Call it as it was: Pence was a clear winner in the V-P debate

Having watched the vice-presidential debate, I was amazed by Cameron Stewart’s claim there was no clear winner (“VPs come out all civil but tough”, 9/10). Such a rose-coloured assessment of Kamala Harris ignored the fact Democrat-aligned moderator Susan Page, who is writing a biography of Democrat Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, from the start asked questions for which Harris complimented her and that fitted comfortably into Harris’s narrative.

As for being strong on foreign policy, Harris was not asked about Donald Trump being the first President in 50 years not to initiate armed conflict overseas, instead fulfilling promises to bring troops home from Afghanistan, or about Trump being the first President in 30 years to broker peace in the Middle East. Pence seemed to have a host of facts to refute Harris and was a winner with the one-liner that Harris was entitled to her opinion but not to her own facts.

Surely Pence’s response to Harris’s claim that Trump has lost the trade war with China with the comeback that Joe Biden had not engaged in a trade war with China over several decades was a pearler that topped anything Harris had in her armoury. As Greg Sheridan wrote (“Deputy’s win delivers big break for President”, 9/10), Pence’s win in this most important debate was a big break for Trump.

John Bell, Heidelberg Heights, Vic

Rather than perpetuate polarities and fixate on who won or lost in the debate, can I suggest we all won. We had two adults who managed to communicate their respective views. The highlight to me was the response by both to the last question, from a high school student wondering “if our leaders can’t get along, how are the citizens supposed to get along?”

The answers were gentle, kindly and optimistic. It couldn’t happen, of course, but I got to wondering what a Pence/Harris shared leadership package might bring to the US and to the world.

Keith Thomas, Ivanhoe, Vic

Real change

This week in The Australian I read about a school teacher viciously attacked in a remote Aboriginal community. Events like this make it hard to attract teachers to these communities. I also read about Indigenous Health Minister Ken Wyatt’s preference for an Indigenous voice over a treaty. I have not totally dismissed the call for an Indigenous voice to Parliament or the treaty, but have yet to see a compelling argument for either. If someone could explain how a treaty or voice to Parliament will make Aboriginal communities safer for all, then I and many other Australians would be more likely to show our support for these two options.

Anthony Dillon, North Sydney, NSW

The Australian’s editorial (“Albanese’s budget speech blues far from in the pink”, 9/10) asserts Labor “needs to rediscover the power of aspiration and incentive”. This is precisely what Labor is seeking to do with its new childcare policy. The system as it is stymies women’s ambition and locks us out of full-time work. What incentive is there to work a fourth or fifth day per week if we stand to pay more in childcare, tax and HECS than we would earn? Women have plenty of aspiration. What we need is a government that recognises our potential.

Lucie O’Brien, Essendon, Vic

Flying blind

Every day it costs the construction industry literally millions of dollars to comply with COVID rules. On one of the sites it takes two hours for the men to ascend on a 6m by 6m loft to their place of work. Only four people are allowed in the lift at the same time. But here I am flying from Brisbane to Hamilton Island on a full aeroplane. Everyone jammed in barely 400mm apart. So tell me, Premier Palaszczuk, how does that work?

Bill Henderson, Brisbane, Qld