Let’s start by saying that vice presidential debates generally don’t swing elections. But the 90-minute tilt between Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio) and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz was a throwback to debates of yesteryear, where two pols with Capitol Hill experience gently traded statistic-laced barbs.
Vance and Walz didn’t talk over each other — for the most part. They didn’t talk about immigrants eating pets. They did some “Midwest nice,” especially Walz. They talked about their humble middle-class roots. The pair repeatedly said that they agreed with each other on basic policy points.
Overall, Vance probably came out of this ahead — to the extent it matters. Vance, the Yale Law graduate who has only been in public office for two years, had more to gain, and he got there. They both had strong moments, and they both stumbled.
It wasn’t like this year’s presidential debates, where the winners were clear-cut. Vance, whose approval ratings are pretty poor, was polished and reasonable, even if you didn’t agree with his positions. Walz appeared really nervous at the beginning of the debate, but he steadied himself throughout the event.
The sharpest split between Vance and Walz came over Jan. 6, and this occurred near the very end of the debate.
Vance attempted to turn the topic into Vice President Kamala Harris trying to censor speech online, adding that he is “focused on the future.” Walz pushed back very hard, noting the violent nature of the Capitol riot inspired by former President Donald Trump that day. Walz called it a “damning non-answer.”
Yet the two men treated each other with respect overall, something we haven’t seen in a national debate in what seems like eons. Definitely pre-Trump era stuff.
After a spirited back and forth over immigration policy, Walz said, “You’re hearing a lot of stuff back and forth, and it’s good. It’s healthy.” Vance allowed that many of Harris’ policies “sound pretty good,” before wondering why she didn’t enact them during the last three-and-a-half years. At another point, Walz said he agreed with Vance’s assessment of how American manufacturing jobs were shipped overseas.
It was like watching a sepia-toned debate out of the 1990s. Lots of talk about policy and legislative politics. Yes! Let’s dig in.
Israel and Iran. The opening question was pretty direct: Would you support an Israeli strike on Iran in response to Tehran’s missile attack on Tuesday? President Joe Biden, Harris and top congressional leaders could face this crisis very soon.
Neither Walz nor Vance actually answered the question. While Vance said he’d leave that decision up to Israel, Walz didn’t really address it at all.
More broadly, there was shockingly little examination of Vance’s foreign policy views, which have been a defining feature of his short Senate tenure, especially when it comes to Ukraine. There were zero questions about the war in Ukraine.
The border and immigration. As expected, border security and immigration were central focuses of the debate. Walz zeroed in on the bipartisan Senate border bill that Trump and Speaker Mike Johnson helped torpedo earlier this year. This has become a go-to retort by Democrats in down-ballot races when they’re confronted over the crisis at the U.S-Mexico border, a real political vulnerability for their party.
Walz also touched on Trump’s immigration rhetoric and border wall promises dating back to 2015, making the argument quite effectively that Trump thrives when the border is in crisis because it helps him politically. Walz hit Vance over his rhetoric about Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio. Like many of Walz’s answers, it was rehearsed. But it worked.
In turn, Vance repeatedly blamed undocumented immigrants for an array of problems facing the country — housing, inflation, guns and crimes. He said Harris is now trying to copy many of Trump’s policies on the border because the current administration has failed.
Vance even gave Walz credit at one point, saying: “I think you want to solve this problem, but I don’t think that Kamala Harris does.”
Vance on abortion. If there was a jaw-dropping moment of the night, it was Vance’s answer on abortion. Vance acknowledged that there are a lot of Americans who don’t agree with what he’s said on the issue.
Then Vance flatly declared that Americans don’t trust Republicans when it comes to abortion. This is something you hear from Democrats on the campaign trail constantly. And it’s something you never — and we mean never — hear from elected Republicans in the Capitol.
“We’ve got to do so much better of a job at earning the American people’s trust back on this issue, where they frankly just don’t trust us,” Vance said.
The China flub. Walz was clearly unprepared for perhaps the most predictable question of the night: Why did the Minnesota governor say he was in Tiananmen Square in June 1989 when he wasn’t? Walz stumbled badly, saying that he was proud of his service in Congress and as a soldier.
Pressed further, Walz seemed frozen, saying, “I was in Hong Kong and China during the democracy protest. Went in, and from that, I learned a lot.”
