patrick.net

Why the hell did anyone waste their time on this?

VP debates don't effect the election outcome worth shit.

"I screwed up, Xi. Please don't kill me."

DemocratsAreTotallyFucked says

Why the hell did anyone waste their time on this?

VP debates don't effect the election outcome worth shit.

They have shown to move the needle by less than a percent nationally, by a bit more on the state level. If you trust the polling historically

mell says

They have shown to move the needle by less than a percent nationally, by a bit more on the state level. If you trust the polling historically

No. Studies have shown that presidential debates in general do not matter in effecting election outcomes. The Trump-Biden one is a historic exception to that rule, of course.

Veep debates, even less. How many Americans do you think are not even aware WHO is the current Veep right now? Yes, even though she's running for POTUS?

In general, debates don’t matter that much for presidential votes. Debates are important in inverse proportion to the importance of the office. So, for instance, in presidential debates, most voters know already who they’re leaning to vote for because of political polarization. But if you get down to, say, congressional seats, they may not know as much about members of Congress, and so they learn more about the individual candidates.

Presidential primaries can have large fields of candidates. Voters may not know a lot about each one, and so there is an opportunity for a candidate to say something, or to act in a way that sticks in voters’ minds and makes them think more positively about them.

https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2024/0625/presidential-debates-history-biden-trump-elections

CBS Shut Off Vance's Mic After He Mentioned "CBP One" App, Allowing Illegals To Apply Online For "Asylum" To Fast Track Them Into The Country

https://x.com/libsoftiktok/status/1841290278205866205

DemocratsAreTotallyFucked says

mell says

They have shown to move the needle by less than a percent nationally, by a bit more on the state level. If you trust the polling historically

No. Studies have shown that debates in general do not matter in effecting election outcomes. The Trump-Biden one is a historic exception to that rule, of course.

They have been shown to move the needle by less than one percent nationally, potentially more in swing states due to smaller numbers of voters, so in a close election they can matter. US elections have become quite closer, with the exception of Bush v Gore (recount).

Patrick says

CBS Shut Off Vance's Mic After He Mentioned "CBP One" App, Allowing Illegals To Apply Online For "Asylum" To Fast Track Them Into The Country

Yeah, but that only adds fuel to the fire because ppl heard what he said.

mell says

They have been shown to move the needle by less than one percent nationally, potentially more in swing states due to smaller numbers of voters, so in a close election they can matter. US elections have become quite closer, with the exception of Bush v Gore (recount).

Bullshit. Close elections happen no matter what. Have NOTHING to do with the debates. Also, the majority of ppl who even watch the debates only do so for the first 20 - 30 mins only.

"Debates matter!" is just 100% Grade A copium bullshit that political junkies say to themselves. True.

Sorry dude. I used to fall into that trap myself.

No matter who you are favoring in this election, you have to admit that Tim Walz made the most truthful debate statement ever when he said "I'm a knucklehead."

Well, to be fair, a debate did put Potato to the pasture, didn't it?

This one was too close and uneventful to make a dent though.

DemocratsAreTotallyFucked says

mell says

They have been shown to move the needle by less than one percent nationally, potentially more in swing states due to smaller numbers of voters, so in a close election they can matter. US elections have become quite closer, with the exception of Bush v Gore (recount).

Bullshit. Close elections happen no matter what. Have NOTHING to do with the debates. Also, the majority of ppl who even watch the debates only do so for the first 20 - 30 mins only.

"Debates matter!" is just 100% Grade A copium bullshit that political junkies say to themselves. True.

Sorry dude. I used to fall into that trap myself.

It's not a trap. Just telling you what the polls historically show, if you choose not to believe them or blame the movements on other factors that's fine. Since the debate started until now the biggest betting market, Polymarket saw Trump close a 1.7 % gap down to a 1% gap until now. These are people betting their money that it can matter. Personally I think on a national level they're insignificant, in a swing state with a couple percent undecided voters the may very well be significant.

DemocratsAreTotallyFucked says

mell says

They have been shown to move the needle by less than one percent nationally, potentially more in swing states due to smaller numbers of voters, so in a close election they can matter. US elections have become quite closer, with the exception of Bush v Gore (recount).

Bullshit. Close elections happen no matter what. Have NOTHING to do with the debates. Also, the majority of ppl who even watch the debates only do so for the first 20 - 30 mins only.

"Debates matter!" is just 100% Grade A copium bullshit that political junkies say to themselves. True.

Sorry dude. I used to fall into that trap myself.

Dan Quayle begs to differ.

Nixon too.

Since the Dems are residing in a palace of lies provided for them by their handlers and pounded out by a relentlessly lying MSM, I am interested in the audience response: can they tell that it is a palace of lies, or are they beguiled by it. It seems a good plurality or majority are not beguiled. That means that the palace of lies promoted by the Intels is dissolving on its foundations of sand.

Vance is an interesting figure. He is cool, courteous, even at times flattering of the opposition for effect, but still manages to run rings around his three debating opponents, two of whom are able to frame him with cheap shot strawmen (drawn from the fakery of Jan 6 and Global Warming), false flags asserted as real, begging the question, false analogies, non sequiturs in the questions etc. etc. They plumbed a pretty good range of logical fallacies and assertion fallacies while being even more waspish than Trump's hostile moderators.

