Kamala vs Pence

[I-5]

I've spent my entire supervisory career working with immigrants. In general, they are more trusting of authority than their native born counterparts. I don't have to spend a lot of time rationalizing why it is that I want something done. I tell them to do it and that's good enough for them. Their naivety can be taken advantage of, too. One supervisor told a group of Hispanics that they couldn't talk to each other in any language other than English, so they obeyed him...that is, until I found out what he had told them.

That's not naivety. That's practicality and self-preservation. They are new here, they don't want to cause trouble and want to keep their noses clean, as they say...but don't assume they're not wise to exactly what's happening.

I believe immigrants will push us socialist at some point. America is the main hold out on socialized medicine.

Just to clear, I assume we all know that socialized services and socialism are not even in the same universe. They are apples and oranges. We've talked about it ad nauseum, but the US has a TON of social services that taxes pay for; it's just that healthcare isn't one of them for some reason. I would never want to live in a country where the government owns the means of production. I don't see any immigrants pushing for socialism, ESPECIALLY the ones from communist countries. That's why they left. I have a good friend who grew up in Soviet Ukraine as a little girl, and she is the least socialist-minded person I know. It was traumatizing for her to grow up in that environment.

[Aseahawkfan]

Just to clear, I assume we all know that socialized services and socialism are not even in the same universe. They are apples and oranges. We've talked about it ad nauseum, but the US has a TON of social services that taxes pay for; it's just that healthcare isn't one of them for some reason. I would never want to live in a country where the government owns the means of production. I don't see any immigrants pushing for socialism, ESPECIALLY the ones from communist countries. That's why they left. I have a good friend who grew up in Soviet Ukraine as a little girl, and she is the least socialist-minded person I know. It was traumatizing for her to grow up in that environment.

Yes, I understand this. We are all socio-capitalist for the most part, even America. I mean socialism isn't a bad word to immigrants. They do not fear socialism like Americans. Now Communism many don't like.

[I-5]

It's ironic that using the term 'social...' attached to any conversation about healthcare is anathema to americans. Most of the world is democratic, and not only is no one outside of the US threatened by that term, but I think non-americans are generally perplexed by the vehemence of americans to even consider the idea that the government can successfully administer health insurance. It's almost as mind-boggling with americans obsession with guns. Those 2 issues will probably never be solved in the US. Who woulda thunk?

[RiverDog]

I've spent my entire supervisory career working with immigrants. In general, they are more trusting of authority than their native born counterparts. I don't have to spend a lot of time rationalizing why it is that I want something done. I tell them to do it and that's good enough for them. Their naivety can be taken advantage of, too. One supervisor told a group of Hispanics that they couldn't talk to each other in any language other than English, so they obeyed him...that is, until I found out what he had told them.

That's not naivety. That's practicality and self-preservation. They are new here, they don't want to cause trouble and want to keep their noses clean, as they say...but don't assume they're not wise to exactly what's happening.

It is true that part of the reason why immigrants are more willingly compliant than their native born counterparts is that they want to 'keep their noses clean' so as to meld with the rest of society. But another large part of it is their being unaware of their rights, ie they're naïve. In the example I gave, person-to-person communications, the Supreme Court has ruled that it is an infringement on their first amendment rights to prevent a person or persons from speaking a certain language unless they have a business reason to do so (I'm simplifying here). The people that approached me about the issue were unaware what their supervisor was telling them was illegal. As a matter of fact, the supervisor himself was unaware what he was telling them was illegal as he, too, was an immigrant.

And you're still missing my point about their ignorance. I never said that they are not "wise to what's happening". What I've said is that they are not wise to past voting practices, the stereotypes/peer pressure that sometimes channels a voter's preferences, etc. That's why I referred to them as a blank slate.

[Aseahawkfan]

It's ironic that using the term 'social...' attached to any conversation about healthcare is anathema to americans. Most of the world is democratic, and not only is no one outside of the US threatened by that term, but I think non-americans are generally perplexed by the vehemence of americans to even consider the idea that the government can successfully administer health insurance. It's almost as mind-boggling with americans obsession with guns. Those 2 issues will probably never be solved in the US. Who woulda thunk?

