One of These is Not Like the Others

 ASSERTION regarding Vance ducking as to whether the 2020 presidential election was legitimate. 

Avoiding an answer to one question when both did that several times is not really an indication of anything other than standard politics.

RESPONSE Substitute him ducking the question as to whether or not the 2nd Amendment should be repealed (merely a DIFFERENT PART* of the Constitution than the part Walz asked about) and it is obvious that both the 2nd Amendment hypothetical and the actual question Walz (and the moderator) asked regarding Article II, Section 1 are FUNDAMENTAL TO THE RULE OF LAW.

Vance and Walz can duck questions all they want about unpopular policies they support or are stuck with but THIS is not a question as to whether someone cheated at poker: the courts and Trump's own Attorney General said the game was fair.

This is someone showing their cards and then announcing they are going to ignore the Constitutional referees and make up their OWN process of determining the allocation of Electoral Votes.

You would see that IN A HEARTBEAT if it was the 2nd Amendment hypothetical.

You SHOULD see it through Trump's challenge to Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution.

* See SCOTUS, "CHIAFALO ET AL. v. WASHINGTON" at 19-465 Chiafalo v. Washington (07-06-2020)