JD Vance vs. Tim Walz: Key Takeaways From A High-Stakes Debate

In a vice-presidential debate held in New York, the stakes were unusually high as Republican Donald Trump and Democrat Kamala Harris remain neck-and-neck in the race for the White House. JD Vance, Trump’s running mate, and Tim Walz, Harris’s VP pick, faced off in what is expected to be their only debate, each aiming to avoid undermining their respective candidates’ chances.

New Faces Take the Stage

Tim Walz, who was relatively unknown nationally prior to the summer, set the tone by downplaying expectations. He compared Vance’s prestigious academic background as a “Yale law guy” with his own experience as a “public school teacher.” While he had a shaky start, Walz gained confidence as the debate progressed. Known for his affable nature, he attempted to incorporate folksy anecdotes but sometimes came off as defensive, straying from his typical Midwestern charm.

In contrast, JD Vance, recognized for his rhetorical skills, faced the challenge of compensating for Trump’s disappointing performance in the previous debate against Harris. Seizing the opportunity, Vance effectively addressed issues where Trump had missed critical points, particularly concerning immigration and inflation.

Awkward Moments and Missteps

The debate was not without its awkward moments. Walz had to clarify a claim regarding his presence in Hong Kong during the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests, admitting, “I got there that summer and misspoke on this,” referring to himself as a “knucklehead” caught up in rhetoric.

Vance faced scrutiny over past remarks where he labeled Trump “unfit for our nation’s highest office” and compared him to “America’s Hitler.” He acknowledged being misled by media narratives and conceded that he was wrong in his previous judgments.

Proxy Battle for the Presidency

The debate served as a proxy battle between Trump and Harris, with Walz and Vance directing their sharpest critiques at each other’s running mates. Walz criticized Trump for dismissing the expertise of scientists and economists, asserting, “If you’re going to be president, you don’t have all the answers. Donald Trump believes he does.” He also condemned Trump’s bragging about avoiding taxes and urged Republicans to support a bipartisan border security bill.

Vance countered by attacking Harris on immigration issues, claiming her policies contributed to rising housing costs due to an influx of migrants.

Fact Checks and Heated Exchanges

This election cycle has seen an unusual focus on fact-checking during debates. The format led to a few on-air corrections, particularly concerning Vance’s statements on climate change and migrant status, which provoked a strong reaction from him. The candidates’ mics were briefly muted during a heated exchange, illustrating the intensity of their discussions.

A Return to Civility

Without the presence of the bombastic Trump, the debate bore a resemblance to more traditional election formats, focusing on policy and maintaining a tone of civility. A particularly poignant moment occurred when Walz shared a harrowing story about his 17-year-old son witnessing a shooting, prompting Vance to express sympathy.

The candidates also highlighted their families throughout the debate, with Vance mentioning his “three beautiful little kids.” The evening concluded with a handshake between Walz and Vance, joined by their wives on stage, reinforcing a sense of civility despite the underlying tensions of the race.

(INCLUDES INPUTS FROM ONLINE SOURCES)

ALSO READ: Claudia Sheinbaum Makes History As Mexico’s First Female President