It's becoming less anathema. It will happen at some point. It's too advantageous in too many ways. But it's going to be a tough fight as American going socialized medicine will destroy or limit a large number of industries. I am not sure if you invest or study the medical sector much, but huge sums of money are made in America off medicine. Medical stocks and all associated companies will lose huge amounts of money and value if America moves to socialized medicine. Literally hundreds of billions of dollars, jobs, and so much more will be lost if America goes socialist. Not just here, but abroad as well. America fuels the majority of profits for medical corporations from drug makers to device makers to health insurance worldwide. It would change quite a bit.

I learned this little bit investing in foreign medical device and drug maker stocks. Approval in markets other than America have limited upside because nearly every other developed, wealthy nation has socialized medicine which negotiates prices and won't pay the insane fees America will pay for a new device or drug as well as smaller, often healthier populations. Thus the obese, unhealthy, wealthy, willing to pay for a pill over doing work to improve health America makes companies a lot of money.

If you socialize healthcare, you likely destroy the private health insurance industry, increase taxes, and create a non-competitive market for drugs and medical devices which will substantially limit upside profits for medical companies. You also have to implement forced dietary changes and health behaviors or the costs become exorbitant as well as have doctors and medical boards empowered to choose who gets medical care first based on necessity over income. Americans don't like being told they can't get something they're willing and able to pay for. Then you have the unions who aren't for it because the better healthcare they negotiate for union members wouldn't be as valuable.

it's going to be very hard to disentangle our current system with so many forces working against it. It will likely happen. Or maybe some really smart business person comes up with a way to do healthcare better and cheaper than a socialized system. We shall see.

As far as the guns, if you don't trust the government as Americans are raised to not trust their government, why would you give up your guns? I'm hoping folks in other nations never find themselves wanting if a new world war breaks out. If some new tyrant rises they will greatly regret giving up arms while they're on the phone begging America to come and save them. We've literally had to enter wars on behalf of other nations against bigger players for a hundred years now. I hope we're sufficiently economically dependent that these wars are pretty much over. At the same time an economic collapse worldwide could change things and if it should happen, you definitely want to be armed and know how to use your weapons.

I know you're living in Canada. I can guarantee you if America collapses economically, Canadians are completely screwed. American raiding parties will head into Canada and rip it up with far better arms and training than Canadians will be able to resist. Hell, Mexico and Latin America would be screwed too. Even their paramilitary organizations couldn't withstand the sheer amount of firepower possessed by the American citizenry. Americans are better armed than most nations militaries. I don't know that I want to give that up any time soon as it is definitely a deterrent to invasion and put us in a powerful position should things go bad in the world.

I know you're one of those folks that thinks this will never happen, but I can't share your optimism. We've had relative peace now for what? 50 years? Since Vietnam in the 70s? Maybe 30 plus if you include the Cold War. Most of the modern wars have been short, quick wars where America easily crushed their opposition. All it would take is a major economic collapse in China or Russia deciding to expand again to create issues or a major war between India and China where we had to pick sides. I'm still not at the point where giving up arms seems like a good idea. I won't be there in my lifetime. Maybe some future group of humans can feel comfortable doing that where the world is sufficiently peaceful. I don't want to end up like Europe or Canada where we would need to call someone else for help during an invasion because we got no one to call. America only has itself to defend us against an aggressor. The rest of the world, besides perhaps England and hopefully Canada, would provide us no aid. And only England would likely be useful as Canada is too small and militarily weak to stand up to a China or a Russia or a combination of China and Russia.

The world domination game isn't over yet. We gotta stay vigilant to ensure we don't end up screwed by the monster that is China, until their government becomes less of a controlling, oppressive influence.

