Vance vs. Walz debate: Top takeaways from VP candidates' face-off
In recent weeks, Tim Walz’ team tried to lower expectations for his debate with rival JD Vance. Now we know why.
Democratic vice presidential nominee and Minnesota Gov. Walz did not turn in a disastrous performance on the debate stage, but he was clearly outclassed by Ohio Sen. Vance. Trump supporters who have questioned the young Ohio senator’s qualifications for the nation’s second-highest office, or asked why the former president chose him to be his running mate, slept better on Tuesday night. He was sharp, appealing, and policy-savvy. Most important, Vance totally upended the media’s unflattering characterization of him by being sympathetic, respectful and likeable.
Vance had the advantage of having held dozens of press interviews in recent weeks; he was ready and tested. By contrast, Walz has done almost no unscripted encounters with the media since he became the Democrats’ vice-presidential candidate; his inability to go beyond talking points and delve deep into policy was not surprising.
VANCE, WALZ VICE PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE ENDS WITH BOTH CANDIDATES TOUTING ‘NEW’ FUTURE
Walz spent much of the debate talking about programs he claimed to have successfully enacted in Minnesota, like paid family leave. What he was supposed to do on Tuesday night was make the case for running mate Vice President Kamala Harris.
As with the ABC presidential debate between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris, the CBS News moderators embarrassed themselves by clearly favoring the Democrat contestant. Moreover, CBS’ Margaret Brennan and Norah O’Donnell affected a grating school-marmish tone, overly eager to chaperone what was an extremely orderly debate.
Their questions featured well-worn Democrat priorities (climate change, abortion) and they largely avoided topics that could have played well for Vance, like crime. O’Donnell challenged the senator on Trump formerly calling climate change a "hoax" and then asserted gratuitously that "the overwhelming consensus is that the climate is changing."
WALZ REPEATS GEORGIA ABORTION DEATH FALSEHOOD DECRIED BY DOCTORS AS 'FEARMONGERING'
Moreover, having said they would not fact-check the candidates, the two women intervened more than once to question a response from Vance, while doing so only one time with Walz.
Unhappily for the Minnesota governor, that one probing question was calamitous. Asked why he had falsely claimed to be in Hong Kong during the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre, Walz launched into a word salad that would have made Kamala Harris proud, talking about his experiences traveling in China. Asked again to answer why he had been untruthful, Walz misfired and looked stunned. In effect, he was caught out in a lie. Since he has a history of spinning falsehoods about his past, and especially about his military rank, this was not helpful.
Vance, like Walz, was meant to argue the case for his running mate, and that he did. When the moderators and Walz derided Trump’s claim during the presidential debate that he had the "concept of a plan" on health care, Vance said that Trump did not have a plan – he had a record. More than once during the evening he reminded the audience that during Trump’s presidency inflation was low, the border was closed and the world was at peace.
KAMALA HARRIS MAKES A DESPERATE MOVE ON A CRITICAL ISSUE TO SAVE A SINKING CAMPAIGN
When moderator Margaret Brennan pushed Vance to explain why Trump had abandoned the Iran nuclear deal, thus purportedly allowing the terror state to speed up its efforts to build a nuclear weapon, Vance noted that for the past three-plus years Harris and Biden have been in charge. He rightly pointed out that they helped rebuild Iran’s ability to wage war by not enforcing the Trump sanctions, thus allowing the mullahs to grow their income by $100 billion. With Iran just having attacked Israel with 180 missiles, Vance’s referencing the Reagan-Trump doctrine of peace through strength resonated.
While Walz repeated Harris’ vague promises about making life better for middle class families, Vance reminded the audience that take-home pay had risen under Trump and inflation was low, while under Harris, prices on everything from food to housing had shot up more than 20%. When Walz claimed economists backed Harris’ plan over Trump’s, Vance responded that Trump didn’t have Ph.D.s on his team, he had common sense.
When Walz accused Trump of wanting to enact tariffs on imports, which would serve as a new tax on Americans, Vance congratulated President Joe Biden on keeping the former president’s tariffs on China in place, defusing the issue.
Over and over during the nearly two hour debate, Vance asked the most salient question, also posed by Trump during his debate. Harris has been in the White House for the past three and a half years – why hasn’t she moved forward on the policies she now claims will solve the nation’s problems?
CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION
Vance clearly won the dispute over the border, noting that Harris had bragged for three years about undoing all the restrictions that Trump put in place. When Brennan challenged Vance on how Trump would handle separating families while carrying out deportations, Vance referred to the horrifying report that the Department of Homeland Security has lost track of more than 320,000 children brought across the border illegally – a damning and heartbreaking situation that has resulted from Harris’ open border.
Not surprisingly, the debate got heated on the subject of abortion. Vance criticized the Minnesota law signed by Walz that does not require the doctor to do everything necessary for the care of a baby that survives a late-term abortion. Walz disputed the characterization, but Vance is correct. Walz, meanwhile, charged Vance with having earlier backed a 15-week national abortion ban. Vance explained that he shares Trump’s view that the states are now charged with setting the regulations.
The candidates sparred on other topics, and took expected swipes at each other’s running mates, but both maintained their composure and even agreed that on some issues, like school safety, they could likely find some common ground. Especially given the Harris-Walz strategy of avoiding scrutiny and trying to hide their progressive agendas, it was an unusually useful event for America’s voters.
The winner of the night, without a doubt, was JD Vance. Will it matter? After all, many argue that no one votes for the V.P. But voters tell pollsters they do not enough about Kamala Harris and Tim Walz.
Now they know more, and on the basis of Tuesday night’s performance, Vance might have won over a few folks. With the race a dead heat, everything matters.