For me, the highlight of Tuesday night’s one-and-only vice presidential debate was when each admitted he was kind of a schmuck.
This was a highlight in relief from a 90-minute game of dodgeball played by a couple of serious, courteous men trying to be liked by the folks at home watching the CBS News-sponsored event. They each sounded reasonable, for the most part.
First to put in the dunce cap was Democratic Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz who dodged when asked by moderator Margaret Brennan why he claimed to have been in China for the start of the aborted Chinese revolution in 1989. He was not there.
He started out by talking about he was just a normal Midwest kid who rode a bike, and yackety yacketa.
Brennan did not let him ride away from the question. She demanded an answer.
“I’m a knucklehead at times,” he said.
“I talk a lot, I get caught up in the rhetoric.”
Finally, “I misspoke.”
Republican Ohio Sen. JD Vance was asked how he could be No. 2 to Donald J. Trump, whom he said a fistful of years ago was “unfit for office,” and “America’s Hitler.”
Vance has been asked the question before.
“I was wrong about Donald Trump,” he said, but alibied by saying he was misled by the mainstream media’s lies.
Vance danced on that, but took a heavy body blow at the close of the debate when Walz asked Vance, flat out, “Did he lose the election?”
Vance went into the Waffle House. He refused to confess that Trump had lost, saying that’s something we can talk about, and said many Democrats had protested election results.
But they didn’t try to overturn the election, Walz responded.
The very first question of the night was should the U.S. support, or oppose, a pre-emptive strike against Iran?
Walz waltzed.
Vance vamped, and said Iran didn’t attack Israel when Trump was in office.
True enough, but Trump tore up a deal with Iran that unleashed that country’s pause in nuclear development.
This was the moment we should have heard a question about Russia’s war on Ukraine. But, sadly, we did not.
Vance was asked about when Trump called climate change a hoax. Vance ignored that and said the Democrats want to buy solar panels made in China.
Vance maintained a smile for most of the night, otherwise he showed little emotion. Unfortunately, Walz’s resting face is a scowl.
The biggest howler was Vance’s assertion that Trump saved Obamacare, a program he ruthlessly tried to kill.
Brennan goofed once by leading Walz into fact-checking a couple of things Vance said. Vance called her on it and talked over her to claim some time he was entitled to. He did not call her a childless cat lady.
He dodged how Trump would remove millions of illegals, and also if Trump would separate illegal parents from their citizen children.
Walz did not give satisfactory answers to questions about how Kamala Harris would pay for various tax credits.
Walz blamed Trump for his failure to confront Covid, but agreed with Trump in opposition to exporting jobs.
They disagreed with the content of a Minnesota pro-abortion bill. Vance said it permitted abortions until the 9th month. Walz said that was not what the law said, saying it reflected Roe. But Roe imposed limits on abortion, and Walz did not directly deny the Minnesota law had no limits.
Under the heading “threat to democracy,” each accused the other but Walz made a tactical error when he referred to Trump’s supposed plans to imprison his enemies.
Maybe I imagined it, but I thought his eyes shifted, because Trump arrested no one when he was President, but has been charged numerous times by Democratic prosecutors, along with many people around him.
Yes, yes, Democrats I know you believe he earned it, but there are many millions of Americans who believe it is nothing more than lawfare.
When it ended, they shook hands.
Good to see.
It’s hard to believe in the long history of baseball, this is the first time…
The gray clouds hanging around City Hall Friday noon could do nothing to dispel Mayor…
Ah, the Inquirer’s crank case is at it again, spewing and spinning her anti-auto paranoia…
I have long been on record as rejecting the idea that America suffers from “systemic…
You’ve got to wonder about “science” that puts its weight behind an experiment to determine…
Well, they are at it again, pinheads proposing legislation that would do minimum good with…
View Comments
A thoroughly enjoyable debate for a change! I didn’t want to throw anything at the screen even once.