[I-5]

I know you're one of those folks that thinks this will never happen

Since I’m the one who brought up the possibility of a new civil war, I very much think anything can happen, esp with groups like Qanon cheerleading Trump’s demagoguery. If the US collapses, it’s not just Canada or Mexico that’s screwed, the entire Free World is screwed. There’s always someone ready to take up the power vacuum. The visual of marauding americans is pretty funny, though, I have to admit.

[Aseahawkfan]

Since I’m the one who brought up the possibility of a new civil war, I very much think anything can happen, esp with groups like Qanon cheerleading Trump’s demagoguery. If the US collapses, it’s not just Canada or Mexico that’s screwed, the entire Free World is screwed. There’s always someone ready to take up the power vacuum. The visual of marauding americans is pretty funny, though, I have to admit.

It is amusing.

Yeah. I don't trust the state of the world yet to give up the guns. It would be nice someday if the entire world together could give weapons and violence becoming like Vulcans working together because it is the best way to live. Right now humans are too damn crazy for that. So we in America should be keeping armed like citizen soldiers, which is the intent of the 2nd Amendment. Now I'm pretty sure the founders would have made some concessions for the level of weapons we have now, but I think the cutoff of at least armaments of a citizen soldier with an assault rifle and a sidearm is sufficient for a strong enough militia to revolt successfully as was intended.

It's contemplating ideas like this as to another reason I am happy Lincoln was as good a politician and leader as he was. When I think of Nazi Germany coming to power with a divided United States with a Southern half embroiled in racism and evil likely to back Nazi Germany, you can't help but think the forces of good won with Lincoln. That was a leader with vision, temperament, wisdom, patience, intuition, and nearly every aspect of leadership you would want in a human being. And we needed him during that Civil War as it took everything to hold this nation together and abolish slavery at the same time.

We don't seem to produce leaders like that any longer. I am not particularly sure why. Perhaps because the values of this time do not lend themselves well to the creation of great leaders. Too much is based on perception over intellect, popularity over ability. You don't even see American leaders write as well as they did the in the past and writing is an area that really develops the mind. If people spend more time writing about their thoughts and ideas to help achieve a more cohesive understanding of the world, we might be in a better place.

[I-5]

Predictions for the one and only VP debate tonight?

Peronally, I think it's fairly easy to predict tonight's VP debate will be much more substantive than the first presidential debate, simply due to less interruption, and I think both candidates will come extremely prepared.

A lot of people (liberals) tend to underestimate Pence, but I don't. I think Pence is a clever politician, and he knows how to avoid getting punched by not really answering direct questions. He also knows that his strength is when projects calmness, along with his puppy dog expression to express earnestness (even when he's lying for Trump). It will be a classic boxing match. It will be interesting to see how he tries to attack Kamala when given the chance. It won't be easy to paint her as soft on crime with her past track record as a prosecutor that even liberals in California don't like about her because she is perceived as too harsh on convicted criminals. He's obviously going to try to also paint her as a tool for the far left, but I don't think she will have much problem handling that, and will probably use that attack to talk about her vision.

On Kamala's side, I think this is her debate to lose, not because of Pence's qualities, but simply because he has to defend an undefendable president. He will try to spin and spin, but she will need to use the prosecutorial skills we saw from her in the Senate to not let him go. I think she is probably the best of the democratic candidate candidates from the primary to prosecute the Trump administration, so I'm sure she is relishing it. What she can't make the mistake of however, is to show too much anger, as she also has to show calmness and balance, moreso than most VP's of the past, for two reasons: she is the first black and asian woman to run for VP, so the bar is set very high, and because of Joe's age, she has to project a certain gravitas as potential POTUS. It's kind of silly since Joe is only 3 years older than Trump and is much healthier physically and psychologically, but age is a factor, and his age is historic. As Trump would say, 'it is what it is'.

It's pointless to predict who will 'win', as both sides will claim victory, and I do think Pence could really help Trump's chances...unless Kamala nails him to the ground on their failures in a way that he can't squirm out of.

[RiverDog]

Predictions for the one and only VP debate tonight?

Peronally, I think it's fairly easy to predict tonight's VP debate will be much more substantive than the first presidential debate, simply due to less interruption, and I think both candidates will come extremely prepared.

