Five keys to the Walz-Vance debate that could swing the election

Whether it was because the night wasn't right for more aggressive posturing after Iran's attack on Israel or because both candidates needed to appeal to undecided voters with a more measured tone, JD Vance and Tim Walz delivered a debate marked by civility, where no verbal 'nukes' were launched. The Republican senator, often perceived by the public as an extremist, was the clear winner. He was calm, composed and in control of the situation.

The unforced errors of Walz the "knucklehead" 

With both contenders adopting a conciliatory tone, the anticipated battle felt more like a tennis match. True to the sport's slang, nerves got the better of Kamala Harris' running mate on several occasions. In fact, the first slip-up came quickly when he mistakenly confused Iran with Israel while responding to a question about the Middle East situation.

Walz's discomfort resurfaced when he referred to himself as an "knucklehead" while trying to dodge the question about why he falsely claimed he was in Hong Kong during the Tiannamen Square massacre. "I’ve not been perfect, and I’m a knucklehead at times," he said. That response was not good enough for moderator Margaret Brennan, who forced the Minnesota governor to assure that it was all a misunderstanding.

Vance, a solid candidate

Despite Walz's attempts to portray Vance as a dangerous MAGA extremist, the Republican candidate dominated the situation throughout the evening. Unlike his rival, he did not shy away from the more controversial issues and offered clear and direct answers, even if they might not resonate with some of his base. He skillfully dodged attempts to link him to Project 2025, the Democrat's go-to criticism against Trump and articulated his ticket's stance on abortion with poise.

All this was done without missing the opportunity for counterattacks on every issue, highlighting Kamala Harris' record as vice president and exposing her more radical positions.

Abortion

One of key pillars of the Democratic campaign to win the White House and a topic where Walz seemed more confident as a champion and defender of "reproductive rights" quickly shifted when Vance responded. After proudly stressing his commitment to defending the unborn, the Ohio senator went on to debunk the Democrat's biggest lies.

After returning the serve by rejecting the claim that Republicans are pushing for a national ban, Vance delivered a powerful rebuttal by highlighting a controversial law signed by Walz in Minnesota. He pointed out that the law allows a baby who survives an abortion to be left to die. "The Minnesota law that you signed into law, the statute that you signed into law, it says that a doctor who presides over an abortion where the baby survives, the doctor is under no obligation to provide lifesaving care to a baby who survives a botched late-term abortion."

Border security

Vance didn't get sucked into Walz's comparison of recent border encounter numbers, which had dropped to levels seen four years ago as the election approached and the Biden-Harris administration began enforcing laws that were already in place when they arrived but had either been ignored or repealed until mid-2024.

On this occasion, Trump's ticket mate clearly went on the attack, holding Harris responsible for the current border crisis. Vance pointed out that, despite being tasked with overseeing the issue, Harris has made only minimal appearances at the border, unlike Vance who has frequently visited and held meetings in the area. Vance stressed that "it's heartbreaking, because the Border Patrol agents just want to be empowered to do their job."

Walz was cornered

Walz was visibly uncomfortable and struggled to handle the most challenging questions of the night. Therefore, Vance refrained from bringing up the topics that could have most damaged the Democrat. Walz attempted to mimic Kamala's strategy of dodging direct answers. However, this approach backfired, projecting an impage of insecurity, nervousness. He even came off as concealing information. This impression did little to bolster his credibility as a candidate seeking to share in governing the world's leading superpower.