Vice presidential candidate JD Vance outshone the debate skills of his Republican running mate, Donald Trump, as well as defeating his Democratic opposite number Tim Walz Tuesday night, according to Newsweek readers and writers.
The New York meeting between Vance and Walz delivered calm performances in stark contrast to last month’s Trump-Harris presidential clash, characterized by fiery exchanges, personal attacks, and multiple moderator interventions.
Unlike the aggressive and erratic energy that defined the Republican presidential nominee’s September performance, Vance presented a more polished, substantive, and effective approach against Walz.
And many analysts who spoke to Newsweek said Vance had now made up for Trump’s widely panned showing, which could reinforce the former president’s decision to not debate again.
JD Vance at the vice-presidential debate in New York City, New York, October 1, 2024. Analysts have told Newsweek that Vance’s performance far outshone Donald Trump’s last month.
Matt Rourke/ASSOCIATED PRESS
Barbara A. Perry, professor and presidential historian at the University of Virginia’s Miller Center, told Newsweek that Tuesday’s debate was much more traditional.
“Vance, who is an effective speaker, presumably from his Yale Law and podcast experiences, seemed to be running out of steam by the end, but overall, he did well,” Perry said.
“This debate was not nearly as entertaining as the Trump/Harris contest,” Perry said. “Trump’s meltdown (especially on Springfield, OH) and Harris’s responses (including incredulous facial expressions), as well as her pushing his buttons, were unprecedented in campaign history.”
Both Vance and Walz mostly stuck to the issues, delving into policy topics such as health care, the deficit, and manufacturing.
Aaron Kall, director of debate at the University of Michigan, told Newsweek that Vance had the ability to maintain focus and communicate effectively, noting, “It was a polar opposite of what happened in Philadelphia a few weeks ago. Vance did a much better job of prosecuting the case against the Biden-Harris administration.”
Kall also said that Vance’s law school background likely aided his performance, just as Harris’ prosecutorial history served her well against Trump.
In his debate against Democratic presidential nominee Harris, Trump made headlines for his unsubstantiated claims, such as accusing Haitian immigrants in Ohio of “eating the dogs and cats.”
By contrast, Vance avoided inflammatory rhetoric, even when tackling contentious topics like immigration and climate change. Instead of repeating Trump’s dismissive stance on climate issues, Vance emphasized manufacturing and energy independence, which struck a more constructive tone.
This departure, however, had mixed implications for the potential impact on voters.
Ben Voth, a professor of rhetoric at Southern Methodist University, told Newsweek that negative campaigning tends to make the greatest difference at altering electoral chances. “The two candidates were exceptionally amicable and moving toward agreement on their points,” Voth said. ” That is good for debate and overall civic spirit, but it does diminish the likelihood that the debate will cause a decisive shift in polling results.”
Wendy J. Schiller, a political science professor at Brown University, echoed the sentiment that Vance presented himself more effectively than Trump, while still maintaining “unwavering loyalty” to him. She told Newsweek “Vance’s performance was very polished, and I am not sure he could have improved anything.”
“This was a much more traditional debate in the sense that each candidate answered the questions and addressed them relatively clearly. I attribute that sense of decorum to their attempts to appeal to swing state voters.”
The outcome of the vice-presidential debate also sheds light on what might come next—or rather, what may not.
Analysts have noted that Vance’s strong showing reduces the incentive for Trump to return to the debate stage.
Kall explained, “Vance’s solid night probably decreases the incentive for Trump agreeing to a final presidential debate, given some newfound campaign momentum and absence of mistakes that need to be cleaned up.”
While the September debate saw Kamala Harris outperform Trump, Tuesday’s vice-presidential debate showed that Vance could hold his own, even in a closely contested and high stakes environment.
The contrast between the two Republican candidates—one seemingly unable to resist provocation and the other focusing most on policy—was made apparent, and the difference could prove critical as the election season moves forward.
Despite the impressive performance by Vance, experts remain skeptical about whether this debate will significantly alter the election landscape. Kall said, “Neither vice-presidential selections nor debates have a major impact on elections, no matter how good or bad the performances may be.”
