News Every Day | 05:05

Debate Was a Big Media Narrative-Buster — Showing Substance, Vance Won

WASHINGTON — This time, the oddsmakers got it wrong. Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz was their betting favorite going into Tuesday night’s vice presidential debate, but Ohio Sen. JD Vance did the better job of talking to the American people on immigration, housing, and the economy.

For months now, Big Media have put all their eggs in the Vance-is-an-extremist basket. They beat the “childless cat lady” remark he made in 2021 into the ground, which is what they do. Too many in my profession think it’s their job to word-check Republicans rather than look at the records of both administrations and how they affected American lives.

(If you didn’t watch the debate, you still can.)

Vance repeatedly talked about the effects of Biden–Harris administration policies — on housing prices, at the grocery store, and how an influx of migrants in Springfield, Ohio, have overwhelmed hospitals and public schools.

Walz did his utmost to make the debate about Donald Trump’s personality.

Co-moderator Margaret Brennan of CBS News opened with a question about the war in the Middle East. She asked Walz, “If you are the final voice in the situation room, would you support or oppose a preemptive strike by Israel on Iran?”

Walz misspoke when he talked about “the expansion of Israel and its proxies.” He meant to say Iran. Then he segued to Trump-bashing.

Given the chaos in the Middle East, the world needs “steady leadership,” Walz argued, not “a nearly 80-year-old Donald Trump talking about crowd sizes.” Walz talked about former Trump aides who won’t endorse their erstwhile boss, while he offered that Vice President Kamala Harris offers “steady leadership” and “calmness.”

I get it. Trump over-personalizes his relations with U.S. allies and national security rivals. I cringe as I recall the then-president gushing over the “beautiful letters” he received from North Korean strongman Kim Jong Un. Don’t get me started on the Trump tweets.

Vance’s response moved the issue from the reaction to Trump’s antics inside the beltway to the results: “Donald Trump actually delivered stability in the world, and he did it by establishing effective deterrence. People were afraid of stepping out of line.”

The Oct. 7 Hamas terrorist attack on Israel that left 1,200 dead? That happened after Trump left office. Iran attacked Israel under Biden–Harris. “When was the last time that an American president didn’t have a major conflict breakout?” the GOP running mate asked. “The only answer is during the four years that Donald Trump was president.”

Vance’s worst moment occurred after CBS News’ Norah O’Donnell noted that all the nation’s governors certified the 2020 election results and sent a slate of electors to Congress on Jan. 6. O’Donnell noted that Vance recently said he would not have certified that election and instead would have asked states to submit alternate electors.

Wrong answer.

Trump lost. And since then, the price many Republican candidates have had to pay is to play along with his delusional claims about winning 2020 when they of all people know that he lost. (Last month, even Trump admitted he lost that election “by a whisker.” Within the week, Trump took it back.)

Walz seized the moment. He recalled the toll on victims of the violence on Jan. 6, 2021, because of Trump’s bogus claim. Walz looked Vance in the eye when he asked, “Did he lose the 2020 election?”

“Tim, I’m focused on the future,” Vance responded. “Did Kamala Harris censor Americans from speaking their mind in the wake of the 2020 COVID situation?”

“That’s a damning non-answer,” Walz countered.

Agree.

Besides, Walz was suggesting the future could include history repeating itself.

As to Vance’s move-the-ball response, albeit to an important issue, the answer would be, yes. Facebook co-founder Mark Zuckerberg admitted in a letter to the House Judiciary Committee that the Biden–Harris campaign and White House pressured the social-media giant to censor “certain COVID content, including humor and satire.”

As Vance noted, trampling on Americans’ free speech rights is a danger to democracy. Walz just didn’t get it. He defended government censorship, saying, “You can’t yell fire in a crowded theater.”

That tells you the Minnesota governor has no problems with Washington pressuring big media to stick to its frequently boneheaded narrative.

That’s what Democrats do now.

Contact Review-Journal Washington columnist Debra J. Saunders at dsaunders@reviewjournal.com. Follow @debrajsaunders on X.

Why Is Kamala Still Losing?

The post Debate Was a Big Media Narrative-Buster — Showing Substance, Vance Won appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.