J.D. Vance Lashes Out After the Smallest Fact-Check in V.P. Debate
J.D. Vance Lashes Out After the Smallest Fact-Check in V.P. Debate
J.D. Vance grew agitated after a mild fact-check on his comments about immigrants in Springfield, Ohio.
You're viewing a single thread.
No. Republicans loved that Vance pushed back here.
This is not the win yall think it is.
Walz did fine. Not as good as JD Vance but I at least wasn't expecting Walz to do as well as JD Vance. Yall got the election if you keep the topic on Trump. Don't get distracted here, especially when its an L or at best, stalemate on your image.
Lol sure buddy the guy lying the whole time won now let's get you to bed.
To be completely fair, I think Vance lying through his teeth lost less red followers than Walz saying expanding Israel's influence was a necessity lost blue followers.
I'm still never going to vote for another Republican, but that was an absolutely horrible way to start the debate.
Y'all might be brainwashed... Or perhaps you have a brain worm? That's actually an official, well-documented thing omongst Trump endorsers these days.
Unfortunately it's not about who was the most honest or had the best ideas. It's about who was more "convincing" to a "blank slate". When one person has zero problem saying anything to support their point even if its complete bullshit, it's easy to be more convincing. I still think debates should happen but it's sad that the Republicans "win at all costs" mentality elevates quick talkers who will lie to your face and make up disingenuous arguments without a care in the world. Something something about a pig in the mud and wrestling it...
Sorry about all the air quotes but it's hard to talk about this stuff without them.
What specifically do you feel Walz didn't do as well as Vance?
Convince people. The quick polls are already in.
Walz is fine though. I don't remember any mistake honestly. But the numbers are in already. We can say solidly that JD Vance did better.
22 people is hardly a survey for a national election, and is a total nonanswer. I'm asking you what you think Vance did better.
Also, what is the source of that image?
From the fonts I’d guess NYT
Edit: other comments are saying Washington Post
Oh, my first impression was it might be WSJ. Which if those other two are supposedly centrist, but almost always side with the right, then WSJ's op-ed portion is almost cartoonishly right-wing.
Image, body language. Looking at the camera with the "Marine Stare" to show off with body language his disdain for a particular topic or response from Walz (while Walz's body language was not nearly as effective at showing JD Vance's weird shit).
If you're not aware of what "Republicans see as weird", well... guess what?? JD Vance is, and he's able to rally people with just a glance. It was clearly effective. Though perhaps in a "deeper" political look / visual communication cue rather than actual talking.
JD Vance is the complete package. Walz is well spoken but not quite as emoted and not as good of a reaction to JD Vance.
Don't get me wrong, JD Vance is fucking nuts. But if you're not seeing JD Vance's good performance here, you're at risk at underestimating the scope of the problem here.
EDIT: Like... base things. The things people care about. Like, "Who looked more like a soldier" (especially on the meta-topic of JD Vance service record vs Tim Walz's service record), JD Vance looked more like a soldier. Base things that appeal to the ID and not logic. JD Vance is spot on on these issues.
I don't think it matters because Donald Trump is the actual topic of discussion. But JD Vance's performance is better than you'd think within a Republican mindset.
Its fine because Walz didn't need to win this debate. Walz just needed to punt and he's accomplished that. JD Vance isn't going to turn all of Trump's ills away with one good debate performance either (especially since Walz wasn't crushed or defeated).
Walz needed to introduce his personality to the country. And Walz did that. Good. Take the W for what it is, but don't overplay your hand here. This isn't like the Harris v Trump debate where Harris crushed Trump. This is actually slight win to JD Vance IMO but Walz is good enough to not damage Harris's campaign kinda debate.
JD looked and talked like an alien making his first contact with humans. He lacks any charisma, and you can tell he doesn't actually believe anything he says. And because of that, the moderators asked many times about his stance on almost everything being 180 degrees from when he started the Trump audition.
Also I don't think Republican = MAGA cult anymore. I also feel 99% of these "undecided" voters at this point are going to vote Trump, and are just reaching for something that they can say is the reason other than racism.
and you can tell he doesn’t actually believe anything he says.
100% agree on this point.
But that's also not JD Vance's goal here. JD Vance's goal is to sanewash Trump. And he accomplished that.
