So what you’re saying is that you saw the link was Newsweek, and then decided to read it anyway, instead of dismissing anything in it as potentially non-credible.
That’d be like if someone lied to you their whole life, but you believe them this time because they’re citing DailyMail.
I don’t trust Newsweek, you probably shouldn’t either. However, with that being said… if the debate would have gone differently, and let’s just say Joe had a bad sore throat instead of “a cold,” and Joe went up there and said nothing at all, he’d still have my vote in this election. Honestly, I think if Joe would have said nothing, and just let Trump lie, that would have been better than how it went.
He appeared as weak, and a bit incoherent up there. He resorted to name calling on multiple occasions.
Trump lied about 90% of the things he said. Trump sounded better, and didn’t really take the cheap shots at Biden that we expected.
There was nothing about that debate that would have swayed “undecided voters” (who’s that by the way) to vote FOR Biden as a result of the debate. The number of lies coming from Trump may have persuaded some people to vote against him however.
Her record as DA is problematic for a lot of people. She was labeling herself as a progressive, but then behaved as a conservative. Fought to keep a lot of people in prison for minor offenses, fought to keep the death penalty, etc. While doing that, she had a book out about criminal justice reform… and went against her own advice. Pretty much a lap-dog for conservative criminal justice policy. Overall, blatantly hypocritical to anyone that was paying attention.
You’re not wrong but you’re not providing any solutions either (but I won’t blame you - there aren’t any); several states have closed primaries that disallow 3rd party candidates.
I watched the whole thing even though I knew it was done within the first 4 minutes. I hope to be able to vote for whichever democrat replaces Biden as the nominee.