In this episode of “You Can’t Make It Up, CNN Already”…
Despite JD Vance’s apparent loss to the bumbling Tim Walz in Tuesday’s vice presidential debate, leave it to CNN to find a very lean silver lining behind a very obscure cloud.
And that was before the debate even began.
CNN’s rank-and-file Democratic contributors absurdly argued that it would actually be a bad thing for Vance to wipe the floor with the ill-prepared, regularly lying governor of Minnesota Vance. No, really.
Irrational rationalization at its best? Naturally. After all, the self-proclaimed “Most Trusted Name in News™” always manages to entertain the sensible and objective among us.
READ ALSO:
Tim Walz may have just ended the Harris campaign with approval and bizarre “school shooter” comment
HOT TAKES: Democrats and media seethe as Republicans cheer after Vance dominates vice presidential debate
Kicking off the festivities was veteran Democratic hack and CNN regular David Axelrod.
I think he was basically hired to be Donald Trump’s designated hitter. Donald Trump is a casting director, and he was convinced that he would be good for television, and this debate is obviously the most significant television appearance there is.
And you know, he comes in, we all know he worked with (CNN Democrat contributor) Van Jones, like these Yale-educated lawyers are very skilled –
CNN’s only conservative contributor, Scott Jennings, interrupted Axelrod and took a edged swipe at Tim Walz.
Easy, simple! You’ll trigger Walz, you keep talking about Yale. He hates this Yale.
Axelrod remained stubborn.
But you know, they have very different personalities. Vance is, you know, he’s a little bit predatory and waltzing on this debate platform, his strength is his warmth and his everydayness. It’s a bit like a Labrador versus a coyote. And the question is, people are cheering for the Labrador, but can he get enough of a beating to keep the coyote away from him?
Oops. Despite the Democratic Party’s continued attempts to portray the Ohio senator as a right-wing attack dog, Vance could not have been more polite and gentlemanly. No matter for CNN.
Jones admitted that Vance was arduous to discuss, but not for the reasons that every objective observer saw at the event, where he was nippy, in control of the facts, and had a polite but mighty grip on Walz (emphasis , mine)
I think it’s hazardous to discuss JD Vance. First, you don’t know which JD Vance you’re going to get. He’s such a fraud that he could either be the wrong Appalachia guy, or he could be the type of idiot he was to get a job with Donald Trump.
If you have to do it Someone with high IQ, low integrity, high IQ and low empathyhigh IQ but really no – willing to hurt Haitian children to get ahead, willing to change his entire personality to get a position with Donald Trump, that is a hazardous person for a good man to discuss; Someone who is actually constrained by facts, who is constrained by their desire to be a unifier.
So, I think soIt’s going to be a tough night for Coach Walz to show that good guys can win against people with low integrity like him.
Where should I start?
It was clearly JD Vance who was in control of the facts, even as he correctly fact-checked CBS debate moderator Margaret Brennan after her incorrect “checked” him on the Haitians in Springfield, Ohio.
READ MORE:
WATCH: JD Vance flattens smug fact-checking CBS News mods in epic Springfield-themed fashion
CNN host Anderson Cooper even asked Axelrod and Jones ahead of the debate whether they would “try to lower expectations” for Waltz. Both Simps stated that this was not the case – which it was Exactly what they did and looked like idiots.
