Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz took on Ohio Sen. JD Vance in the first — and only — vice presidential debate of the 2024 election last night. Having previously confessed to being a “bad debater,” Democrat Walz’s nerves were evident as he took to the stage. Vance, who’s 38 years younger than his GOP running mate, Donald Trump, was a markedly youthful presence.
A more civilized matchup
The Walz-Vance meeting was significantly less heated than Donald Trump’s clash with Kamala Harris last month, but it was far from tame. Both men veered away from personal attacks, each focusing instead on the other’s running partner.
Asked about Iran’s attack on Israel, Walz seized the opportunity to highlight Trump’s age, asserting: “A nearly 80-year-old Donald Trump talking about crowd sizes is not what we need in this moment.” He added a jibe at “Donald Trump’s fickle leadership.”
Vance replied, “Who has been the vice president for the last three and a half years? And the answer is your running mate, not mine. Donald Trump consistently made the world more secure.”
A smoother talker than Walz, Vance characterized the challenges of the last several years as ones Harris has personally failed to meet, even referring to “the administration of Kamala Harris” early in the debate. He barely mentioned Joe Biden’s name.
On the economy, Walz came in strong, claiming “Kamala Harris’ Day One was Donald Trump’s failure on Covid that led to the collapse of our economy. We were already, before Covid, in a manufacturing recession — about 10 million people out of work, the largest percentage since the Great Depression.”
Vance said that the Biden administration’s economic record had been “atrocious,” adding: “Honestly, Tim, I think you got a tough job here, because you got to play Whac-A-Mole.”
Focusing their attacks on Trump and Harris
Both men appeared eager to be agreeable wherever possible, even backing up each other’s statements at times. They both conceded that gun violence was a problem and that the housing crisis was severe. When the subject of abortion came up, Walz said: “I agree with a lot of what Sen. Vance said about what’s happening – his running mate, though, does not. And that’s the problem.”
Vance reiterated Trump’s assertion that states should be responsible for reproductive rights, at which Walz recalled the horrific fate of the women who’ve been seriously unwell or died as a result of their state’s restrictive bans. “We have seen maternal mortality skyrocket in Texas, outpacing many other countries in the world,” he said.
“The fact of the matter is, how can we as a nation say that your life and your rights, as basic as the right to control your own body, is determined on geography?” he asked.
Vance attempted to explain away his past disagreements with Trump as the result of biased media, asserting: “Sometimes, of course, I disagree with the president, but I’ve also been extremely open about the fact that I was wrong about Donald Trump. I was wrong, first of all, because I believed some of the media stories that turned out to be dishonest fabrications of his record.”
Migrants and the border
Vance remained cordial after Walz rubbished his claim that undocumented migrants were responsible for rising house prices, replying: “Tim just mentioned a bunch of ideas. Now some of those ideas I actually think are halfway decent, and some of them I disagree with.” He then returned the spotlight to Harris, adding: “But the most important thing here is: Kamala Harris is not running as a newcomer to politics. She is the sitting VP.”
Walz talked up Harris’s record on the border, highlighting her experience before she became VP. “Kamala Harris was the attorney general of the largest border state in California. She’s the only person in this race who prosecuted transnational gangs for human trafficking and drug interventions,” he said.
He offered a generous assessment of Vance’s position, suggesting: “I believe Sen. Vance wants to solve this, but by standing with Donald Trump and not working together to find a solution, it becomes a talking point.” Vance ducked when challenged on the finer details of Trump’s promises to deport swathes of migrants, retorting: “I’ve been to the southern border more than our border czar, Kamala Harris, has been.”
On climate change, Walz went in harder on Trump, quipping: “Donald Trump called it a hoax, and then joked that these things would make more beachfront property to be able to invest in.”
Walz calls himself a “knucklehead”
Walz was forced to respond to fresh revelations regarding his past claims that he was in Hong Kong during the June 4, 1989, Tiananmen Square protests in Beijing. It emerged this week that he was actually at home in Nebraska at the time.
Walz said he “misspoke,” adding: “My community knows who I am. They saw where I was at… 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.” He didn’t substantively respond to the discrepancy between his past claims and the latest reports.
Getting stuck on Jan. 6
The debate’s tensest moment came when Walz challenged Vance over the 2020 election.
“Did he lose the 2020 election?” he asked, referring to Trump’s recurring lie that President Biden “stole” the vote.
Vance attempted to duck the issue, replying: “Tim, I’m focused on the future,” — to which Walz retored “That is a damning nonanswer.”
Vance evaded the subject of the deadly Capitol riot, adding: “On January 6, what happened? Joe Biden became president; Donald Trump left the White House.”
He attempted to draw a comparison between Trump’s election claims and previous controversies, adding: “Hillary Clinton in 2016 said that Donald Trump had the election stolen by Vladimir Putin because the Russians bought like $500,000 worth of Facebook ads.”
“January 6 was not Facebook ads,” Walz replied.
“He lost this election, and he said he didn’t. One hundred and forty police officers were beaten at the Capitol that day, some with the American flag, and several later died,” Walz added. “The democracy is bigger than winning an election.”
He ignored Vance’s attemptes to turn the conversation to media censorship, continuing: “Here we are four years later, in the same boat. The winner needs to be the winner. This has got to stop. It’s tearing our country apart.”
A closer look at a very high-stakes matchup
There is so much else to say, and with the election just a few weeks away, the stakes really couldn’t be higher. Check out last night’s fascinating analysis with senior political correspondent Tara Palmeri, below.