What is strange about these debates is how compressed the topics are in information breadth and width. Both parties can only address recent sound bite issues or publicity rushes on a rather superficial level. The fact that propaganda was legalized by Obama then pursued with bloody murder through the MSM doesn't help.

socal2 says

Dan Quayle begs to differ.

Nixon too.

Who cares?

Just because they had bad debates does not magically mean it effected the election outcomes. Prove A actually correlates to B.

No such proof exists. Nixon's fate was already cooked before that debate ever hapoened.

mell says

Just telling you what the polls historically show

No, you aren't. You THINK you are but aren't. Opium.

Especially when you mention polling numbers within the margin of error. Talking about masturbating on PatNet.

Also. Betting markets are not polls and Americans are forbidden from betting on Polymarket. Did you not know this?

DemocratsAreTotallyFucked says

Veep debates, even less. How many Americans do you think are not even aware WHO is the current Veep right now? Yes, even though she's running for POTUS?

We had a viewing party. I think more people are interested than you'd think.

Another one of those casual, non-manipulated, non-falsified polls:

https://t.me/followsthewhiterabbit/98022

Walz was probably friends with school shooters because he was ordered by the Freemasons to rape them for MKUltra to radicalize them as assassins.

"It was a casual but tasty meal, if a bit tacky."

"I buggered the little bastards until they were screaming to kill something."

https://t.me/followsthewhiterabbit/98022

Yes, he's kindest when he's standing next to you at the urinals.

Russel Crowe killed Don Rickles last night.

DemocratsAreTotallyFucked says

mell says

Just telling you what the polls historically show

No, you aren't. You THINK you are but aren't. Opium.

Especially when you mention polling numbers within the margin of error. Talking about masturbating on PatNet.

Also. Betting markets are not polls and Americans are forbidden from betting on Polymarket. Did you not know this?

Plenty of Americans bet on those markets via VPN (I prefer stocks), but that's not the point. It shows that the debate had an effect, similar to the first (presidential) denate having a slighlty negative effect. There's a reason Trump picked Vance and they it last night. FWIW they're almost tied.now on the betting markets, quite a shift from pre-debate numbers

I have always been curios if you were to place a Longshot bet on Trump early on in the polls, months before the election. Then close to the election he becomes a unanimous favorite, and goes on to win. Would you be paid on your wager based on the odds at the time of bet, or the odds at closing of the bets just before the election?

I think the real wager should be will Amererica allow the election to be stollen, again.

Ceffer says

Walz was probably friends with school shooters because he was ordered by the Freemasons to rape them for MKUltra to radicalize them as assassins.

Was watching with friends. Walz did fine, BUT that might be one of the worst gaffes I've ever heard in a debate. Everyone in the garage did the Joe Rogan reaction meme at a UFC fight. Like what the fuck did we just hear?

That alone, he lost the debate. JD was friendly, hell both were. But you you can't say that even on accident. It's lost Alex Jones millions for just suggesting Sandy Hook was fake. He never said he like school shooters though. I'm no Jones fan as I think he's too boisterous and likely drinks too much, but that was a bad gaffe for Walz.

I can promise you if you have a child in school and heard that and understand a ballot, Kamala likely lost 3-4 points because of it last night. Problem is people don't vote for the VP besides political junkies. JD did solid. Very respectful. Hammered home the point Kamala has no policies and anything she's said she will do, hasn't done it for the last 3.5 years. Basically a do nothing politician.

I did not watch this debate, because presumably the person who won were the people who did not watch the debate. Did Vance mention tampons?

Technically speaking, the Veep IS a do-nothing politician by design. The situation with Joe Biden flying to Moscow and selling "Reset" to the KGB fucks was an anomaly, not a norm. They tried the whole "border zar" BS to lift her out of obscurity and pretend she's not an empty suit, not because the VP is supposed to be a "zar" of this or that. Now, of course, they are trapped and can't simply say that shit the voters are upset about is on Bidet, because see above.

The Veep's job is to sit on xer kister and wait until the POTUS kicks the bucket and meanwhile break a tie in the Senat now and then.

Tenpoundbass says

Would you be paid on your wager based on the odds at the time of bet, or the odds at closing of the bets just before the election?

You would be paid at the odds when you placed the bet. All bets are covered, what is what determines the odds.

WookieMan says

We had a viewing party. I think more people are interested than you'd think.

Not about 'interest'. It's about effect.

All you are doing is trying to raise the importance of what you did even though it doesn't impact the election.

mell says

Plenty of Americans bet on those markets via VPN

How many? Prove it.mell says

It shows that the debate had an effect

In your mind. The stats are clear: presidential debates don't effect the outcome (unless you pull a Biden).

Pull someone randomly off the street and asked if they saw it. Ask who the VPOTUS candidates even are. Hell, I will even give you latitude and ask them first if they are even voting so you can filter them out.