JD looked and talked like an alien making his first contact with humans
I kinda-sorta see where you're coming from here.
Alas: this is the marine stare. A lot of marines I know do this. I think people in the know are in the know and see JD Vance's mannerism here as charismatic.
Please, reconcile your fawning fascist fellating with the FACT that he's the last popular VP candidate in American history. I'm sure it will be an entertaining, if somewhat nauseating read.
JD Vance is like +19 points in favorability today post-debate.
Recognize the threat and sit the fuck down. I'm on your side. But we all need to recognize what is or isn't working in politics. JD Vance's performance worked. That's the face of our political opponents, and it's a solid working strategy.
Don't be blinded by short term Trump issues. JD Vance is the longer term threat now, even if Trump loses we have many decades of JD Vance ahead of us, especially with his performance last night.
Vance went from -22 to -3. Wow. He's so popular now. Such a long term threat.
Charismatic adjective
- exercising a compelling charm which inspires devotion in others.
I wouldn't consider staring off while trying to reword your same lie as being charismatic. There is a reason his favorability has been under water the whole time, it isn't because he was a Marine. I have met Marines, and I have seen former Marines in office that can have a normal conversation, and actually appear to care. JD lacks the ability to converse, and has zero ability to relate with anyone, even MAGA folks.
Lefties not wanting to accept JD Vance isn’t existing in reality. He is existing in MAGA reality. Which is incoherent and separate from actuality.
Lefties pretending that MAGA goes away after the election are fucking dumb. It won't go away on its own and we need to work political strategies to counter it.
Hard agree. Sorry you are catching downvotes for speaking logic. Appreciate you.
Image, body language. Looking at the camera with the "Marine Stare" to show off with body language his disdain for a particular topic or response from Walz
JD Vance is, and he's able to rally people with just a glance. It was clearly effective. Though perhaps in a "deeper" political look / visual communication cue rather than actual talking.
JD Vance is the complete package
That's so damn horny 😄
Are you a couch?
Are you a couch?
This was the exact thought running thru my head as i forced myself through that disgusting fan fiction.
Because the point of an election is to determine who has the best body language. You heard it here first folks
You all don’t seem to understand how stupid people vote. Or what’s important to them or most importantly HOW FUCKING MANY OF THEM YHERE ARE.
Trump looks like he's about to fall forward at all times, and his blank, geriatric, demented stare is honestly a spectical at this point, paired with his constant word salad.
I guess that means Kamala wins, folks. Wrap it up, everyone. It's over. Let's go home and move on.
You jest but half a country are below average intelligence. It’s not outlandish to think that many individuals in that half aren’t really following what is being said or understand it. What they can follow is the visuals. How they look, how they stand, how they move; how they “read”. And a non-trivial number of above average people still judge books by their covers.
I think the point the person above was trying to make is that Vance won the area the majority of people can evaluate and the importance of visuals.
Harris's body language was far superior to Trump's. And is part of why she crushed him so completely.
EDIT: Body language is incredibly important to QAnon btw, because QAnon believes that JD Vance is not free to speak his mind. So these nods and looks JD Vance are doing are non-verbal acknowledgements that also plays to the whole "Q" and "Deep State" shit. Yadda-yadda.
I'm not sure if you're recognizing the threat this body language actually is, or the role its playing in this debate. Tim Walz certainly looks completely ignorant to it all (or at least, doesn't want to deal with it). This is JD Vance literally leaning into Q-shit and rallying it.
Wow, and I thought your first post was full of maga copium, but damn, this one takes the cake.
Who the actual fuck gives a single wet shit what QTurds have to say?
At least anybody who is seriously trying to figure out how to get Kamala and Walz across the finish line.
Q-shits and other groups like that are how we got Trump in the first place. We must defeat that ideology not because of a trump, but because QAnon will continue to influence our politics over the rest of our lives, long after the 78-year old orange man is dead.
Sitting around in a circle pretending Walz had a better night than he actually did is counterproductive. Walz did fine but we must be honest with ourselves here. JD Vance did very well.
At a bare minimum, we need to be honest about which parts of this debate we need to meme and spread around. This moment in this topic is a self-own and plays to Q-anon. So NOT meme this, it's counterproductive.
