The first — and only — vice presidential debate is in the books. And JD Vance won it.
Vance came into the debate as a figure, nationally, of mockery. The caricature painted of him — which he had a hand in creating — was of a buffoonish goof who Donald Trump would love to get rid of.
Vance was the exact opposite of that on the debate stage. Confident. Commanding. And, yes, polite and civil.
He told his personal story well — and repeatedly. He drove home the idea that Kamala Harris has been vice president for four years and/but hasn’t done many of the things she said she will do if elected in November.
And Vance’s answer on abortion — he admitted that Republicans had to work to regain the trust of the public on the issue — was the best I have heard from a GOP candidate in a long while.
Vance wasn’t perfect — especially when forced to defend the indefensible, like Trump’s false insistence that the 2020 election was stolen. Vance, under pressure from Tim Walz, refused to say that Trump lost the election — a good thing to keep the former president from going nuts but a bad thing for democracy.
Walz was, well, uneven. He looked absolutely terrified in his first answer — and Democrats had to have had flashbacks to Joe Biden’s disastrous June debate.
Walz did bounce back somewhat though. I thought he was good on abortion, guns and democracy — although he didn’t get that last hit in on Vance until 10:40 pm eastern time, a little late in terms of maximizing the audience watching.
Walz had an awful moment when asked about a CNN report concerning whether he was in Hong Kong during the Tiananmen Square massacre in 1989. Walz fumbled and stalled before sort of sputtering out. It’s amazing to me that he and his team didn’t a) know that question was coming and b) have a good answer for it.
One other big thought: The debate was remarkably civil. (I actually think Walz could have benefited from being a little tougher on his opponent.) Vance and Walz regularly noted that they agreed with each other on some things. They never attacked one another personally or questioned the other guy’s motives. It was a striking contrast with the Biden-Trump and Trump-Harris debates.
So, does it change anything? If history is any guide, almost certainly not. I think Vance did himself a world of good as a future leader of the GOP — whether or not Trump wins in November — and Walz made it through what he has admitted is not his strong suit.
I still think this race is a choice between Harris and Trump — and it’s a coin flip.
Share this post