The most surprising thing about the VP debate

[coldjoint]

Cutting through the BS spouted by Kaine and attempting to digest something real to take away from the debate:

If Hillary's and Kaine's positions on immigration and the refugee issue is the correct position, why then are ICE and also the Border Patrol Unions endorsing Trump and Pence?

If Hillary's and Kaine's positions on law enforcement and law enforcement bias is the correct position, why then has the 30,000 member Police & Law Enforcement Union endorsed the Trump-Pence ticket?

If Hillary's and Kaine's position on foreign relations, ISIS, Middle Eastern policies, IRAQ, Libya, Russia, China, the Military, etc., is the correct position, why then are active duty military endorsing the Trump-Pence ticket by a margin of 2 to 1?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Excuse me? What has any of that to do with Pence or his refusal to support the man at the top of the ticket?

Pence refused to take the bait, that is what you are pissed about.

It's not "bait" when one is asked to defend or advocate for a position that the Presidential candidate advocates and the one asked to do so is the Vice President. It's not "bait" in any way at all when one is asked to defend one's own positions and assertions.

What makes a call to defend one's positions and ideas become "bait" is either (1) one's being incapable of defending them cogently and directly, which is something that typically happens one has articulated something that one has not fully considered prior to making the statement, (2) the ideas themselves being indefensible, or (3) both. At this stage of the campaign, #1 is inexcusable.

Pence saw it for what it was, quotes taken out of context and media hyperbole. Nothing to do with the issues, only character assination.

Do you not think among the things a VP should do is defend the character of the person for whom they will be Vice President if the pair wins the election?

• Do husbands not defend their wives character and vice versa?
• Do children not defend their parents character and vice versa?
• Do corporate VPs not defend the character of company Presidents and CEOs?

On what basis should a VP candidate get a "pass" on defending the character of person whom they will serve?

If this election was based on character both candidates would be disqualified. Issues are important.

 

[The VOR]

Bottom line: Pence smoked Kaine and smoked him bad

Only in you and your fellow brain dead nutter buddies delusional minds, lard ass.

 

[OldLady]

320? Didn't happen? I've been limiting this to the topic as posed in your OP and the title, which was about the debate itself.

 

[320 Years of History]

Excuse me? What has any of that to do with Pence or his refusal to support the man at the top of the ticket?

Pence refused to take the bait, that is what you are pissed about.

It's not "bait" when one is asked to defend or advocate for a position that the Presidential candidate advocates and the one asked to do so is the Vice President. It's not "bait" in any way at all when one is asked to defend one's own positions and assertions.

What makes a call to defend one's positions and ideas become "bait" is either (1) one's being incapable of defending them cogently and directly, which is something that typically happens one has articulated something that one has not fully considered prior to making the statement, (2) the ideas themselves being indefensible, or (3) both. At this stage of the campaign, #1 is inexcusable.

Pence saw it for what it was, quotes taken out of context and media hyperbole. Nothing to do with the issues, only character assination.

Do you not think among the things a VP should do is defend the character of the person for whom they will be Vice President if the pair wins the election?

• Do husbands not defend their wives character and vice versa?
• Do children not defend their parents character and vice versa?
• Do corporate VPs not defend the character of company Presidents and CEOs?

On what basis should a VP candidate get a "pass" on defending the character of person whom they will serve?

WHO/WHEN/WHERE was Pence asked during the debate to defend Trump's character that he refused?

Did you check the links I provided earlier?

During the debate, Kaine asked, "How can you defend that?", about the following topics:
-- The Trump insult about John McCain and prisoners of war
-- The Trump insult about the Indiana judge not being qualified because of his heritage
-- The Trump birther nonsense
-- The Trump claim that more countries getting nukes is a good thing
-- The Trump argument questioning NATO and alliances
-- Trump's (and Pence's) comments about how Vladimir Putin is a strong leader
-- Trump's taxes
-- Trump's line that Mexico is sending criminals, drug dealers and rapists across the border
​

Perhaps you don't see Trump's having made those claims as indicative of his character. I sure do.

​

 

[320 Years of History]

Excuse me? What has any of that to do with Pence or his refusal to support the man at the top of the ticket?

Pence refused to take the bait, that is what you are pissed about.

It's not "bait" when one is asked to defend or advocate for a position that the Presidential candidate advocates and the one asked to do so is the Vice President. It's not "bait" in any way at all when one is asked to defend one's own positions and assertions.