Our opponents think the media is in cahoots with Harris / Walz, that Walz is scripted and Harris has an earpiece telling her the answers. To see the moderators of the debate challenge JD Vance like this is proof of the conspiracy. It's not the shining moment you think it is politically speaking.
January 6th moment later in the debate? Meme that. Spread that one. You need to be strategic about the message if you want any hope of winning. This election is closer than it should be so we need to give it everything we got to reach across the finish line.
I know you're getting downvoted, but I appreciate this analysis. I have autism and don't pick up on body language
Well, you don't wanna listen to dragontamer then. The scenes they're describing happened only in their head.
JD Vance did full 100% politician stance the entire time so I don't think there's anything to take from it.
Are you really referencing a poll of 22 people lmao
Are you really denying the poll which has now been replicated on CNN and CBS instant polls?
JD Vance won the debate in every reputable flash poll I've read this morning. For fucks sake you dumbass, open your eyes and recognize the political challenge before us.
You'd rather muse on irrelevant technicalities than see the actual polls from the electorate. Small polls are in fact statistically sound btw if handled correctly, and the methodology of focusing on undecided voters is the key here. The election is close and we need every vote we can get to stop Trump, and you are blinding yourself to the truth of the situation.
You’re getting emotional over something that doesn’t matter. Only 1% of people changed their views after this debate
JD Vance went +19% on favorability.
Yes he did, which would normally be fantastic except you have to consider where he started.
Again, try to be a bit more level headed. Yes, he did well. Yes, about 1% changed who they are voting for (could be either d/r). People are voting between Harris or Trump. The VP debates just let you get to know the VP candidates a bit more.
Also, I’m not the one downvoting you
Again, try to be a bit more level headed.
Rich.
Tell this community to fuck off with their replies and down votes. I'm the only one speaking reason in a sea of dumbasses and you are trying to ping me for being unreasonable in the face of 20+ messages pinging me.
It's a dog pile. I know these happen on the internet, but how about you recognize a dogpile and instead be a bit less accusatory (You’re getting emotional over something) under these circumstances.
I'm sorry I care about truth here. And your level of technicalities in the face of this is rich given the circumstances.
I'm not even saying Walz did bad or that anything was harmful to Harris. I'm simply pointing out that the Republicans are much happier with this debate than the liberals realize and y'all need to start becoming aware of the underlying problem with the meta-discussion.
If you are just cheering one side without thinking of the greater political story or the place our little discussion hasnin the world of political issues, you will be too ignorant to truly make lasting change.
Part of that is being honest about the performance of politicians on widely watched debates, and understanding the image projected upon your political opposition.
I’m sorry you are getting swarmed like this. Happens to me when I comment in .ml or hexbear so I know the feeling. You’re not being outlandish or anything but I imagine it doesn’t feel great to have all this backlash including from me.
Funny thing is that I have voted for more Republican presidents than Democrat ones. John Kaisich was even at my wedding. In true republican fashion I switched sides when it suited me best - when I had kids and realized they’re gonna be here about longer than me.
Just remember no one has ever changed there political party from Lemmy or Reddit comments. Good luck!
Newsweek is reporting the opposite, with Walz getting a boost and not Vance.
You didn't even read the article.
A flash poll conducted by CNN and SSRS after the debate among 574 registered voters who watched the showdown found that 51 percent of respondents said that Vance came out on top, compared to 49 percent who said the same of Walz. The margin of error was +/- 5.3 points.
A CBS News flash poll performed in conjunction with YouGov also showed Vance winning by a slim margin, with 42 percent of 1,630 respondents saying they thought the Ohio senator won the debate, to Walz's 41 percent. The margin of error was +/- 2.7 points. Seventeen percent of respondents said the debate was a draw.
What you, and your system of copera is doing, is muddying the waters and ignoring JD Vance performance.
Trump dies in a few years, he's a 78-year-old sickly man. JD Vance is the guy we will likely have to deal with the rest of our lives politically speaking. He's young and clearly taking charge of the ideology. This is a long term problem (even if Trump is the bigger problem).
Ah yes, "the numbers". Are those the same numbers that say Trump has the bigliest rallies? Are they the BEST NUMBERS OF ALL TIME?
Yeah, you might be an idiot if it belive any of that. That's your right, though. It's a free country, for now.
They are the hardest, longest and girthiest of numbers.
This is a fucking Washington Post screenshot.