A lot of people (liberals) tend to underestimate Pence, but I don't. I think Pence is a clever politician, and he knows how to avoid getting punched by not really answering direct questions. He also knows that his strength is when projects calmness, along with his puppy dog expression to express earnestness (even when he's lying for Trump). It will be a classic boxing match. It will be interesting to see how he tries to attack Kamala when given the chance. It won't be easy to paint her as soft on crime with her past track record as a prosecutor that even liberals in California don't like about her because she is perceived as too harsh on convicted criminals. He's obviously going to try to also paint her as a tool for the far left, but I don't think she will have much problem handling that, and will probably use that attack to talk about her vision.

On Kamala's side, I think this is her debate to lose, not because of Pence's qualities, but simply because he has to defend an undefendable president. He will try to spin and spin, but she will need to use the prosecutorial skills we saw from her in the Senate to not let him go. I think she is probably the best of the democratic candidate candidates from the primary to prosecute the Trump administration, so I'm sure she is relishing it. What she can't make the mistake of however, is to show too much anger, as she also has to show calmness and balance, moreso than most VP's of the past, for two reasons: she is the first black and asian woman to run for VP, so the bar is set very high, and because of Joe's age, she has to project a certain gravitas as potential POTUS. It's kind of silly since Joe is only 3 years older than Trump and is much healthier physically and psychologically, but age is a factor, and his age is historic. As Trump would say, 'it is what it is'.

It's pointless to predict who will 'win', as both sides will claim victory, and I do think Pence could really help Trump's chances...unless Kamala nails him to the ground on their failures in a way that he can't squirm out of.

I'm not sure if I'm going to watch very much of it. No one votes for the #2 spot on the ticket and I already know how I'm going to vote so there's not a lot of sense in watching the two debate. I haven't seen a lot of Kamala Harris, so I want to see and hear her speak just to get a feel for her. Like you, I already have a healthy respect for Mike Pence. He's one of the few 'good guys' in the Trump Administration. But it's nothing but window dressing, so I doubt that I'll watch for very long.

Pence probably wouldn't be nearly as appealing if not for the contrast between him and his boss. When I was working as a supervisor managing one of 4 shifts in our 24 hour, 7 days a week operation, I used to beg my boss to schedule our 4 month shift rotation so I would follow a certain supervisor that was just horrible, treated his people like chit, very poor manager. That way, when it came time change shifts and I went to the one that he was just on, people thought I was some sort of God. That's the same effect that Trump is having on both yours and my impression of Mike Pence.

[Aseahawkfan]

Now that Biden beat Trump up, VP debate barely matters now.

[RiverDog]

Now that Biden beat Trump up, VP debate barely matters now.

The VP hasn't mattered for decades. The only time it matters is if a presidential candidate makes a bad choice that hurts the ticket by creating a controversy. McGovern and McCain are two nominees that I can think of that made bad choices that hurt their chances. The only time in the last 100 years that the VP made a positive difference in the POTUS election was in 1960 when JFK took LBJ, which tipped the balance in Texas, and even that wasn't critical as it turned out that JFK didn't need Texas. Biden made a safe pick as unless Harris does something really stupid, she won't hurt be a distraction.

Can anyone remember Hillary's running mate without doing a Google? I can't. Someone named Kaine maybe?

[Aseahawkfan]

Things are the reverse of what I thought. Pence is doing better against Kamala than Trump did against Biden. This debate is far more informative, focused, and supportive of the Trump administration than the Trump versus Biden debate.

I never much watched the last election debates. Pence and Trump are polar opposites in personality. Pence is way more presidential than Trump. I wonder how he stomachs being around a scumbag like Trump. It would be interesting to see what private discussion with Pence are like when he can speak freely about Trump.

[mykc14]

Things are the reverse of what I thought. Pence is doing better against Kamala than Trump did against Biden. This debate is far more informative, focused, and supportive of the Trump administration than the Trump versus Biden debate.

