Dem crackhead boiler room trying to spin this somehow, some way.

And today, the Party starts pulling money from Harris-Walz and instead tries and save as many Senate seats as they can.
 
GY2v3HmXMAAtSul
 
Simple, the talking points are still being written and no board leftoid has posted a thread telling us Walz was great.
When Walz forced Vance to run from saying Biden won fair and square, Walz won. The whole nation saw Vance chicken out and go election-stealing fascist. Walz was the alpha there, and Vance couldn't face him.

We also know he won because the Trump cultists are now crying.

No, it wasn't the dominating beatdown that Harris delivered to Trump, but Walz did do a little better. Pretty good, considering it was a high school coach vs a lawyer trained in the art of Christofascist deception.

See you in November, Trump cult losers. Emphasis on the "loser" part. Looks like Cruz is losing too.
 
Simple, the talking points are still being written and no board leftoid has posted a thread telling us Walz was great.

Easy-peasy.

They're working their little brains overtime in some Dem crackhead boiler room trying to spin this somehow, some way.

And today, the Party starts pulling money from Harris-Walz and instead tries and save as many Senate seats as they can.
Funniest moment of the debate was the question about being in Hong Kong during the '89 protests. He got the deer in the headlights look and said "HEY I'M A KNUCKLEHEAD SOMETIMES!" :auiqs.jpg:
 
Simple, the talking points are still being written and no board leftoid has posted a thread telling us Walz was great.

Easy-peasy.

They're working their little brains overtime in some Dem crackhead boiler room trying to spin this somehow, some way.

And today, the Party starts pulling money from Harris-Walz and instead tries and save as many Senate seats as they can.
Waltz's mission was to stop the bleeding of male voters for the democrats .. though he did ok during the debate he did nothing to staunch the flow .. he didn't win over male voters .. he didn't project strength in any form whatsoever ..
 
You think walz did better than Harris in their debate?

Really?

I’ve watched some of it, not all, but will when l have time.

But l noticed, Walz opened okay with this views on Israel/Iran. But then swiftly ruined it with the trashing of Donald Trump, and the same old heard-it-all-before deflections.
 
Simple, the talking points are still being written and no board leftoid has posted a thread telling us Walz was great.

Easy-peasy.

They're working their little brains overtime in some Dem crackhead boiler room trying to spin this somehow, some way.

And today, the Party starts pulling money from Harris-Walz and instead tries and save as many Senate seats as they can.
Walz definitely is a better debater than Kamala is. And I think he held his own fairly well considering that he really had nothing to say, no policy positions to speak of, no real answers.

And J.D. is a better debater than President Trump is. Very together, articulate, on point, and well prepared and well informed.

It was obvious at least to me that questions posed to Walz were designed to give him an out. The only thorny issue he wasn't allow to duck was his lie about when he was in China and he handled that pretty well I thought. Questions posed to J.D. were designed more to trip him up and/or make him or Trump look bad, but he didn't get flustered or sidetracked and in my opinion made no mistakes.

If I was judging the debate I would give the win to Vance simply because he directly answered more questions.

I thought it curious that there were no questions about the wars going on or the tragedy that has developed in the storm ravaged states. I figure that was because nothing could be said that wouldn't make Biden/Harris look terrible.
 
Walz definitely is a better debater than Kamala is. And I think he held his own fairly well considering that he really had nothing to say, no policy positions to speak of, no real answers.

And J.D. is a better debater than President Trump is. Very together, articulate, on point, and well prepared and well informed.

It was obvious at least to me that questions posed to Walz were designed to give him an out. The only thorny issue he wasn't allow to duck was his lie about when he was in China and he handled that pretty well I thought. Questions posed to J.D. were designed more to trip him up and/or make him or Trump look bad, but he didn't get flustered or sidetracked and in my opinion made no mistakes.

If I was judging the debate I would give the win to Vance simply because he directly answered more questions.

I thought it curious that there were no questions about the wars going on or the tragedy that has developed in the storm ravaged states. I figure that was because nothing could be said that wouldn't make Biden/Harris look terrible.

Did you see when the mikes went off?
 

Forum List

Back
Top