Walz Stumbles, Vance Shines During VP Debate
From his awkward, nervous response to his first question about Israel and the Middle East to his later admission to being “a knucklehead,” Tim Walz stumbled while JD Vance shined during the Vice Presidential debate.
The largely good-natured forum, hosted by CBS News, featured the two candidates agreeing with each other repeatedly and expressing warm personal sentiments — avoiding the blistering personal attacks that were part of both presidential debates earlier this year.
Walz, 60, who has honed a folksy demeanor on the campaign trail, was noticeably nervous and misspoke repeatedly as he wrung his hands, took frantic notes, and his eyes darted around the CBS studio. JD Vance, on the other hand, commanded the stage, giving a steady and lawyerly presentation that had him widely seen as the victor in what may very well be the final debate of the campaign season.
Walz fumfered through his first answer about Israel and, even an hour into the debate, still failed to find his footing, declaring, “I’ve become friends with school shooters” — when he seemed to mean victims — during an answer about gun control.
Vance responded amicably and expressed his regret that the Governor’s son had witnessed a shooting at a Minnesota community center.
The Democrat stumbled again, in what will be the most replayed moment of the debate when he was asked about fresh reporting that he lied about having been in Hong Kong during the Tiananmen Square massacre in the spring of 1989.
“Look, I will be the first to tell you I have poured my heart into my community,” Walz said in a rambling initial response. “I’ve tried to do the best I can, but I’ve not been perfect, and I’m a knucklehead at times, but it’s always been about that those same people elected me to Congress for 12 years.”
Co-moderator Margaret Brennan then pressed, “Governor, just to follow up on that, the question was, can you explain the discrepancy? “
Walz, visibly shocked and dismayed by the blunt follow-up, grudgingly claimed that “I got there that summer and misspoke on this.”
Neither Vance nor the moderators raised Walz’s alleged embellishment of his military exploits or use of fertility treatments to help his wife conceive children, despite Republicans focusing on both in recent weeks.
Walz, at one point, praised Donald Trump’s running mate for giving viewers “the conversation they want to hear” about the future of the country, in an apparent reference to the civility of the debate.
Vance, who spoke about his mother’s struggle with opioid addiction while urging greater US-Mexico border security and about his grandmother sometimes turning the heat off in the winter to save money, stood the most to gain from showing amiability.
In one of his best-received answers, Vance recalled that someone “very dear to me” had an abortion in the past and confessed to him, “She felt like if she hadn’t had that abortion, that it would have destroyed her life because she was in an abusive relationship.”
Vance had the most to gain by appearing civil and sympathetic during the debate. The Republican entered the debate with a more negative appraisal by the public — with a 10.3% deficit in his own favorability ratings, according to the RealClearPolitics average of recent polls, versus Walz’s plus-2.5% favorability rating.
It appeared to pay off handsomely, with venerable pollster Frank Luntz finding that in a 14-person focus group of undecided voters across seven battleground states, 12 concluded that Vance won the debate.
Former Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., who admits he had reservations about Trump’s pick for Vance for VP, said that Vance was “a tour de force” during the debate.
“It was a terrific debate by J.D. Vance,” Santorum said post-debate. “I don’t think there is any other way to describe it. He was calm. He was likable. He was concise.”
Vance also handled the CBS moderators well when they began fact-checking him, which went against the debate rules, Santorum added.
“That was a moment that, again, showed that command and presence and understanding,” Santorum said.
I sure. am glad we have real human beings running for president and vp. the scum known as the democrats do not deserve to be near the whitehouse. they went to s.c. to “tour the Helene damage:. why not Asheville? or chimney rock nc? oh, that’s right. THERE ISNT A CHIMNEY ROCK ANYMORE. it is GONE. the wonderful pieces of excrement have offered each Helene victim a whopping $750.000 EACH. wow the generosity!!!!!!!!!!! they offered ukraine billions. they offered Hawaii residents of the catastrophic fires $750.00. did they offer anything to the Palestine Ohio people for the train wreck? this is who pretends to love america and its citizens. HOW MUCH DO THE ILLEGALS GET FOR BREAKING THE LAW? $2,500 VISA CARDS. SEE THE DIFFERENCE? IF THERE ARE ANY PEOPLE STUPID ENOUGH TO VOTE HARRIS AWALZ, YOU NEED PSYCHIATRIC HELP IMMEDIATELY. DONT HANDLE ANY DANGEROUS ITEMS UNTIL YOU GET THE HELP YOU SO OBVIOUSLY NEED. VOTE TRUMP. HE WAS ON THE GROUND IN NC BEFORE JOEY COULD GET OUT OF HIS BEACH CHAIR, AND KA MA LA COULD UNDO HER KNEEPADS. I am sure the residents of nc and HELENE VICTIMS WILL BE VOTING RED IF THEY CAN FIND A VOTING BOOTH. I SURE AS HELL WOULD WALK OVER GLASS TO VOTE THESE DEMS THE HELL AND GONE OUT OF POLITICS. AND SEE DOUGY EMHOFF HAS AN NDA WITH THE NANNY HE KNOCKED UP. HE PAID HER $80,000 TO SHUT UP ABOUT THEIR BABY SHE GAVE AWAY. WHERES THE DOJ AND FBI WHEN YOU NEED THEM?
Watching this so called debate and listening to various news commentators’ evaluations. Who came out the winner was split along party lines. Of course, known Republican defenders pick Vance. On the Dems side commentators spoke well of Walz’s showing in general while acknowledging the moments of stumbling relative to timing when he was in China.
Both men have their own stage presence. Each is vary different from the other. Nonetheless, judging from substance answering questions and facts truly represented. Vance deserves a C average grade. Walz earned a B above average grade. Neither hit it out of the park nor did one wipe the floor with the other.
Vance came off as a slick performer with some polish which served him well campaigning the win for Representative. However, any gains made in smooth talk fell away as he repeated Trump’s fabrications and ducked tough questions.
Walz presented himself forthrightly, more identifying with common people, and middle American folksy. After the debate took a commercial break, Walz appeared more assertive, confident of himself and his responses.
Vance proceeded after the intermission with very much the same composed polish mannered style as how he had at the debate’s beginning.
Considering a debate between VP candidates at the federal level creates stress equal to nothing else the two have yet experienced. Vance manages his stress by keeping his voice even and calm. His mannerisms are keyed low with arm/hand gestures kept at normal. One exception to his calmness came when he showed frustration with a moderator’s fact check connected to his previous assertion. He verbally complained and in the moment deviated from his usual composure. He dropped the character actor of a debate shifting to an agitated frustrated person questioning the moderator’s fact check. Afterwards Vance checked his emotions returning to character and the debate continued.
Therefore, how this particular jousting match can be called a definitive win for either party happens to be in the eye of the beholder. The commentator’s article above does not square up. As seen through a perspective agreeing with Trump so all lines up in his view. Then that commentator will grant Vance the win. But, Vance may take no credit for this debate in the overall context. He did not receive general approval from all or most media commentators conclusions. Trump attempted proclaiming victory in 2020, but the votes that counted did not.
In this case, the outcome not an obvious win. The most objective source judging the face value of the debate’s equality unbiased running and how both candidates answered questions and the substance in their answers which contribute something to further define their position and policy for America today and for our future,
Vance did not turn over a single boulder or rock more than his competition. Winners turn over boulders with their direct quantifiable solution policy. Evasions, quick step maneuvering, and falsification of facts had impressed a few, but that does not qualify as a victory.
This one I call a draw. That’s my opinion and I Stan on it.