Minor Vance win overall since he had lower expectations going in and Walz got that one unfortunate extremely clippable misspeak. Vance refusing to admit Trump lost in 2020 and his Springfield...thing though cost him any chance of a rout, which is basically required for a VP debate to have significant upballot effects. Still the Republicans probably appreciate getting Vance above Sarah Parin and Aaron Burr and getting the media distracted for another day or two.
ThatOneKrazyKaptain
It can matter in swing states if it comes down to 4 digit margins. Florida in 2000 for example, or New Hampshire in 2016
Fuck that "I've become friends with school shooters" misspeak is gonna be clipped to hell isn't it
I mean, it's a factor in how much of which party they siphon from
I will say this debate is inherently riskier than the last one simply because JD Vance is already at his floor. He's the most unpopular VP or VP candidate in history. Worse than Sarah Palin, worse than Spiro Agnew, worse than Aaron Burr.
He loses, nothing changes, he cannot go lower barring Mark Robinson tier revelations and even then I have doubts. He wins, Walz slips a point or two, Harris by extension maybe 1/4th of a point.
Really anything that can stop the bleed for the Republicans is a win for them, October is critical. Harris rode a 6 week high after getting in at the end of July, spent the first two weeks undoing the pit Biden had dug, then got boosts from the VP pick and convention that lasted until early September. Trump finally had trends on his side and the debate utterly wrecked that. That's finally fading again so they really are seeking a win, a screw up here could be too late to wait out and Vance getting some good press could bury stuff like the Uncle Robinson(no relation) disaster.
The other problem is that he's young, really young, Teddy young. JD Vance is young enough he can fake it for a little bit in a way Trump is just too old to do these days. He's baitable, but not to the level of Trump or even Biden in this environment. Young Narcissists can put on a face for a while in a controlled space like this, 80s Trump did it all the time and I'd argue Vance might be sharper than him.
I don't think it's a bad matchup, Walz is very wholesome and more experienced(and the reverse would be very unideal for the Democrats. Vance would be better at avoiding the massive tangents Harris baited Trump into, meanwhile Walz isn't as high energy or effective on the pursuit against Trump as Harris is) , but he definitely 'looks' and 'sounds' older than he is, especially compared to Harris. So Walz is walking in with that already there.
Despite how close it is the most likely individual scenarios are still sweeps, as a small error one way or the other effectively cleans out. The 4 most likely scenarios are still 'Harris sweeps swing states', 'Trump sweeps swing states', 'Harris sweeps all, but Arizona or Georgia', Trump sweeps all, but Michigan'
This wasn’t meant to be a prediction and moreso a hypothetical because of how much discussion of polling error I hear from both sides. Like, what if the Polls are actually really good and accurate this time? This is what we’d get
This wasn't meant to be a prediction and moreso a hypothetical because of how much discussion of polling error I hear from both sides. Like, what if the Polls are actually really good and accurate this time? This is what we'd get
Hence this is meant to be a hypothetical. As I said, if it's a 2022 repeat Harris sweeps the swing states and if it's a 2020 repeat Trump sweeps them.
(Although given Swift is from PA the art potential is...interesting, to say the least. Which Dragon Ball girl fits her best I gotta do some Biden Blast art)
There have also been periods of American history with basically no swing states and the bulk of the country up for grabs with only a couple of 'safe states' each if that, the 70s and 80s didn't really have swing states, neither did the Depression Era, but I don't think it's trending that way