Elections VP Debate thread

[waiguoren]

Pence is put in an almost impossible position trying to deny the things that Trump has said.

Impossible only because there was not enough time to respond to everything. 90% of Kaine's attacks were misleading or out of context.

 

[waiguoren]

It's been pretty apparent that Trump supporters are absolutely fine with outrageous lies, so long as the lies are pandering to their views.

True, but that's also the case for Clinton supporters.

 

[waiguoren]

The furious anti fact check stuff from the right is one of the funnier things to come out of this wacky election IMO. Facts now have a heavy liberal bias.

Pretty sure the argument went right over your head.

 

[waiguoren]

Seems like a reach. If that's the only example, fact checkers are doing a great job.

It was literally the first Pence statement that came up on the front page. I didn't spend more that 15 seconds looking for it. I guarantee there are many worse examples.

If you and others can't understand why it's absurd to rate Pence's comment as "mostly false", you really shouldn't vote. One of the reasons democracy is giving us terrible candidates is because of the poor critical thinking skills of large numbers of voters.

 

[waiguoren]

The gap between the differing policy preferences would have the biggest impact on people's lives (and would affect the lives of almost everyone in the world). Also, presidents have a lot of power to act (or not) in that area.

Written by someone who has clearly never made an attempt to read IPCC AR5 or otherwise understand greenhouse forcing.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Pence did a better job of promoting himself. Kaine did a better job of attacking Trump.

Pence did OK at indirectly attacking Trump, but, yeah not as good as Kaine.

 

[Jack V Savage]

LOL

150 IQ Tim "einstein" Kaine

You cannot go around estimating people IQ's because they have a degree from a better university.

You're oversimplifying the point. If you look at his whole bio, it's consistent with what I said and not with the very low estimates of others in this thread. And I think you guys (you who are expressing skepticism about the rather obvious point) are greatly overestimating what that level means.

Written by someone who has clearly never made an attempt to read IPCC AR5 or otherwise understand greenhouse forcing.

 

[lecter]

How were Kaine's attack at Trump a good thing lol
Some were well placed but most of the time he went on completely random rants against Trump, spit out all sorts of accusations and totally exaggerated everything. People are annoyed by that.
If he had done such a good job at attacking Trump, more people would have given him the edge in the debate as well.

It's not because everybody carefully evaluated the debate between them without looking at this attacks against Trump, he simply didn't impress anybody with it.

 

[Hans Gruber]

Impossible only because there was not enough time to respond to everything. 90% of Kaine's attacks were misleading or out of context.

Yeah..he even tried to use an out of context line about "black people are living in hell" and suggest that Trump was talking bad about black people. It was ridiculous.

 

[Fawlty]

Nothing to see here.

If you weren't lazy, you would look up why Bernie's statement was mostly true, and why Trump's was mostly false. I'll give you a hint: one cited data while the other made up his own.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Yeah..he even tried to use an out of context line about "black people are living in hell" and suggest that Trump was talking bad about black people. It was ridiculous.

He wasn't "talking bad about black people," but he was indicating that he is grossly misinformed about the experience of a typical black person in America and that his impression is coming from some very questionable sources.

 

[WalkenWouldOwn]

Pretty sure the argument went right over your head.

Did you respond to the right person? This post makes absolutely no sense in response to my post.

 

[waiguoren]

Did you respond to the right person? This post makes absolutely no sense in response to my post.

Right person.

The argument against fact checkers is not an argument against facts or their existence. The argument is that anyone can create a "fact check" website which is biased against a candidate via selection bias, willful misrepresentation of statements, and holding different candidates to different standards.

 

[dontsnitch]

If you weren't lazy, you would look up why Bernie's statement was mostly true, and why Trump's was mostly false. I'll give you a hint: one cited data while the other made up his own.

Bernie

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/jul/13/bernie-s/bernie-sanders-says-real-unemployment-rate-african/

Sanders said that for African-Americans between the ages of 17 and 20, "the real unemployment rate … is 51 percent." His terminology was off, but the numbers he used check out, and his general point was correct -- that in an apples-to-apples comparison, African-American youth have significantly worse prospects in the job market than either Hispanics or whites do. The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information, so we rate it Mostly True.


Trump

http://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2016/jun/20/donald-trump/trump-misleadingly-puts-black-youth-unemployment-r/

Trump says the unemployment rate for black youths is 59 percent.

The unemployment rate is a widely used term with a specific definition: It refers to the percentage of jobless people in the workforce who are actively seeking employment. In May, the unemployment rate for blacks ages 16 to 24 was 18.7 percent, or less than one-third of Trump’s claim.

Trump’s campaign didn’t respond to our question about where the candidate got his 59 percent figure. But it appears likely it comes from a computation of all 16- to 24-year-old blacks who aren’t working and may not even want a job, including high school and college students.

Clearly, black youths have a harder time finding work than whites. But Trump exaggerates the issue through his misleading use of statistics.

 

[waiguoren]

If you weren't lazy, you would look up why Bernie's statement was mostly true, and why Trump's was mostly false. I'll give you a hint: one cited data while the other made up his own.

False. The politifact article on Trump's statement explicitly explains how the 58.5% figure is calculated from BLS data. How can make shit up like that and expect to be taken seriously?

 

[dontsnitch]

False. The politifact article on Trump's statement explicitly explains how the 58.5% figure is calculated from BLS data. How can make shit up like that and expect to be taken seriously?

It goes beyond facts. Look at how the articles are written.

"So where did Trump come up with the eye-popping 59 percent? We can’t say with certainty, because Trump’s campaign, as usual, didn’t respond to our question."

versus

"We’ll start by noting that the most commonly used unemployment-rate statistic is not as high for each group as Sanders indicated."

 

[waiguoren]

He wasn't "talking bad about black people," but he was indicating that he is grossly misinformed about the experience of a typical black person in America and that his impression is coming from some very questionable sources.

I agree with you, but you aren't addressing Hans's point, which was that Kaine's statement offered no context and was therefore misleading.

 

[Jack V Savage]

I agree with you, but you aren't addressing Hans's point, which was that Kaine's statement offered no context and was therefore misleading.

What I'm saying is that Kaine was referring to a well-known comment, and the implication was what it was.

Looking back, it looks like Kaine was playing Go, while Pence was playing Hungry, Hungry Hippos. No one really gives a shit about the VP debate, and Kaine used it to provide material (both with his own comments and with Pence's inevitable responses) for future ads and news clips and to extend Trump's tilt, while Pence was using it to make a case for a form of conservatism that is no longer popular (and that Trump himself doesn't espouse) and for himself in 2020.

 

[Sir Galahad]

Pence via 1st RD submission over whiny little bish Kaine.

 

[WalkenWouldOwn]

The argument against fact checkers is not an argument against facts or their existence.

Maybe not your argument. You don't speak for the entire right wing though.

Most pro Trump folks I've seen this entire cycle, even when he was being fact checked against other Republicans, have simply dismissed all post debate fact checks instantly regardless of the source because every single one of them tend to make Trump look like a liar. Must be a liberal conspiracy.