In general I agree with your comment although I don't think the 'dance' was pathetic, just wishy washy. JD did not push hard enough on MN law as you stated and could have scored a few more points if he had. What both Trump and JD are missing, imo, is the 'gotcha' on abortion. I would have loved to see JD say, 'VP Harris and Gov Walz constantly talk about a woman's rights and healthcare when talking about abortion. What about the baby's rights and healthcare? When does the baby begin to have rights? In MN, CA, CO (and maybe others I don't know), the baby has NO rights until after birth. Yet, in every one of those states, an unborn fetus whose pregnant mother is murdered can be considered as a SECOND life when charging the murderer. And, each one of those states define when that fetus is considered a second life differently just like each state can have its own abortion laws. How can your state, Gov Walz, and others say that it's OK for a mother to kill her unborn child in the 30th or 35th week but a murderer can be convicted of killing that same unborn child in week 22?' Most people who are adamant about preserving abortion rights have never thought about this side of the issue. Some may say, 'It's totally different'. To which JD (or I) would reply, 'Not to the baby'. To me as a logically thinking individual, it makes zero sense that a state would define a fetus as a 2nd life when murdered but not a life at all when being aborted. If more people would actually consider this inconsistency, I believe there could be a reasonable limit set on unrestricted abortions. Politically, a huge majority are against late term abortions. Capitalize on that overwhelming majority's opinion and nail Harris/Walz down on when, exactly, the definition of 'late term' should begin?