It was a wonky policy debate, with talk of risk pools, housing regulations and energy policy

In an age of world-class disses optimized for social media, Tuesday’s debate was a detour into substance. Both candidates took a low-key approach and both enthusiastically delved into the minutiae.

Walz dug into the drafting of the Affordable Care Act when he was in the House in 2009, and pushed Vance on the senator’s claim that Trump, who tried to eliminate the law, actually helped preserve it. Vance, defending his claim that illegal immigration pushes up housing prices, cited a Federal Reserve study to back himself up. Walz talked about how Minneapolis tinkered with local regulations to boost the housing supply. Both men talked about the overlap between energy policy, trade and climate change.

It was a very different style than often seen in presidential debates over the past several election cycles.

What Vance said about 2020 election results
Vance told ABC News in February 2024 that if he had been vice president in 2020, he would have told states, “We needed to have multiple slates of electors.” That’s in line with what former President Donald Trump and his allies wanted to do. That plan was an effort to reject the slates of electors from battleground states where Joe Biden won.

Vance has said that the election was “stolen” from Trump. That flies in the face of evidence, including from Trump administration officials and courts.

— Amy Sherman

A common refrain among a certain type of liberal commentator is that Democrats should be winning the election by 20 points! The economy is great! Joe Biden got a lot done! And Donald Trump represents an existential threat to democracy. It’s only misinformation, perpetuated by Trump but accentuated by the mainstream media, that’s keeping the election close.

After watching last night’s VP debate, I’m more skeptical about this claim than ever.

The debate itself probably won’t matter. VP debates rarely do, especially one like this that was fought to a draw in polls. In CNN’s survey of debate-watchers, JD Vance won 51-49 — but that’s well within the margin of error.

JD Vance failed to reject Trump’s lies about the 2020 election. He can’t be trusted to protect democracy.

JD Vance and Tim Walz covered lots of issues: inflation, housing, guns, abortion, immigration, health care, and much more.

But there was only one question on which the vice presidency—the job for which these two men are competing—really matters. That question was whether they would certify the results of the next presidential election. And on that subject, Vance gave a non-answer that instantly disqualifies him: He refused to acknowledge that Donald Trump lost the 2020 election.

Certification of elections was a central factor in Vance’s audition to become Trump’s running mate. Other contenders for the job demonstrated, as Vance did, that they were sufficiently right-wing or loyal to MAGA. But, as Thomas Joscelyn has pointed out in The Bulwark, Vance stood out in one respect: He was the one who signaled most clearly that he was willing to push constitutional boundaries to do Trump’s bidding.

It was a wonky policy debate, with talk of risk pools, housing regulations and energy policy

In an age of world-class disses optimized for social media, Tuesday’s debate was a detour into substance. Both candidates took a low-key approach and both enthusiastically delved into the minutiae.

Walz dug into the drafting of the Affordable Care Act when he was in the House in 2009, and pushed Vance on the senator’s claim that Trump, who tried to eliminate the law, actually helped preserve it. Vance, defending his claim that illegal immigration pushes up housing prices, cited a Federal Reserve study to back himself up. Walz talked about how Minneapolis tinkered with local regulations to boost the housing supply. Both men talked about the overlap between energy policy, trade and climate change.

It was a very different style than often seen in presidential debates over the past several election cycles.

What Vance said about 2020 election results
Vance told ABC News in February 2024 that if he had been vice president in 2020, he would have told states, “We needed to have multiple slates of electors.” That’s in line with what former President Donald Trump and his allies wanted to do. That plan was an effort to reject the slates of electors from battleground states where Joe Biden won.

Vance has said that the election was “stolen” from Trump. That flies in the face of evidence, including from Trump administration officials and courts.

— Amy Sherman

A common refrain among a certain type of liberal commentator is that Democrats should be winning the election by 20 points! The economy is great! Joe Biden got a lot done! And Donald Trump represents an existential threat to democracy. It’s only misinformation, perpetuated by Trump but accentuated by the mainstream media, that’s keeping the election close.