I never much watched the last election debates. Pence and Trump are polar opsites in personality. Pence is way more presidential than Trump. I wonder how he stomachs being around a scumbag like Trump. It would be interesting to see what private discussion with Pence are like when he can speak freely about Trump.

I had the same take. Pence was the perfect VP candidate for Trump and this debate just reinforces that. This was everything that a presidential debate should be- they differed greatly on many topics but were respectful and ‘presidential.’ Imagine the book Pence could write about his time as Trumps VP! I doubt he would write anything scathing about Trump, but it would be a best seller.

[RiverDog]

Things are the reverse of what I thought. Pence is doing better against Kamala than Trump did against Biden. This debate is far more informative, focused, and supportive of the Trump administration than the Trump versus Biden debate.

You were surprised that Pence out-did Trump? Pence is far more intelligent and resourceful than Trump is. I've watched him in press conferences quite a bit, especially once Trump gave up the COVID briefings. All Trump does is trash talk and throw a lot of chit on the wall, hoping that something sticks. He's uninformed and unprepared, lacks a basic understanding of policy, of history, and doesn't even have the geographical knowledge that would be expected out of the average middle schooler. The man truly is a moron. It's not hard to outshine a dimwit like Trump, especially in an impromptu setting like a debate.

I didn't watch the debate last night. It wasn't worth interrupting my evening on the deck sitting in front of my outdoor fireplace, sipping a glass of Chardonnay, reading a book, and listening to my music. Only a football game causes me to break from that routine. But I did record it so I'll probably watch some of it when I hit the treadmill later today.

I never much watched the last election debates. Pence and Trump are polar opposites in personality. Pence is way more presidential than Trump. I wonder how he stomachs being around a scumbag like Trump. It would be interesting to see what private discussion with Pence are like when he can speak freely about Trump.

They need to come up with a better way of getting information to voters. I do like the idea of debates as it forces candidates to do more than shove a 15 second sound bite in front of you on a TV commercial, but so much depends on the physical effectiveness of the presentation, and some candidates, like Ronald Reagan, just aren't very good when put in impromptu situations like debates and press conferences. The very first televised debate, Kennedy vs. Nixon, is a classic example. Most people that saw the debate on TV felt that Kennedy had won while those that heard it on the radio tended to think that Nixon did the better job.

I doubt he (Pence) would write anything scathing about Trump, but it would be a best seller.

I agree. Pence doesn't impress me as a kiss-and-tell type looking to turn his experience in the Administration into gold. I'm sure a few interesting things will come out when he writes his memoirs, but if you're expecting a Hawktalk-like rant, you're likely to be disappointed.

[c_hawkbob]

Pence still lied and dodged all the questions of substance but at least he did so with some measure of civility. Besides, what else was he going to do? Where the President is weak he's weak and some of the things he says and does are indefensible, I'd have hated to be in his shoes, but he did as well or better than could be expected.

[Aseahawkfan]

You were surprised that Pence out-did Trump? Pence is far more intelligent and resourceful than Trump is. I've watched him in press conferences quite a bit, especially once Trump gave up the COVID briefings. All Trump does is trash talk and throw a lot of chit on the wall, hoping that something sticks. He's uninformed and unprepared, lacks a basic understanding of policy, of history, and doesn't even have the geographical knowledge that would be expected out of the average middle schooler. The man truly is a moron. It's not hard to outshine a dimwit like Trump, especially in an impromptu setting like a debate.

I didn't watch the debate last night. It wasn't worth interrupting my evening on the deck sitting in front of my outdoor fireplace, sipping a glass of Chardonnay, reading a book, and listening to my music. Only a football game causes me to break from that routine. But I did record it so I'll probably watch some of it when I hit the treadmill later today.

I don't usually watch debates or politicians. I started to give the debate last night a watch out of curiosity as to how Pence would spin Trump against Kamala. I was impressed by Pence. I see why he was chosen as he can smooth the edges off Trump's pigginess.