Have fun with that.

https://babylonbee.com/cleanArticle/school-shooters-distance-themselves-from-that-weirdo-tim-walz

RWSGFY says

Technically speaking, the Veep IS a do-nothing politician by design. The situation with Joe Biden flying to Moscow and selling "Reset" to the KGB fucks was an anomaly, not a norm. They tried the whole "border zar" BS to lift her out of obscurity and pretend she's not an empty suit, not because the VP is supposed to be a "zar" of this or that. Now, of course, they are trapped and can't simply say that shit the voters are upset about is on Bidet, because see above.

The Veep's job is to sit on xer kister and wait until the POTUS kicks the bucket and meanwhile break a tie in the Senat now and then.

VPOTUS debates are even more fluff than POTUS debates. They definitely don't impact the election.

Can't say I disagree, LOL.

RWSGFY says

Technically speaking, the Veep IS a do-nothing politician by design.

She's the tie breaker in the Senate on votes. So technically a Senator with it being tight between parties. Kind of a big deal and can become POTUS.

She did nothing and most do nothing. But it's a more important role than you'd think with how perfectly divided we are. That's why Trump was campaigning out in Bozeman, MT for a Senate seat. It's a red state he'll win, but that's a huge Senate seat if they win it. If there's a 50/50 split in the Senate, Vance is the deciding factor.

I don't think conservative realize the outcome and aftermath of it. If Kamala wins, we're literally fucked. I'm not going to pull the Dem bullshit that I'll move somewhere else, but this is the most important election in my lifetime. She cannot win. Vote Vote Vote.

I'll be in Mexico, so early voting for me. Probably not the best timing, but whatever. I'm still getting a vote in even in a deep blue state. With a ton of blacks that I think are shifting red. I think IL is more purple now than it has been in the past. Not a swing state, but an IL surprise wouldn't shock me one bit. Black people don't like fake black. I also don't like illegals. Even Latinos born here don't like illegals and they're coming of voting age.

I'll eat my words. Trump will win MN, WI, MI and PA. Even just 2 he wins. Call it sexist, no one is ready for a woman POTUS. Definitely not this one. I'm a news junkie but I see nothing on Harris. She just doing private fundraiser or any rallies she bussing people in. I take my car, right? They're just grabbing people off the street and tossing them a meal and $50. That's her campaign.

https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/knuckleheads-wednesday-october-2

He actually said this: “I’ve become friends with school shooters.” The Vice Presidential Debate flashed across CBS last night, closely watched by political partisans, and completely ignored by everyone else. The tone was civil and noncombative; the moderators were not allowed to ‘fact check’ anyone; and the corporate media seems unable to pick a ‘winner.’ It was Vance. Vance won.

https://nitter.poast.org/KamalaHQ/status/1841299880603513202




J.D. Vance won the debate because he is wicked smart, well-spoken, and was unburdened by the necessity of pretense. He could just be himself. Walz carried the burden of two different jobs last night: he had to debate Vance, but at the same time he also had to pretend to be a living cartoon of a folksy, rural conservative Democrat instead of a marxist tool who’s been to China over thirty times.

Walz’s China fetish procured one of the many laugh-out-loud moments last night. Headline from USA Today, last evening:

Walz on claims he was in China during Tiananmen: 'I'm a knucklehead at times'
Riley Beggin
USA TODAY
Published 10:41 p.m. ET Oct. 1, 2024

The boring backstory is that Walz lied about being in China during the Tiananmen Square massacre. It only became news when somebody found some old newspaper reports putting Walz at home during the event in question. After one of the CBS moderators asked Walz to explain the discrepancy between his claim and news reports about him being in the US during that time, Walz gave a little speech about his China policy.

To her credit, the moderator didn’t let him get away with it, and pressed Walz to answer the question. Walz folded. He basically admitted he lied. "I have not been perfect,” Walz explained, “and I'm a knucklehead at times."

A “knucklehead” is one way of putting it.

But that wasn’t even close to Walz’s worst moment. Ultimately, it wasn’t hard to pick, though his claim that “abortion is a basic human right” was a close second place. But Walz claimed the top knucklehead prize after being asked why he opposed assault weapons bans before he supported them. Walz then said this:

"I’ve sat in that office with those Sandy Hook parents. I’ve become friends with school shooters… This idea of stigmatizing mental health; just because you have a mental health issue doesn’t mean you’re violent. We end up looking for a scapegoat. Sometimes it just is the guns. It’s just the guns. And there’s things you can do about it."

What? Sometimes, it’s just the guns? The guns do it? Are the guns hypnotizing people? Was Walz talking about some newfangled, high-tech, AI-driven DARPA autonomous weapon?

At the same time Walz was arguing for some kind of gun control for regular citizens, he also seemed to be arguing for giving crazy people easier access to firearms to avoid stigmatizing them. You can’t make this stuff up.

Whatever squirmy misfire in Walz’s cranium caused him to give that fruity answer earned the gaffe of the year award. Touché, brain worm.

I suppose the moral of the story is: pick replacement VPs for your selected VP in haste, and repent in leisure.

Soon, Walz will be campaigning from the basement like the rest of the faux candidates.