Who won the Vance-Walz debate? Takeaways from a civil, substantive faceoff | Opinion
Almost no one puts much stock in running mates when it comes to casting a vote for president.
But if, as expected, the contest between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump is to be determined by a few thousands voters in a handful of states, the slightest bump in either direction based on Tuesday night’s faceoff between Tim Walz and JD Vance could matter.
They battled over foreign policy, energy and the environment, immigration, and they were mostly substantive discussions. Voters would be forgiven for wishing they could have gotten this kind of detailed exchange from Trump and Harris.
Vance and Walz, who have sniped at each other on the campaign trail, didn’t target one another much. Both candidates aimed instead at the top of the opposing ticket.
Here are some winners and losers from what was probably the last debate of the 2024 presidential cycle.
WINNERS
Proxy attacks: The goal for running mates is to attack the other side’s top candidate. For both, it was mission accomplished. Walz repeatedly hit Trump as unstable. Vance cast Harris as ineffective as vice president. It was mostly a wash, so who was the better defender? Vance deftly pointed out the high points of Trump’s presidency. Walz did OK but was handcuffed by Harris’ lack of policy specifics as a candidate.
Foreign policy, Middle East: The first question was on Iran’s recent attacks on Israel and how to contain Iran’s nuclear ambition. More sustained follow-ups would have been helpful, but it’s hard to argue there’s a more pressing concern around the globe right now.
Substance and civility: As often happens, the level of personality animosity between the vice presidential candidates was much lower than the presidential contenders. Maybe it’s because the mission is to focus on the top of the other ticket. Maybe VP candidates are trying to build broad appeal for a future White House run of their own. But give Vance and Walz credit for mostly answering the questions, engaging each other respectfully and discussing the top issues.
Joe Biden: The current president remains deeply unpopular, and there are increasing questions about how engaged he is in the final moths of his term. That should have made him a target for Vance and created an opportunity for Walz to try to distance his ticket. Instead, Biden was barely mentioned: The most sustained talk about him actually came in the form of praise from Vance.
LOSERS
Deficit and debt: There’s a train barreling down the track toward the American economy, with trillions of dollars of debt driving up interest costs. Vital programs such as Medicare, Social Security and national defense are at risk of being gutted in the future. The only discussion of the deficit was to ask each candidate to explain how their administrations would pay for programs projected to add more debt. That’s important, but it’s a much bigger potential crisis than that.
Foreign policy, everywhere else: The Middle East is the highest priority. But the U.S. is increasingly embroiled in an intractable conflict in Ukraine. The next four years could bring direct confrontation with China. But this debate featured almost no mention of any other foreign policy issue.
Cats and dogs: Both Vance and Walz have been subject to goofy caricatures, some deserved. Vance’s past comments about “childless cat ladies,” questions about Walz’s military record and the false stories about Haitians eating cats and dogs were largely set aside in favor of issues. That probably disappoints some partisans, but it’s ultimately better for voters.
This story was originally published October 1, 2024 at 8:05 PM with the headline "Who won the Vance-Walz debate? Takeaways from a civil, substantive faceoff | Opinion."