Holy shit man. Pull your head out of your own ass. Walz did fine, its not a big deal. But JD Vance outperformed. If you don't see it then you're fucking blind and you're ignoring even left-leaning papers like the WashPo.
That's right everyone, the Bezos Post is left leaning!
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/washington-post/
Yall live in your own fucking reality. I'll tell you what.
Oh I see, dispite it being owned by a BILIONAIRE who is opposed to any fundimental change in the status quo, this one website says they are left leaning so no need to consider anything they are left... FFS use your damn brain
Cope harder dumbass.
All the polls this morning are that JD Vance outperformed this thing.
Actually, don't cope. Turn on your fucking brain and see the threat for what it is. Pull your head out of your ass, strategize and make Kamala and Walz win in this upcoming election.
Lies about Walz performance last night do NOT help the cause.
More Americans like what JD Vance pulled last night on TV than you realize. That is the scope of the threat here.
I mean, am not arguing who did better, I will be honest I both did not watch it, and already voted.
As for what the threat is, I cannot see a significant difrence between Trump and Harris, and there is a real likelyhood Trump wins agian, but the cause for that is that the Dems keep lurching rightword and refuse to even consider trying to move to the left, so people stop approving of them and stop voting.
Agian I am not saying polls one way or the other, but the media fact check, no WatPo is right wing owned by a bilionare, the data they present may or may not be accurate on a case by case, and I would not be suprised if high approval was the turnout here.
And who the fuck crowned MBFC the kings of based unbiased-ness?
The "both sides" types seem to think it is entirely credible.... 🤣
It's fucking bullshit. It ranks news orgs owned by billionaires as "left leaning"
Yes. That's always the question the hard right and their apologists and the Enligtened Centrists (TM) can never answer in any serious way and that question is - how can the news outlet of a huge MNC and/or controlled by an oligarch be, in any serious way, on the left?
These unserious people keep telling me that "well, everyone just knows" or quoting polls that poll the newsreaders or the stenographers for the elite and who they are registered for, not realizing we are talking about the help, not the owners. What the help wants or who they vote for doesn't mean a fart in a high wind. It's the owners that call the tune, FFS.
How have you been on Lemmy for a year, and don't yet know that we fucking hate MBFC?
Can someone please explain to me why everyone hates this? I'm so lost lol
Cuz it's not objective.
Because the vast majority of "mainstream" news outlets are pro-corporate and pro-capitalism, making them center-right at best, yet they label them as left wing. The entire idea behind the site is Republican propaganda that was created to coerce the media into repeating their lies unquestioningly, lest they be labeled as "biased".
MAGA uses it so suggest that every fact you throw at them is biased because an outlet may lean left, which the majority of the noteworthy ones do. My buddy is a maga guy and he even declares AP news and Reuters as liberal mainstream media.
Another popular tactic is to see who owns the company where the news is coming from. If there’s a single Democrat on the board of directors or anything like that, then the news is “tainted”
Can’t win. It’s also pointless giving them facts I’ve learned over the past 8 years.
That MBFC garbage even rated AP as left leaning last time I saw it. It's so incredibly biased.
Because they are losing the factual discussion with me here.
Polls from CBS and CNN confirm that JD Vance won the debate last night and that JD Vance is up huge in favorability.
They don't like to see how unpopular liberal viewpoints really are. Or the reality of the American political system. But we need to push reality above all, we cannot afford to be complacent moving into this election.
You're focused on polling. If you think polling is "factual", you don't understand how polling works.
Oh wow, WaPo? Well, if daddy Bezos says so, I guess it must be true. /s
Just gonna throw it out there that WaPo written negative articles about Amazon many times
JD Vance out preformed! Cause I say so!
WashPo, CBS and CNN reports JD Vance won the debate in quick polls of swing state voters post debate.
Cope harder. There is simple truth on this issue and I'll continue to speak the truth here.
WashPo, CBS, and CNN, the arbiters of truth on all subjective matters. Forgive my ignorance.
No wonder the media is free to fuck up this country.
Polls aren't subjective. It's just asking a question, recording the stats and then publishing some graphs.
Yeah they can be fucked with, but WashPo, CBS and CNN aren't some right wing bullshit site who lies about results.
Polls will always be limited by sample size and selection bias. Subjective.