What makes a call to defend one's positions and ideas become "bait" is either (1) one's being incapable of defending them cogently and directly, which is something that typically happens one has articulated something that one has not fully considered prior to making the statement, (2) the ideas themselves being indefensible, or (3) both. At this stage of the campaign, #1 is inexcusable.

Pence saw it for what it was, quotes taken out of context and media hyperbole. Nothing to do with the issues, only character assination.

Do you not think among the things a VP should do is defend the character of the person for whom they will be Vice President if the pair wins the election?

• Do husbands not defend their wives character and vice versa?
• Do children not defend their parents character and vice versa?
• Do corporate VPs not defend the character of company Presidents and CEOs?

On what basis should a VP candidate get a "pass" on defending the character of person whom they will serve?

If this election was based on character both candidates would be disqualified. Issues are important.

Issues are important, but not to the exclusion of character. Discussion about issues is great for understanding how the candidate plans to deal with known issues. Character is what tells us how the candidate may handle things that come up that are not foreseen.

Was there a 9/11 issue prior to 11-Sept-2001? No, however, for all else that I may or may not like about G.W. Bush, the man's character isn't and wasn't that of an ill tempered ten year old who "flies off the hook" at the slightest affront. It was that of a man who authorized his Administration to misrepresent the facts about Iraq. Trump's main character flaw, his paltering, is the one thing the nation has had enough of, too much really, and it's the same flaw that ruined G.W. Bush's presidency.

 

[coldjoint]

Pence refused to take the bait, that is what you are pissed about.

It's not "bait" when one is asked to defend or advocate for a position that the Presidential candidate advocates and the one asked to do so is the Vice President. It's not "bait" in any way at all when one is asked to defend one's own positions and assertions.

What makes a call to defend one's positions and ideas become "bait" is either (1) one's being incapable of defending them cogently and directly, which is something that typically happens one has articulated something that one has not fully considered prior to making the statement, (2) the ideas themselves being indefensible, or (3) both. At this stage of the campaign, #1 is inexcusable.

Pence saw it for what it was, quotes taken out of context and media hyperbole. Nothing to do with the issues, only character assination.

Do you not think among the things a VP should do is defend the character of the person for whom they will be Vice President if the pair wins the election?

• Do husbands not defend their wives character and vice versa?
• Do children not defend their parents character and vice versa?
• Do corporate VPs not defend the character of company Presidents and CEOs?

On what basis should a VP candidate get a "pass" on defending the character of person whom they will serve?

If this election was based on character both candidates would be disqualified. Issues are important.

Issues are important, but not to the exclusion of character. Discussion about issues is great for understanding how the candidate plans to deal with known issues. Character is what tells us how the candidate may handle things that come up that are not foreseen.

Was there a 9/11 issue prior to 11-Sept-2001? No, however, for all else that I may or may not like about G.W. Bush, the man's character isn't and wasn't that of an ill tempered ten year old who "flies off the hook" at the slightest affront. It was that of a man who authorized his Administration to misrepresent the facts about Iraq. Trump's main character flaw, his paltering, is the one thing the nation has had enough of, too much really, and it's the same flaw that ruined G.W. Bush's presidency.

Misrepresenting the facts? WMDs were found, but after the war. Bush relied on faulty intelligence, not exactly his fault, but that won't stop Democrats and progressives lie about it.

On the other hand, Hillary has no problem misrepresenting anything. And used some of the same loopholes in the tax laws Trump did.

 

[320 Years of History]

Bush relied on faulty intelligence

Well, whose fault exactly was it that Bush elected to rely upon incomplete, thus faulty, intelligence? Who's fault was it that Bush lacked the presence of mind to press his advisors for higher quality information than he received? Did the "dog eat someone homework?"

Whosoever's fault it was, that has nothing to do with Pence's failure/unwillingness to defend positions and policies that Trump has articulated. And his failure in that regard is the topic at hand.

 

[coldjoint]

Bush relied on faulty intelligence

Well, whose fault exactly was it that Bush elected to rely upon incomplete, thus faulty, intelligence? Who's fault was it that Bush lacked the presence of mind to press his advisors for higher quality information than he received? Did the "dog eat someone homework?"

Bush used the best intelligence at his disposal. I suppose Hillary would put on a burka and go undercover herself.

 

[320 Years of History]

Bush relied on faulty intelligence

Well, whose fault exactly was it that Bush elected to rely upon incomplete, thus faulty, intelligence? Who's fault was it that Bush lacked the presence of mind to press his advisors for higher quality information than he received? Did the "dog eat someone homework?"

Bush used the best intelligence at his disposal. I suppose Hillary would put on a burka and go undercover herself.

