정책 토론 하이라이트: 이민, 낙태, 신뢰 문제

### 정책 관련 토론의 주요 내용: 이민, 낙태 등
* 🎤 이번 토론회에서는 **이민, 낙태, 대외 관계, 주택, 세금 등 다양한 정책**이 다뤄져 정책 애호가들에게 의미 있는 행사였습니다.
* 🏠 특히 **"수백만 명의 불법 이민자"의 입국을 허용**한 카말라 해리스를 비난하는 데 초점을 맞춰 이민이 주택 가격에 미치는 영향에 대한 지적이 제기되었습니다.
* 👩 낙태에 대한 토론에서는 **여성의 건강 관리에 대한 우려**와 **계획되지 않은 임신이 여성의 삶과 미래에 미치는 영향**에 대해 집중적으로 논의했습니다.
* 💬 밴스 의원은 낮은 지지율에도 불구하고 **이미지를 부드럽게 다듬고 중산층 문제를 효과적으로 해결**한 것으로 유명합니다.
* 🚨 이 토론에서는 **범죄 이민자를 추방하고 미국인 근로자의 임금을 보호하는 방안**과 함께 **불법 이민에 대한 논의**도 이루어졌습니다.
* 📊 밴스 주지사는 태양광 패널 생산과 같은 지역 현안에 대해 논의하면서 기반을 잡았지만, **특히 외교 정책에서 월 주지사의 초기 불편한 모습**과는 대조적인 모습을 보였습니다.
* 🗳 2020년 선거 결과에 대한 후보자들의 질문이 이어지면서 **선거의 공정성과 민주적 절차에 대한 지속적인 긴장**이 부각되는 중요한 순간이 있었습니다.
* 🤝 서로의 차이에도 불구하고 토론을 통해 **후보들 간에 놀라울 정도로 많은 합의점**을 발견할 수 있었고, 이를 통해 미국 대중에게 효과적으로 자신을 알릴 수 있었습니다.

밴스 상원의원은 정책 중심의 토론에서 효과적으로 자신의 이미지를 부드럽게 바꾸고 중산층 미국인들과 소통했습니다.

the stage is set. Governor, Senator, thank you for joining us. This debate was policy-rich: immigration policy, abortion policy, foreign policy, housing policy, tax policy. If you're a policy person, this was your debate. First of all, Tim just said something that I agree with. We don't want to blame immigrants for higher housing prices, but we do want to blame Kamala Harris for letting in millions of illegal aliens into this country, which does drive up costs. We're pro-freedom to make your own choice. We know what the implications are: women having miscarriages, women not getting the care, physicians feeling like they may be prosecuted for providing that care. A lot of those same economists attacked Donald Trump's plans, and they have PhDs, but they don't have common sense, and they don't have wisdom. Both vice presidential candidates were mostly civil with each other, but they did focus their attacks on the presidential candidates, Harrison Trump. We have a lot to get to. I believe Senator Vance wants to solve this, but by

standing with Donald Trump and not working together to find a solution. It becomes a talking point. I agree with you. I think you want to solve this problem, but I don't think that Kamala Harris does. Senator Vance came into this debate with an underwater approval rating. More Americans don't like him than do like him. He did a really effective job of softening his image, of speaking right to Americans, of talking about middle-class Americans and the issues they face. And in that respect, he had a very good debate. We've got to do a better job at winning back people's trust. So many young women would love to have families. So many young women also see an unplanned pregnancy as something that's going to destroy their livelihood, destroy their education, destroy their relationships. And we have got to earn people's trust back. Vance went out of his way to make Trump's bumper sticker policies seem more digestible to the American people. So we've got 20-25 million illegal aliens who are here in the country. What do we do with them? I

