Political Crossfire Forums

The broadcasted confrontation between the two major vice presidency candidates was not a debate. It was 3 people talking over each other; a barroom like audio brawl.

Senator Tim Kaine is unable to shut his mouth while Governor Mike Spence is speaking. He’s demonstrating he can behave no less uncivil than Donald Trump. Both Kaine and Trump are unfit for the offices they’re aspiring to.

Respectfully, Supposn

Mike Spence

All the Dem's have is Trumps name calling and bullying , other then that, they got nothing. Why didn't HRC fix things decades ago? But Pence was correct, the policy of Obama & HRC in the mid east, made isis possible.

What the few minutes that I watched of this pointless VP debate made me think about is how f**k old both of these tickets are. Trump is 70 and Clinton, should she win, will turn 70 during her first year in office. Kaine is 58 and Pence is the "baby" of this election at 57. Both of the major party Presidential nominees AND their running mates are AARP eligible (55 or older).

I was bored on a slow work day and decided to take a quick glance at Wikipedia to see when this last occurred. Good thing it was a slow day, because I ended up wasting a lot more time than I expected.

The answer is 1792. In 1792 the major candidates for President - this was before the 12th Amendment so Vice Presidential candidates didn't exist - were George Washington, John Adams, and George Clinton. All of them were over 55. The closest to being under was John Adams who was 57, and who, on this date in 1792, was several months younger than Mike Pence is today. Also, in case you didn't catch it - I had to f**k go back to before Vice Presidential candidates even f**k existed to find an election where there were no candidates for President or Vice President under 55.

Meanwhile, boomer commentators in the media wring their hands and struggle to fathom how it is that millennials have such little enthusiasm about this race.

This post is irrelevant to anything that happened in the debate last night, but I wasted my time researching it for no particular reason, so I hope you've enjoyed wasting your time reading it.

And oh yeah - bask in this moment shitboomers. This is your death rattle.

You might be surprised how many Gen-exers would shake their head in agreement with you Philly.

While I may not be a millennial, the vast majority of people who work with me are millennials, so I feel like I have a better understanding than most. I'm also not a complete idiot when it comes to the importance of social media and all the respective issues surrounding it in this modern era, and both candidates are so far removed from reality on this front (Trump's twitter rants don't count, any drunk celebrity can do that). Just look at their answers concerning "cyber", they've got no f**k clue. I would kill to see a younger candidate, who can straddle the generations. Obama was pretty decent at it, but he was black, so that didn't work out for some people.

I also think it's important for the vitality of the nation to have a president in office who's not on his death bed. I have no problem with serious cabinet members being old and experienced (might be a good thing), but the president needs some vitality and an upbeat mentality in my opinion. People want to move forward to the next big thing, not rest on our laurels. Except for racists I guess, they want to relive the good old days when white male American was great, who gives a shit about the reality for what the rest of the population dealt with back then, I suppose.