Not really.  I don't even feel compelled to come up with my own talking points before being accused of repeating others'.

  I think both debaters had more appeal than they've come across in the past.  But I think people are starved for that sense of all people doing things the way things need to be done.  Of course speaking sanely, coherently, calmly has a baseline appeal.  And people are motivated differently.  Some people get jazzed by debate, others by rally.  Political campaigning isn't doing the job of being president.

  Both debaters are coming from bogs.  Both debaters were able to hold strong in an issue-oriented environment although such debates by nature sort of tour guide more than getting philosophical or really matching up track record to real world.  More like a brochure.

  Is each representing party?  That's a tough question because both parties are so lack-luster and seemingly far, far away from being a party to accomplish anything.

  I heard the word disparaging quite a few times and could almost hear my mom telling me that people can only disparage you if you let them, or, quit blaming others for that state of mind if that's your state of mind.  But I think the debate showed that both candidates are more tough than not.  

  It seemed like the issues that were brought up didn't assume party-stance.  One candidate did already have four years worth of our lives to get the position of VP onto the perfectly presentable resume.  I appreciate others' work and personal development, especially as professionals.  I just think the Democrats did what they could.  Partly I'm saying that because a list of damages isn't going to help us cut our losses and move on.  Beating the dead horse of Biden-style politics is like finding some stale pancake mix at the food pantry and serving that to the guests.

  I think the tail end of Scranton goes to D.C. was less motivating than an Alkaseltzer.  All people everywhere are being forced to entangle with these guys' Low T.  But female T doesn't do it for me either...kind of scary.

  There's a lot of ways that Americans rich and poor are just American.  In a really profound way decency is at our core.  To be successful is something we share but not by example for example.  When the debate was HC v DT both candidates were more electrified with all that generation's politics.  This debate was more basic and asking a self-sufficient audience to remember the exercise where beliefs matched up to parties?!  We're not aliens.

  Not sure that's going to solve anything but, I think we're seeing us in a different place from needing a ring leader.  So there's progress coming from all over, we're not a circus or a cartel, we're the Americans.  Maybe at the bottom of a staircase but not dead yet.

  Another common element underlying a lot of bitching and moaning and quick-reacts is the need to find solution.  In that we've gone sometimes around the roadblock.  When a president alienates, we go about our business as ourselves without the president's support.  We've used the tools in the political toolbox.  We've used our citizen know-how.  We've also seen how that fails in other places not the same.  We've even used those tools to vent too-stuck-together-gridlock.  And we've spent a lot of time fighting tool to tool.  That's what they are saying in the buzzword weaponization.

  I know some of us have felt the crush of political party as weapon.  There is no shortage of fear(?) that give an abuser another chance and look what happens.  Governments can and do abuse.  But governments are necessary in the existing pantheon of nations.  The two-party system may be played out, like it served it's purpose to funnel the masses, but as bioligical gender doesn't go away because it's trendy to be both or more practical to be a capable individual, it's a basic organization.

  We are in a different place but we are who we've been.  We're in a different place with a large amount of us aging into older, and there is a large amount of us just getting started.  We're not just white guys.  It's fun to imagine us as a 1940's style football team, but we're not that.  It was that sort of All American, all white guy, that fashioned and maintained a lot of our stability though.  And challenges to that fortess, any challenges including different-looking and different-thinking/being were largely canon and musketed.  And that's why Bill De-Blas-io fit the bill.  Not a football player yet all the new and different-seeming wasn't quite there to be the body tapping the microphone and receiving another tour of duty as "the winner".  In some ways we've been so 1950's dance.  And that does preserve the basics of birth and life and dying, but

  There's action that needs to be taken as a nation in an also-happening world.  We can't do much without making money.  Making money is no good if all the money pays down debt, gets taken away, gets lost, gets spent on stuff we may or may not have beliefs about.  That's why they say, right now, we are "coming from behind" and this phase of not dead yet is about the economy.

  We've learned again and again that the economy is not repaired by Republicans taking over and waving a wand.  Or Republicans taking over and eliminating all the others on the planet.  Though representatives of each party get monsterized (just like they get kingified/reified) in reality political party can only ever set tone and make suggestions without moving into weaponization.  Even with tough issues like abortion...or, separating who pays for the abortion from an automatic government paying for the abortion...laws are used as guardrail.  Someone who strongly believes one thing or the other about the issue and the issue's overlap with other issues may not feel supported by political party when it's basically about money, but disentangling the money pot before one group or the other claims the money pot really is "social justice".  

  We have to seriously think about this sort of thing mid-stream.  Here we did put a lot of money into wars, ongoing, "hot wars", which move along and enmesh more and more of our time, energy, resources, and loved ones.  Each payment on anything leads to next decision and next decision.  At this point in history war has already become a well-established mechanism so putting money into that money pot very quickly escalates the values involved.  That's what they mean by lesser warring could be greater warring.  Or, we stop that.  We stop contributing.

  That, sadly, realistically, is how to move forward from a relationship that's not best.  A first phase--stop contributing.  It can be starkly different and you may feel "alone" but still in a world of people.  Kind of like being on a sidewalk and war all around.

  Just can't get out of impact zone