I was also impressed by Vance’s grasp of the issues and his calm, complete (for the most part) answers, but I wasn’t thrilled that Walz seemed to get the last word each time.
As far as the 2020 election, as someone who worked closely at the local level, my answer would have been “Trump lost a very unfair election.” There may not have been a lot of fraud, but the setups were designed to favor Democrats in every way.
“Trump lost a very unfair election.” - perfect. Agree 100 %. Think the way Mail-in ballot harvesting was allowed proved very advantageous to Dems (& think it will benefit them again this year). In PA you can make a case that the decisions on those belonged to the legislature and not the Governor.
I don’t know for a fact that the outcome would have been different but yes it helped Dems. Unfair rules but written in the books were applied by the book & not “fraudulently.”
They actually were cordial to each other, respectfully disagreeing and actually digging up some common ground upon which compromises could be built. You know, the government, and Congress, is actually supposed to work. And they followed the number one rule for VP debates, "Do no harm to the ticket". I personally was anticipating total disgust with JD Vance, and that just wasn't the case. As they used to say on What's My Line (now I'm really dating myself), will the real Vance please stand up?
I am waiting for the real Kamala to stand up. What ARE her “core beliefs?” I truly do not know.
There is quite a lot of material on her website about her plans and policies. That what you meant?
Not sure of context. Before I wrote a column on unanswered questions, there was NOTHING about policy on her website.
She has personally not addressed a myriad of changed policies, but said her “core values” had not changed.
I want to know, specifically, what they are.
As a refresher, she apparently has changed her mind (or HAS she?) changed her mind about fracking, Medicare for all, breaking up ICE, defunding police, not treating illegals as law breakers, the EV mandate, closing detention facilities, free sex change operations for inmates, plus others. And — did she not notice any decline in Biden’s mental acuity, as the last person in the room? How could she not? And why did she deny it?
The dodgeball and misleads are of course a given in all of politics and in debates. Keeping that in the backdrop, Vance’s “debate” performance (not whether I agree with him or not) was the most impressive I have seen in a general election POTUS/VP debate since Cheney’s manhandling of Edwards 20 years ago. Yeaterday’s however was closer to the Cheney/Lieberman one of 2020, another masterpiece by Cheney but where Lieberman was also good and it was very cordial between the two as well.
I don’t agree with Vance’s team on their tariff plan but was mesmerized by how craftily he made a case for it by showing a difference between Biden and Kamala on the issue. It was like a QB totally splitting the defenders out wide.
It's always amazes me when people lie so eloquently and seamlessly. You used the word "mesmerized".... good word choice. One has to be half un-conscious to believe what we heard from Vance last night.
My take away about Vance skillfully not answering certain questions, he should be on the next telecast of “Dancing with the Stars”!
A civil debate without negative comments toward each other. Vance and Waltz confronted about their mis-statements without interference from the other candidate. A pleasure to watch and listen to as a registered voter. I don’t think debate will change anyone’s mind. But, the debaters didn’t hurt their parties chances in the election.
Vance was clearly superior (just like Harris was last month). Do you know how I know? Other than watching it, which I did, my news feed has ZERO stories about last night's debate. Had Walz delivered even a mediocre performance, my news feed would have endless stories about his decisive victory.
Lies aside (still waiting to see the count on that from both sides), I was just somewhat happy to have a debate where one candidate was not a raving lunatic staying stupid stuff and calling people names like an undisciplined three-year-old child. That was refreshing, and I think everyone can pretty much agree that we are all sick of that other stuff. Which is really the ultimate reason why I think Trump is going to lose this election: the sheet exhaustion of the voting public.
The positive reaction to the civility was almost unanimous.
1. Just two things. Trump lost a very unfair election. 2. J.D. Vance hit a home run last night.
Strike 1. Strike 2.
Then the home run.
It was a foul ball but the orange-skinned POS kept arguing that the umpire was wrong.