Well, howdy there internet people, it's Bell again. So today we're going to talk about

the debate between walls and Vance. We're going to start by reading a few messages

from y'all,

because I think it might be enlightening to those who didn't watch the debate.

The first, why are they being so boring?

The next. I watched the first hour. Did it ever get more interesting?

Another. Snooze Fest, I literally fell asleep. Next, why are they being so nice to each other? This isn't what I expected.

Then, Vance isn't nearly as repulsive as Trump. His ideas are trash and he lies about stats, but he's a Republican, so whatever.

I really expected him to be more aggressive.

And finally, I want to claw my eyes out of my effing head.

If I hear them agree one more time, I'll turn it off.

So there you go. That's the viewer review of the debate. And that's about right. It was a relatively

cordial discussion and debate over policy talking points. Not exactly a policy debate, but closer to that than anything we've seen in

recent years. It looks like Vance brought his A game and tried to reset Trump's

campaign for him.

Walls didn't get steamrolled and held his own against an opponent

who was widely expected to get a substantial upper hand.

It was, in fact fact kind of boring. It was in fact relatively

cordial. Debates are supposed to be like that. The reason many have a skewed view of what these events are like is

due to one man, Trump. Outlandish false statements, personal attacks, denigrating various demographics of Americans, and the country

as a whole isn't the norm.

It's weird.

...