It was just a regular, old vice-presidential debate. Many predicted a brawl, with JD Vance and Tim Walz attacking each other—criticizing their past controversial statements, military records and credentials in the battle to be second in command.
In the end, it was a very Midwestern debate. There were some sharp critiques, but a whole lot of passive aggressiveness and a fair amount of substance. The vice-presidential candidates spent most of their time targeting their opponents’ running mates. Vance questioned why Vice President Harris hasn’t done more to stop illegal immigration and inflation, while Walz called Trump dangerous on foreign policy and criticized him for dehumanizing Haitian immigrants in Springfield.
Among the highlights were their answers to national abortion laws. Walz argued for a national standard similar to Roe v. Wade, which was overturned by Supreme Court justices appointed by Donald Trump. Vance, again, struggled to balance the GOP’s hard anti-abortion stance with the reality that it is not the choice of the majority of Americans.
A key moment came toward the end when the candidates were asked if they would certify an election if their side lost, as Mike Pence did on Jan. 6, after rioting Trump supporters tried to stop him.
There’s a lot to unpack in this debate. WOSU’s Anna Staver, host of the talk show and podcast All Sides with Anna Staver joins the show.
Snollygoster of the week
JD Vance—on both style and message—won the debate. His goal was to introduce himself to the American public and prove that he’s not the “weird guy” Democrats portray him as. For at least one night, he succeeded.
I would say this week’s vice-presidential debate marked the first performance of JD Vance’s 2028 presidential run, regardless of what happens in November.
If you have a suggestion for our "Snollygoster of the Week" award, a question or a comment, send them to snollygoster@wosu.org.
