Vance vs. Walz: Who won the VP debate?

Danna (Walz)

With the task of not harming their boss’s candidacies, JD Vance and Tim Walz's policy-heavy debate united audiences in appreciation of their civil, respectful discourse that ended on a warm note. The expert consensus is this debate did not affect the election, but it did present a solid example of respectful discourse that successfully lowered the political temperature. While each nominee proved he was well-picked by his candidate, Walz’s performance and the post-debate fact-checking shows a clear win. 

Overall, the men appeared relatively equal, with some claiming there was no 'overwhelming winner.' However, Walz presented himself as relatable and down to earth when he acknowledged his lack of verbal prowess. Vance, for his part, softened his running mate’s rhetoric but avoided clear answers. In short, Walz spoke more fluidly and strove for accuracy. Vance’s approach, using lines like “you may want to, but your boss doesn’t,” came off as manipulative, reminiscent of someone trying to undermine trust. Intentionally deconstructing the “weird” label Walz tried to give him, Vance spun the perceived extremism of his running mate to seem reasonable by making many untrue claims as he dodged answers or overtly lied.

Finally, Vance refused to answer after Walz directly asked him, “Did he [Trump] lose the 2020 election?” Walz delivered a mic drop: “America, I think you’ve got a really clear choice on this election of who’s going to honor that democracy and who’s going to honor Donald Trump.' When calculating the ratio of gains, Walz left Vance in the dust. Walz’s clear and direct answers pulled him ahead of Vance, which was particularly evident when Walz took a very clear stance supporting women on the issue of abortion. All of this presented a strong image for Walz, and even post-debate fact-checking proves his favorability among future voters. 

Haley (Vance)

As recognized by most media outlets and pundits, JD Vance won the vice presidential debate. Vance was confident, compelling, and comfortable throughout his performance, unlike Walz who seemed nervous, taking a while to 'warm up.' Vance approached this debate with empathy and compassion for those affected by the issues, showcasing his approachability. He referred to his family of four—wife and three young kids—multiple times and had conciliatory moments alongside Walz at several turns, successfully humanizing him among voters. 

Vance also successfully highlighted Trump’s accomplishments during the debate, such as the economic growth and national security Americans had during his time in office. He defended Trump's policy goals and past results by drawing a comparison between them and the obvious incompetence of the Biden-Harris administration, which has produced record-high levels of inflation and illegal immigration. This prompted Vance to ask why Harris hasn't done the things she's been campaigning on, seeing as she's been in office for the last three and a half years. Likewise, Vance did well to mention how Harris-Walz’s desire to censor free speech is the real threat to democracy Americans face. 

Throughout the exchange, Vance remained composed, organized, and presented his points clearly. He even faced being fact-checked by the pro-Walz moderators, which was against the rules. He further explained himself by fact-checking the fact-checkers, showing he is willing to do what's right, even if it's uncomfortable—the qualities of a good leader. These strategies helped Vance to maintain a strong position while Walz’s performance was sprinkled with several awkward moments, such as calling himself a 'knucklehead.' Vance came out as the best commonsense option for Americans, whose understanding of the issues makes him and his running mate even more appealing than they might have previously been—that's certainly a win!