Should American voters demand two more debates where the VP candidate debates the opposing party’s presidential candidate (2 debates, 2 match ups)?

[blueonblack22]

Not attacking either political side when it comes to this idea. This is an open ended non-partisan question.

Anyway I would absolutely love to see JD Vance debate Kamala Harris and Tim Walz debate Donald Trump.

This would be a very badly needed and informative vantage point for American voters to better analyze VPs/presidential candidates. Reason being it would be much more challenging for all the candidates to prepare for their opponents which is a good thing. It would force candidates to think fast on the spot. Get the truth out.

The VP would likely be the aggressor given they can criticize the presidential candidate given they are the ultimate decision makers when it comes to policy. Also the VP would have to defend their own running mates with the opposing presidential candidate’s criticism. It would be like a hostile & unpredictable interview but not necessarily a fist fight.

It would also give more attention and prominence to the VP’s role, abilities and personality. The VP is after all just one gun shot, heart attack, etc. from being the president of the United States.

If both sides could agree to two debates (and maybe do a coin toss on which match up goes first) it be so much better for the American voter. Because it would expose more strengths and weakness of all the candidates. Give a much better picture of what the American voter is really buying.

Anyway I posted this as a non-partisan question. Please avoid attacking Trump, Kamala, etc right off the bat. However I would love to see this and I imagine so would most other people.

Yes

No

Updates

1 y

I know this would never really happen. But seriously I would love to see it. Sure the democrats would cry “misogyny” on Vance debating Kamala. But they would also get to see Walz debate Trump.

[exitseven]

Unless each candidate can choose the venue and moderators for one of the debates, I say forget about it. Trump will get more milage out of doing some Town Hall style question and answer sessions to get his message out to the public. Harris does not have the ability to work off script.

[blueonblack22]

Yeah it would never happen. Wishful thinking. It would be extremely interesting though.

[exitseven]

Thanks for the MHO😎

[ManInChains]

If Vance were to debate Harris the misogynistic comments towards Vance would ramp up even more than they already are.

[blueonblack22]

Yeah but Vance has incredible self discipline. He proved it when he debated Walz. And the moment he (correctly) fact checked the fact checkers was absolutely glorious.

Hey would absolutely destroy Kamala. Wreck her with hard logic and facts.

[ManInChains]

I would love to see him do that and put the feminist bitch in her place like he did with the female moderators

[blueonblack22]

This moment is we absolutely glorious. www.wsj.com/.../...82D-431E-AB60-A6F06C6BAE1E.html

And Vance did it without losing his cool. Not missing a beat. Masterfully transitioned through his thought process. He even had genuine friendly/respectful moments with the opposition but he never let up on the bullshit.

And I was SO GLAD when he called out the disgusting censorship the democrats are doing.

[Caroline91]

Really interesting concept. I haven't decided what I think about your proposal yet since it's never been done. I'm thinking about it, but I do see your point. I agree the VP pick is more important than a lot of people give credit for.

[blueonblack22]

I admit it’s wishful thinking. But if both party supporters demanded it I would love it.

I confess I would love to see Vance completely wreck Kamala. She might know how to push Trump’s buttons but Vance is way too smart and self disciplined for that.

But democrats could get to see Walz tear into Trump as well. He would be a lot nastier then Kamala.

Both sides would get their shot.

[Anonymous]

Kamala lies and the moderators don't call her on it

[blueonblack22]

She would get absolutely destroyed by JD Vance in a debate. Hands down.

Not even the moderators can stop Vance in a debate. He effectively and accurately fact checked the fact checkers. This moment was beautiful.

www.wsj.com/.../...82D-431E-AB60-A6F06C6BAE1E.html

[Opinion Owner]

She said that there are zero us military personnel deployed in any war zones. That's a lie. The vice president should know that

[blueonblack22]

And her sorority sister moderator Linsey Davis would never fact check her on anything. This is a TRUE FACT that she was indeed her sorority sister.

Seriously why the hell did Trump ever agree to this debate? The good news is the debate barely hurt him in the polls. But it was a huge opportunity loss to slam Kamala. Especially given she’s literally dodged every tough interview possible.

But Trump SHOULD agree to another debate. Pick one outright conservative moderator and one outright liberal moderator. Hell have Joe Rogan be a moderator.

www.snopes.com/.../

[ManInChains]

Why don't they do a debate with both Trump and Vance vs both Harris and Walz instead of it being just 1 on 1? I'm sure they could find a way to do it like that.

[blueonblack22]

@ManInChains sounds interesting but it would be too many people. That’s more for the primaries.

[andreasderjuengere]

All this Americanesian way of getting elections under way is just one other entertainment nonsense show.

The candidates' positions are made clear long enough - and some additional babble will just be a repetition of already known ideas.

[blueonblack22]

“ The candidates' positions are made clear long enough”. No there not. Kamala Harris has ducked almost all hostile interviews and tough questions. She’s been extremely vague and flip flopping on policy. Vance wouldn’t let her get away with that.

[andreasderjuengere]

If that's the impression - don't vote for her.

[blueonblack22]

Of course I’m not voting for her. But I can’t believe how many stupid Americans there are out there who vote on “feelings” and not policy.

[Dargil]

Voters don't get to demand debates. Rules should be changed where debaters get to choose moderators and a unbiased public venue. All three debates were strongly Democrat biased. That won't happen again.

[blueonblack22]

Yes your right about voters not getting to demand debates. Also very right about the disgustingly bias moderators.

I loved it when Vance fact checked the fact checked on the last debate.

It was a perfect well deserved punch in the face the bias leftist journalists completely had coming. Vance isn’t stupid.

[msc545]

No all you're going to get. If you do, this is the result of a lot of work by speech writers that you've never heard of and never will hear of.

[blueonblack22]

It will never happen. But the idea is to get the more authoring versions of these candidates but creating a scenario that’s tougher to prepare for.