And that has nothing to do with Pence's unwillingness to support and advocate for policies Trump has supported. Indeed, Pence's refusal to back Trump's policies is what I'd expect from a Democrat, perhaps some contrary Republicans, but certainly not from the man who has agreed to be Trump's VP. That refusal is tantamount to treason, especially to a man who, as Trump has, values loyalty.

 

[320 Years of History]

Excuse me? What has any of that to do with Pence or his refusal to support the man at the top of the ticket?

Pence refused to take the bait, that is what you are pissed about.

It's not "bait" when one is asked to defend or advocate for a position that the Presidential candidate advocates and the one asked to do so is the Vice President. It's not "bait" in any way at all when one is asked to defend one's own positions and assertions.

What makes a call to defend one's positions and ideas become "bait" is either (1) one's being incapable of defending them cogently and directly, which is something that typically happens one has articulated something that one has not fully considered prior to making the statement, (2) the ideas themselves being indefensible, or (3) both. At this stage of the campaign, #1 is inexcusable.

Pence saw it for what it was, quotes taken out of context and media hyperbole. Nothing to do with the issues, only character assination.

Do you not think among the things a VP should do is defend the character of the person for whom they will be Vice President if the pair wins the election?

• Do husbands not defend their wives character and vice versa?
• Do children not defend their parents character and vice versa?
• Do corporate VPs not defend the character of company Presidents and CEOs?

On what basis should a VP candidate get a "pass" on defending the character of person whom they will serve?

WHO/WHEN/WHERE was Pence asked during the debate to defend Trump's character that he refused?

In addition to the references I have provided thus far, here are more: 6 things Trump definitely said that Pence claimed he didn’t.

 

[coldjoint]

Pence refused to take the bait, that is what you are pissed about.

It's not "bait" when one is asked to defend or advocate for a position that the Presidential candidate advocates and the one asked to do so is the Vice President. It's not "bait" in any way at all when one is asked to defend one's own positions and assertions.

What makes a call to defend one's positions and ideas become "bait" is either (1) one's being incapable of defending them cogently and directly, which is something that typically happens one has articulated something that one has not fully considered prior to making the statement, (2) the ideas themselves being indefensible, or (3) both. At this stage of the campaign, #1 is inexcusable.

Pence saw it for what it was, quotes taken out of context and media hyperbole. Nothing to do with the issues, only character assination.

Do you not think among the things a VP should do is defend the character of the person for whom they will be Vice President if the pair wins the election?

• Do husbands not defend their wives character and vice versa?
• Do children not defend their parents character and vice versa?
• Do corporate VPs not defend the character of company Presidents and CEOs?

On what basis should a VP candidate get a "pass" on defending the character of person whom they will serve?

WHO/WHEN/WHERE was Pence asked during the debate to defend Trump's character that he refused?

In addition to the references I have provided thus far, here are more: 6 things Trump definitely said that Pence claimed he didn’t.

How many times did Hillary said she did not have classified information in her e-mail?
How many times did she say Benghazi was caused by a video?

 

[320 Years of History]

It's not "bait" when one is asked to defend or advocate for a position that the Presidential candidate advocates and the one asked to do so is the Vice President. It's not "bait" in any way at all when one is asked to defend one's own positions and assertions.

What makes a call to defend one's positions and ideas become "bait" is either (1) one's being incapable of defending them cogently and directly, which is something that typically happens one has articulated something that one has not fully considered prior to making the statement, (2) the ideas themselves being indefensible, or (3) both. At this stage of the campaign, #1 is inexcusable.

Pence saw it for what it was, quotes taken out of context and media hyperbole. Nothing to do with the issues, only character assination.

Do you not think among the things a VP should do is defend the character of the person for whom they will be Vice President if the pair wins the election?

• Do husbands not defend their wives character and vice versa?
• Do children not defend their parents character and vice versa?
• Do corporate VPs not defend the character of company Presidents and CEOs?

On what basis should a VP candidate get a "pass" on defending the character of person whom they will serve?

WHO/WHEN/WHERE was Pence asked during the debate to defend Trump's character that he refused?

In addition to the references I have provided thus far, here are more: 6 things Trump definitely said that Pence claimed he didn’t.

How many times did Hillary said she did not have classified information in her e-mail?
How many times did she say Benghazi was caused by a video?

How many times anyone did anything has nothing to do with what Pence didn't do, and what Pence didn't do is support the positions articulated by the man for whom he's agreed to serve as VP. What someone else did or how often they did it has no bearing on the fact that Gov. Pence failed to support six positions/statements his would be President has taken.