think the first thing that we do is we start with the criminal migrants. About a million of those people have committed some form of crime in addition to crossing the border illegally. I think you start with deportations on those folks, and then I think you make it harder for illegal aliens to undercut the wages of American workers. Vance's performance was very polished. He's a very good public speaker. He's, you know, this is what he does best. And W at times seemed very folksy. He misspoke on several occasions. His performance could be a little bit halting at times and uneven. I've tried to do the best I can, but I've not been perfect, and I'm a knucklehead at times, but it's always been about. Governor Wall seemed the most uncomfortable when the debate began because it began with the question about foreign policy, which is not his strong suit. Iran or Israel's ability to be able to defend itself is absolutely fundamental. I think he really felt incredibly comfortable when he was

talking about Minnesota, we should be making more of those solar panels here in the United States of America. We in Minnesota passed a Paid Family Medical Leave. In Minnesota, we've enacted enhanced red flag laws, enhanced background checks. One of Walz's strongest moments of the debate came at the end when Senator Vance was asked whether, if he was vice president for Trump in the first term, if he would have done what Vice President Pence did, which was to certify the election results. This was a threat to our democracy in a way that we had not seen, and it manifested itself because of Donald Trump's inability to say he is still saying he didn't lose the election. I would just ask that, did he lose the 2020 election? Tim, I'm focused on the future. Did Kamala Harris censor Americans from speaking their mind in the wake of the 2020 COVID situation? That is a damning non-answer. This debate had many differences of opinion, but it was striking how many times they agreed with

each other. Much of what the senator said right there, I'm in agreement with him on this. And I think that Governor Walz and I actually probably agree that we need to do better on this. And I think that might be one of the things this debate is remembered for, because neither of these candidates were very well known. It did offer a big opportunity for both of them to reintroduce themselves to America. Sh [Music]

Vance vs. Walz Highlights: VP Candidates Spar in Policy-Heavy Debate | WSJ

The Wall Street Journal takes you inside carefully selected stories and events in a visually captivating way so you can dig deeper into the news and insights that matter to you. 

The Wall Street Journal

토론에서는 이민, 낙태, 대외 관계, 주택, 세금 등 다양한 정책이 다뤄졌습니다.

후보들은 불법 이민과 주택 비용에 미치는 영향에 대해 카말라 해리스 후보를 비난하는 데 집중했습니다.

밴스 상원의원은 자신의 이미지를 부드럽게 하고 중산층 미국인들과 소통하는 동시에 계획되지 않은 임신에 직면한 젊은 여성들로부터 신뢰를 얻어야 하는 과제를 해결하고자 했습니다.

범죄 이민자 문제 해결 및 토론 공연

불법으로 국경을 넘은 범죄 이민자를 추방하는 데 초점을 맞추고 있습니다.

밴스 후보는 세련된 대중 연설가인 반면, W 후보는 좀 더 민중적이고 고르지 못한 연설을 펼칩니다.

월 주지사는 외교 정책 관련 질문에 어려움을 겪지만 토론이 진행되면서 점점 편안해집니다.

미네소타의 진보적 정책과 정치적 논쟁

미네소타는 태양광 패널 생산량을 늘리는 데 주력하고 있으며 유급 가족 의료 휴가 정책을 통과시켰습니다.

또한 미네소타주는 강화된 적기 경보법과 신원 조회를 제정했습니다.

토론에서는 트럼프의 선거 패배와 코로나19 팬데믹 기간 동안 카말라 해리스가 취한 행동에 대한 서로 다른 의견이 부각되었으며, 후보자들은 다양한 이슈에 대해 동의하는 경우가 많았습니다.

연사는 상원의원의 지적에 동의하며 그와 왈츠 주지사가 개선이라는 공통의 목표를 공유하고 있다고 믿습니다.

이 토론은 후보자들이 대중에게 자신을 다시 소개할 수 있는 중요한 기회를 제공합니다.

발표자는 개선에 대한 이러한 공통된 초점이 토론에서 기억에 남을 만한 측면이 될 수 있다고 제안합니다.