I don't vote off what candidates say. Never have, never will. I look at their positions and the position of the party, generally read what they plan to do, then vote according to the Party that covers more of my issues or my key issues. I haven't been able to vote for anyone I considered worthy of supporting since Bush Jr. first election when I gave him a shot. I voted for Bush Jr. a second time only because I felt it was important he clean up his mess in Iraq and Afghanistan. I didn't think he did a great job. I was going to give John McCain a shot, but he picked Sarah Palin. I do not like Democrats. I view them as the party of handouts, no accountability, and no belief in the power of humanity to cure themselves. They are excuse makers for bad behavior socially, financially, and physically. They encourage government dependence. They have taken away the American belief in their ability to improve their lives through work teaching Americans to view themselves as victims of the rich, of the white, bad circumstances, and so much else.

Unfortunately, the Republicans have become a party making excuses for bad behavior by the wealthy with little interest in creating an environment where working people can prosper and own the product of their labor as capitalism intended. They are almost solely about making money in the market and supporting large corporations they characterize as job creators rather than respecting working folk as engaged in productive behavior on their own behalf. Their work is instead viewed as jobs created by by a job creator who has a higher status in the minds of Republicans than the productive working person.

I find that neither party supports working folk to any great degree. They claim they care, but they don't. They lie to us. Send massive amounts of money to foreign nations. Support laws that allow corporations to globalize the labor pool. Have no standards for schools and won't tell us the truth about how hard Americans will have to work against competition from kids in tech and science jobs. The Democrats would rather have us receiving handouts from them than busting our ass in math and science to compete against kids from other nations like Russian, China, and India. The Republicans and Democrats would rather allow H1B tech visas and allow wealthy and powerful corporations to hire from other nations and globalize the labor pool, while ignoring that there should be a huge push by our government to force, literally force, the younger generations to step up and compete in math and science, so we don't become a nation paupered to the citizens of other nations because we're a bunch dumb people who view math and science as some enemy of working people. I do not like our leadership right now. It's as poor as I have ever seen it. They don't teach competition any longer and the Democrats are literally trying to encourage a sort of parasitic dependence between the government, corporations, and working people where Americans will be dependent on tax and spend government economics for survival. That is anathema to humans being free. Any system or political group that creates human dependence on organizations or institutions is anti-freedom. I despise that. The Republicans are creating dependence on corporations and the Democrats are creating dependence on government institutions creating a dependence on gigantic institutions I cannot support. Then there are the socialists, the ultimate anti-freedom supporters of forced collectivism. I still have no idea how anyone can support forced collectivism.

[mykc14]

I do not like Democrats. I view them as the party of handouts, no accountability, and no belief in the power of humanity to cure themselves. They are excuse makers for bad behavior socially, financially, and physically. They encourage government dependence. They have taken away the American belief in their ability to improve their lives through work teaching Americans to view themselves as victims of the rich, of the white, bad circumstances, and so much else.

Unfortunately, the Republicans have become a party making excuses for bad behavior by the wealthy with little interest in creating an environment where working people can prosper and own the product of their labor as capitalism intended. They are almost solely about making money in the market and supporting large corporations they characterize as job creators rather than respecting working folk as engaged in productive behavior on their own behalf. Their work is instead viewed as jobs created by by a job creator who has a higher status in the minds of Republicans than the productive working person.

I find that neither party supports working folk to any great degree. They claim they care, but they don't. They lie to us. Send massive amounts of money to foreign nations. Support laws that allow corporations to globalize the labor pool. Have no standards for schools and won't tell us the truth about how hard Americans will have to work against competition from kids in tech and science jobs. The Democrats would rather have us receiving handouts from them than busting our ass in math and science to compete against kids from other nations like Russian, China, and India.

