It has only been minutes since the 2024 Vice Presidential Debate between Senator JD Vance and Tim Walz ended, and to put it lightly, this was one of the most interesting debates. This article will go over some of the first impressions of the debate.
The Good
Compared to the 2020 Debates, and to the recent Trump V.S. Harris debates, the debate between Vance and Walz was without a doubt, far more civil. The debate began with both candidates shaking each others hands, throughout the debate they agreed on a number of issues, and afterwards introduced their wives to each other. As opposed to other debates in which candidates gave personal attacks, argued over trivial topics such as golf, Vance and Walz focused on policy with little to no insults. Ed O’Keefe, senior White House and Political Correspondent with CBS News made the remark “You essentially have these two Midwestern dads cracking a beer in the middle of the street and talking about some of their differences and similarities. In many ways, that’s what the country has been saying they want more of.” Mr. O’Keefe’s words are correct, as many Americans on both sides of the political spectrum have praised Vance and Walz for such an outstanding debate.
The Bad
Despite both Vance and Walz receiving praise for their civility, there was a moment in which the moderators of the debate muted both candidates after Vance claimed that a large portion of immigrants in Springfield, Ohio were in the United States illegally. Moderator Margaret Brennan stated “Just to clarify for our viewers, Springfield, Ohio, does have a large number of Haitian migrants, who have legal status,” prompting Vance to respond to Brennan by saying that the moderators stated they would not fact-check the candidates. This then ignited a brief argument between Walz and Vance that resulted in both candidates having their mics muted for speaking over the moderators. Apart from this however, there were little to no times in which the candidates acted in a non-civil manner, at least relative to a number of debates involving Donald Trump.
The Ugly
The good thing is that the debate was civil, the bad thing is that there was a brief tense moment, yet concerning the ugly, one particular aspect sticks out like a sore thumb. Relevant in all debates this year, has been the fact that all candidates on all sides have been reluctant to give proper answers to the moderators questions. When asked by Walz on whether or not he will accept that Trump lost in 2020, Vance said “Tim, I’m focused on the future, did Kamala Harris censor Americans from speaking their mind in the wake of the 2020 Covid situation?”, this was called out by Walz remarking “That is a damming non-answer.” Walz too dodged questions, notably when asked by the moderators about how he claimed he was in Hong Kong during the Tiananmen Square Massacre in July of 1989, however records show that he did not travel to Asia until August of that year. He instead gave a quick recap of his life, reiterated the fact he is not perfect, yet at no point addressed the moderator’s question.
The Result?
Now for the main question, who won? In the first half of the debate, Walz’s performance was rather subpar. It is quite clear that he came in severely underestimating Vance, only to have his expectations be completely subverted. His rather nervous looking facial expressions did not help him either. Walz also had a massive fumble in which he stated he had “become friends with school shooters.” Obviously, this is just a slip-up, yet when there are millions watching, whether or not it was intentional does not matter, what matters is that it was said. Despite his initial shortcomings, in the second half of the debate, Walz performed much better, giving clear examples regarding topics such as abortion, and calling out Vance on not answering questions and instead dodging them.
For Vance, this debate without a doubt helps him PR-wise. Since he was first selected to be Trump’s running mate, Vance had gained much negative attention for past comments regarding Trump, his “childless cat ladies” comment, a rumor regarding a couch, and others. However, here he displayed himself as being a civil and respectful man who is willing to agree with his opponent on certain issues, and wishes the best for the United States. Even those on the opposite side, believe that this debate was favorable to Vance’s image.
By and large, it appears that this debate has no clear victor, as both candidates performed well, and both had their shortcomings. Whether or not this debate will have a major impact on the choices of voters in November, remains to be seen.
