The thing about vice presidential debates is that you usually only remember them when someone is really in trouble. Already have Dan Quayle comparing himself to John F. Kennedy, which made Lloyd Bentsen the most famous person of all time. More recently, there has been Sarah Palin is, well, Sarah Palin. These blunders still live on in political memory because the running mates in question failed to do their job. frequent Their main request in these undercard bouts: to accurately reflect the nominee’s judgment.
But, of course, there’s nothing about the race you call it often. On the one hand, you have Donald Trump—not only a convicted criminal and an ambitious dictator who tried to overthrow democracy but also an increasingly debilitated 78-year-old man whose running mate would inherit the mantle his movement, at least in theory. On the other side is the Vice President Kamala Harriswho rose to the top of the rankings just two and a half months ago and is now trying to maintain Democratic enthusiasm that has waned under Joe Biden while also convincing the handful of swing voters who will decide the election that her campaign offers more than just good vibes.
Will J.D. Vance And Tim Walz‘S Tuesday night debate Did the performance help their respective candidate’s cause?
Vance is more articulate than his boss—a low bar to handle—and has tried to appear more like a traditional politician than a right-wing 4chan thread. He tones down the excessive rhetoric, disguises the most unacceptable and destructive MAGA policies with layers of euphemism, and seems at ease on stage. He clearly presented Trump’s case with the skill—and passion—of a kid in a debate club eager for attention. In contrast, Walz appeared nervous and uncomfortable in the debate format and struggled at times, although he argued more forcefully on a range of issues – especially on “volatile leadership”. ” by Trump, as he stated in the first question. overnight, about escalating hostilities in the Middle East. But neither candidate can do much to change the dynamics of this race.
It should have been like that. Vance was a quicker debater than Walz, but his performance was fundamentally dishonest: He misled viewers about his own performance, he outright lied about his performance. Trump and trying to soften the sharp edges of the MAGA agenda. “I was wrong about Donald Trump,” he said at one point, explaining why he quit describes the former president as “America’s Hitler” to work for this guy. (At one point, he even claimed Trump had “saved” Obamacare—the health care plan Trump clearly seeks to destroy.) Walz also had his own stumbles; his explanation for why he said he was in Hong Kong during the Tiananmen Square protests when clearly he doesn’tfor example, madly longing. “Sometimes I’m a fool,” the Minnesota governor said. But the facts, when it comes to policy, tend to side with Walz — which is perhaps why Vance, in a rare moment of apparent frustration during Tuesday’s debate, pushed back operators Norah O’Donnell And Margaret Brennan when faced with the reality that most of the Haitians in Springfield, Ohio whom he demonized were in the country legally.
“The rule is you don’t fact check,” Vance countered.
Confusion aside, the viciousness of Vance’s politics has been clear, especially on immigration — where he may have discouraged memes about Haitian migrants from eating cat meat, as he does when he’s not on prime-time televisionbut still sees the newly arrived Americans as an existential threat to those already here: “The people I worry about most in Springfield,” Vance said, “are the American citizens whose lives have been ruined by Kamala Harris’ open borders.”
By comparison, it is a more substantive debate than debate Final—in no small part because Donald Trump was not present at one of the podiums. It included a question about climate change, which the recent fierce debate did not have. Walz correctly noted that Trump has called global warming a “hoax” and even suggested he could profit from it. Vance deflected, saying he and Trump support “clean air and clean water,” but did not want to delve into the “weird science” of climate change. It also raises a practical question about democracy: While Mike PenceTrump’s former vice president, respecting the democratic process and certifying the 2020 election results, Vance said he would not do so. What does he have to say about that thing? “We should fight about those issues, debate those issues peacefully in public — and that’s all I said, and that’s all,” Vance declared. Donald Trump said.” (That’s not all Trump said!) “Joe Biden became president,” Vance admitted, before accusing Harris of supporting “censorship” — “a real threat to democracy ”.
Trump “peacefully handed over power on January 20, as we have done for more than 250 years in this country,” Vance said.
That’s not true at all. Walz could not have done it with the eloquence of Jack Kennedy. But at least it will stand up to the test of reality.
