Tim Walz, the popular “good guy” who keeps in touch with reality, narrowly won over JD Vance, the fake populist who peddles lies.
Tim Walz has two decades of political experience and admits to not being good at debates. JD Vance has only two years of experience, but he is quick-tongued and unabashed. The public, however, has a much more favorable opinion of Walz than of Vance.
The duel
The debate was remarkably civil and controlled, thanks to the absence of one Donald Trump.
On the crises in the Middle East, the exchanges were balanced, but Vance’s argument rested on the fiction that the world was a safe haven during the Trump presidency.
On immigration, Vance spun lies to satisfy his boss and systematically dodged tough questions. Walz has only scratched the surface of the enormities of Trumpist positions, particularly on the Haitians of Springfield.
On the economy, Vance’s proposals opened wide scope for criticism and those of Walz targeted the middle class more effectively.
On abortion, Walz had the better hand and he played it well, but his advocacy was not as passionate as Kamala Harris’s.
On guns, Walz likely scored points in the center by moving away from the caricature of the Democrat who threatens the Second Amendment.
The real targets
Ultimately, the mission of both debaters was to score points for their presidential candidate and effectively attack the opposing number one. Walz was more convincing, without landing a fatal blow.
All in all, both camps will be able to boast and declare victory, but we will quickly forget this debate. It’s almost a draw, but Walz will survive the fact-check better and, if only for that reason, he deserves to be declared the winner.