After watching last night’s VP debate, I’m more skeptical about this claim than ever.

The debate itself probably won’t matter. VP debates rarely do, especially one like this that was fought to a draw in polls. In CNN’s survey of debate-watchers, JD Vance won 51-49 — but that’s well within the margin of error.

JD Vance failed to reject Trump’s lies about the 2020 election. He can’t be trusted to protect democracy.

JD Vance and Tim Walz covered lots of issues: inflation, housing, guns, abortion, immigration, health care, and much more.

But there was only one question on which the vice presidency—the job for which these two men are competing—really matters. That question was whether they would certify the results of the next presidential election. And on that subject, Vance gave a non-answer that instantly disqualifies him: He refused to acknowledge that Donald Trump lost the 2020 election.

Certification of elections was a central factor in Vance’s audition to become Trump’s running mate. Other contenders for the job demonstrated, as Vance did, that they were sufficiently right-wing or loyal to MAGA. But, as Thomas Joscelyn has pointed out in The Bulwark, Vance stood out in one respect: He was the one who signaled most clearly that he was willing to push constitutional boundaries to do Trump’s bidding.

On the ‘democracy’ argument

Personally, I think it is pretty damn close to disqualifying to not be able to say that Joe Biden won and Donald Trump lost in 2020. I think our democracy came under real threat in the wake of the 2020 election and, if Mike Pence had caved to the pressure he was under, we could have seen the results of a free and fair election overturned.

But, putting on my hat as a political analyst, I have to say that my view is simply not shared by voters who haven’t made up their mind about the 2024 election.

The issues those voters care about most — according to poll after poll — are the economy, abortion and immigration. “Democracy” is usually much further down the list.

Walz and Vance played defense for the presidential nominees.

Ahead of the debate, Harris aides and allies sought to play down the stakes of the face-off, arguing that it won’t do much to move the polling. They viewed it more as another opportunity for Walz to present Harris’ agenda before a national audience, while Vance was forced to make up for Trump’s poor performance last month. While Walz got off to a shaky start on Tuesday, appearing nervous as he answered the initial question, he quickly eased into his role as the aggressive and energized communicator he’s often been on the campaign trail.

But by the end, even Walz seemed to acknowledge the debate may not have drastically altered the trajectory of the race.

“Most importantly, thank you to all of you if you’re still up and the folks who missed ‘Dancing with Our Stars,’” Walz said. “I appreciate it.”

Helene Upends Election Planning, NPR
North Carolina election officials adjust plans after Hurricane Helene floods counties, with early voting set to begin Oct. 17 despite damaged polling locations and disrupted mail ballots.

Viewers Call VP Debate a Draw, CBS News
CBS News poll shows voters nearly evenly split on the VP debate, with 42% favoring JD Vance and 41% backing Tim Walz, both seen as reasonable and prepared for the presidency.

Asheville Was for Healing—Not Now, USA Today
Asheville’s wellness community, long a haven for healing, faces devastation in the aftermath of Helene as residents grapple with destruction and uncertainty about how to rebuild.

What Data Shows on Migrants With Records, BBC
New ICE data reveals 13,000 non-citizens convicted of homicide, though claims linking them solely to the Biden-Harris administration are misleading, as the figures span decades.

Strategy Behind Trump’s Darkness?, Yahoo! News
Trump is ramping up dark and inflammatory rhetoric, calling immigrants “vile animals” and advocating unrestrained police violence, as part of a strategy to mobilize irregular voters.

Ground News

Americans More Reliant on Govt. Aid, For the Left
With the national debt over $35 trillion, government transfers make up 17.6% of U.S. incomes, while Trump and Harris avoid addressing cuts to programs like Social Security and Medicare.

Debate Moments of Bipartisanship, For the Right
In a surprisingly cordial VP debate, Vance and Walz found some common ground on childcare, manufacturing, and housing despite sharp disagreements over the 2020 election and Jan. 6.