The vice presidential debate between Republican Senator JD Vance and Democratic Governor Tim Walz took an unexpected turn, revealing stark differences in composure and presentation.
The New York Post reported that in the debate, which CBS News hosted, Vance demonstrated a calm and articulate demeanor, while Walz appeared visibly nervous and made several missteps throughout the evening.
Walz's performance was characterized by fidgeting, frequent note-taking, and darting eyes. His nervous energy was evident from the start when he mistakenly referred to "the expansion of Israel and its proxies" instead of Iran when discussing Middle East policy. This error set the tone for a series of stumbles that would follow.
Perhaps the most memorable moment of the debate came when Walz was confronted about recent reports questioning his claim of being in Hong Kong during the Tiananmen Square massacre in 1989. When pressed for clarification, the Minnesota governor's response was far from polished.
Walz stammered:
Look, I will be the first to tell you I have poured my heart into my community. 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 that those same people elected me to Congress for 12 years.
In contrast to Walz's uneven showing, JD Vance delivered a composed and articulate performance. The Ohio senator's responses were measured and often drew from personal experiences, including his mother's struggle with opioid addiction and his grandmother's financial hardships.
Vance's approach to sensitive topics, such as abortion, was particularly noteworthy. He shared a personal anecdote about someone close to him who had undergone the procedure, using it as a springboard to discuss the Republican ticket's proposals for improving family support and affordability.
Despite the overall genial tone of the debate, there were moments of policy disagreement between the candidates. Vance challenged the Biden-Harris administration's border policies, particularly the use of the CBP One app for asylum and parole applications. He argued that this approach exceeded legal authority and amounted to an open border policy.
Walz, for his part, attempted to highlight the Democratic ticket's policy proposals but often struggled to articulate them clearly. His nervous demeanor and occasional verbal missteps overshadowed his efforts to present a coherent message.
Political commentators and analysts widely viewed Vance as the winner of the debate. Pollster Frank Luntz reported that in a focus group of 14 undecided voters from battleground states, 12 concluded that Vance had won the debate.
Dave Wasserman, senior editor at the Cook Political Report, noted, "Dems are fortunate presidential debates tend to matter a lot more than VP debates."
Other observers pointed out that Walz's limited media engagement leading up to the debate may have contributed to his apparent lack of preparedness. In contrast, Vance had participated in over 60 interviews since becoming Trump's running mate, which likely contributed to his confident performance.
The vice presidential debate, while not typically as influential as the presidential debates, offered voters a clear contrast between the two candidates. Vance's steady and articulate performance stood in stark contrast to Walz's nervous and error-prone showing. The impact of this debate on the overall election remains to be seen. Still, it undoubtedly provided voters with valuable insights into the temperament and preparedness of the potential vice presidents.