I agree with most of this. I have been against the 2-party system since High School. I can still remember debating my HS civics teacher about how it leads to division and blindly voting for candidates based solely on party lines (and I thought that division was bad in the late 90's). I do see more value in it now than I did back then but still am against it, which is why I am an Independent. Large corporations and money have infiltrated both parties to the point that they do not have average citizens best interest in mind when making policy. Republicans promise jobs through corporate tax breaks but don't want to regulate how those corporations treat their employees leading to an increase in overall jobs and decrease in unemployment but the employee might not be any better off than when they were on State/Federal assistance. Democrats promise social programs that will lift people out of poverty and help everybody who has any problem without holding those individuals responsible for their actions. They promise to do this by lowering taxes for the average citizen while taxing the top 1-10% at a much higher rate. Inevitably this leads to a deficit in funding because there isn't enough money to fund their social programs leading to half-assed programs that don't work- see Seattle's/San Fran/Portland's handling of the homeless population. At the same time the corporations win. Boeing has been getting tax breaks from our State for years. The Democrats know that it sounds good to tax the major corporations at a higher rate but the reality is they need any tax dollars they can get from them and they would rather have them stay and do business at a lower than promised tax rate than leave to a state/country where they won't get taxed as much. Obviously Boeing and their Dreamliner production is an example of this. I don't have a good answer to fix this but I am hoping that as both parties get more extreme a 'Moderate' party will emerge and may begin to get traction as a viable third party.

[NorthHawk]

The divide has become crazy and I fear for the result of the election.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/08/us/g ... litia.html

[c_hawkbob]

Hey, those are Trump's "good people" ... they just didn't get the "stand by" order.

[Aseahawkfan]

The divide has become crazy and I fear for the result of the election.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/08/us/g ... litia.html

Does that surprised given the looters and rioters targeted the mayors houses in Portland and Seattle? This is an all out culture war for some of these folks.

The Pro-Trump folks view him as the last defense of Western Civilization against the coming socialists like Biden, Kamala, and AOC and her squad. It's pretty insane.

It's not surprising. Way too many people blame and treat each other badly in modern America. They are not united. Then when you have a leader who encourages this division, this is what you get. Trump loves this chaos and division. I don't know how Pence tolerates considering he knows how to unite people, but the situation does not surprise me.

[I-5]

The only thing I'm surprised by is why ASF or anyone would be surprised Pence did better than Trump did. Pence is a far more polished politician and debater/interviewee than Trump ever was (though not as splashy)...probably the best I've seen at not answering questions, bar none. I called it before the debate began that he would do well.

Having said that, it didn't make much difference, as the needle didn't move towards Trump post debate, not even a little. And Kamala did exactly what I thought she would, too. She had to keep it mostly classy, or people would say she's angry. That's how it goes for women. They both landed punches, and neither got knocked out.

[Aseahawkfan]

The only thing I'm surprised by is why ASF or anyone would be surprised Pence did better than Trump did. Pence is a far more polished politician and debater/interviewee than Trump ever was (though not as splashy)...probably the best I've seen at not answering questions, bar none. I called it before the debate began that he would do well.

Having said that, it didn't make much difference, as the needle didn't move towards Trump post debate, not even a little. And Kamala did exactly what I thought she would, too. She had to keep it mostly classy, or people would say she's angry. That's how it goes for women. They both landed punches, and neither got knocked out.

I don't keep track of these politicians. I don't like them very much. I watched on a whim.

[I-5]

Ha! I knew you would. After all, what else is there to do? I would guess we keep track of them similarly.we all have lives to live.

[Aseahawkfan]

Ha! I knew you would. After all, what else is there to do? I would guess we keep track of them similarly.we all have lives to live.

Unfortunately you are right. I usually go to the gym after work, but it's not 24 hours any more. I prefer to spend my time on other activities, but being stuck in your house you start watching things you normally wouldn't care about.

[RiverDog]

Having said that, it didn't make much difference, as the needle didn't move towards Trump post debate, not even a little. And Kamala did exactly what I thought she would, too. She had to keep it mostly classy, or people would say she's angry. That's how it goes for women. They both landed punches, and neither got knocked out.

Name a time when a VP candidate actually 'moved the needle' in favor of his or her running mate.

The VP debates are worthwhile in that it gives us a chance to meet them on a national stage, but it does next to nothing in helping people decide who to vote for.