The debate between the vice presidential candidates, Republican JD Vance and Democrat Tim Walz, has been the last major event on the campaign agenda for the November 5 presidential elections. There are no more debates planned between the presidential candidates, Donald Trump and Kamala Harris, nor any other duel between the two protagonists this Wednesday. The campaign will henceforth move along the lines of rallies, interviews, press conferences, television advertisements and – perhaps – unforeseen surprises. Will this Wednesday’s debate in New York move voters? It’s hard to know. It has been a white glove confrontation in which the two contenders have shot by elevation, aiming for the headliners. Vance has vindicated himself after his campaign gaffes and errors. Walz has had a hard time conveying the authenticity that is assumed of him. There has not been a winner as clear as in previous duels. Both candidates have shown that there is a way of doing politics that is different from the extremism and polarization with which Trump has flooded the American political scene.
1. Attacks on Trump and Harris
Both Minnesota Governor Tim Walz and Ohio Senator JD Vance knew that the candidate to beat was not the one a few meters away at the other lectern on the CBS stage in its New York studios. Walz has attacked Trump for the policies of when he was president and for his inability to democratically accept the defeat of 2020. Vance has criticized the economic results of the Joe Biden and Kamala Harris era in terms of inflation and immigration. Both have defended their bosses. What there has hardly been any crossed attacks between the two candidates: on the contrary, they have shown understanding and even empathy.
2. Vance vindicates himself
The Republican vice presidential candidate had started his career on the wrong foot. He screwed up several times, the newspaper library betrayed him and at several campaign events he had appeared unnatural, uncomfortable interacting with voters. This Wednesday, however, he has appealed again and again to his personal story, of a boy from a poor family who makes his way despite the difficulties. He talked about his wife, his children, his mother… He had it very prepared, so much so that he started with that refrain from the first question, which had nothing to do with that. But it has given him good results. The senator is fluent, he is good on camera, he addressed the moderators by their names, he showed empathy with his rival and he did not fall into any trap. Since expectations were also low, it comes out stronger.
3. A less authentic Walz than expected
The opposite has happened with the Democratic governor. He was a candidate who arrived with the aura of authenticity, of the guy who helps you fix your car, of the high school team coach, of the average American with whom a large part of voters identify. He entered the campaign with force, inflamed the masses in the first rallies and challenged Vance from a distance. However, it has been difficult for him to convey that authentic image. He has had to admit that “he was wrong” when he said that he had been in China during the Tiananmen Square protests. He has not made the same effort as his rival to present himself to the Americans.
4. Neither dogs nor cats, but Trump in the shadows
In the debates there is always some data that is a little manipulated or selected, some decontextualized statement and some exaggeration, but what Trump is used to is chaining out lies and nonsense without rhyme or reason. In the debate with Joe Biden, the lie detectors were fuming with Trump’s interventions, although the president’s collapse overshadowed him. In the face to face with Harris, his intervention reached paroxysm and caused the moderators to correct him on some of the most outlandish statements. For example, that immigrants eat dogs, cats and pets in Springfield (Ohio) or that there are States in which not only late-term abortion is allowed, but even killing children after birth. . In the debate between Walz and Vance there was nothing similar. Even so, Trump acted as a commentator from his social network and insisted without any basis that there are States where “murdering babies” is allowed.
5. No clear winner and no clear effect
Although Vance has exceeded expectations and Walz has struggled to convey authenticity, there has been no clear winner as in the two previous debates, in which Trump defeated Biden and Harris defeated Trump. Both candidates for vice president are good speakers, each has placed their messages, opposite on many issues. Vance has prevailed in the economy, but Walz has cornered him in the final part, when talking about the assault on the Capitol and the threat to democracy. The debate between the presidential candidates on September 10 barely moved the polls. It’s difficult for this one to do it.
