In a way, the two vice presidential candidates were too nice to each other.
The two have often said that they agreed with several of their opponent’s arguments… But that neither Donald Trump nor Kamala Harris went in that direction.
Overall, Vance was much more relaxed than Walz, who at times looked like he was about to burst into tears.
Beating around the bush
Substantively, both candidates began beating around the bush from the first question, as moderators asked them whether they would support an Israeli bombing of Iran’s nuclear facilities.
Vance eventually blurted out that the decision was up to the Israeli government, while Walz blamed Trump for letting go of the deal to normalize relations with Iran.
Walz had some good lines about abortion, particularly when he said that in Wisconsin, “we trust women, trust doctors.”
But Walz’s response was much weaker on China, particularly his false claim that he was in Hong Kong during the Tiananmen massacre in 1989. He launched into a barrage of words about his attachment to his community, what he had done with China, only to finally admit he was wrong.
Too many details
Walz gave good examples, but he spoke too quickly and gave too many details.
For his part, Vance was stronger than Walz in economics. Not that these arguments were more convincing or better than those of his opponent, but rather that his explanations were simpler.
Same thing about immigrants or health.
Kamala Harris, who is plateauing in the polls, needed a Walz who would have clearly won the debate. A draw was not enough. Walt lost. He did not appear presidential, unlike Vance.
