In a VP debate heavy on policy, Vance and Walz draw clear contrast with their running mates

WASHINGTON – Vice -presidential candidates are often chosen partly to contrast with their running mates, and it wasn’t hard for Gov. Tim Walz of Minnesota and Sen. JD Vance of Ohio to do that in their debate on Tuesday night.

Compared to the rhetorical clash between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump three weeks earlier, the VP debate stayed civil and was chock full of policy ideas, despite both candidates predictably dodging questions they didn’t want to answer.

Even after Walz, the Democrat, accused his opponent of “revisionist history” when Vance downplayed Trump’s role in the violent riot at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, the two men thanked each other and ended the night with messages designed to broaden the appeal of their respective tickets.

An early exchange over immigration policy – one of the most heated topics in the presidential race – exemplified the genial approach both men took. Talking about a U.S. immigration system that both parties say is broken, Walz invoked Trump’s successful effort to stop Congress from passing a bipartisan border security bill in February.

“I believe Sen. Vance wants to solve this, but by standing with Donald Trump and not working together to find a solution, it becomes a talking point,” Walz said.

“I agree with you,” Vance replied, after blaming the current vice president for the burden he said immigrants have placed on schools, hospitals and housing. “I think you want to solve this problem, but I don’t think that Kamala Harris does.”

Here are a few more takeaways from what is expected to be the last debate before Election Day, Nov. 5.

Vance focuses on likability

After Trump spent most of the presidential debate on Sept. 10 scowling and refusing to even look at Harris, Vance was pointedly friendly toward his Democratic opponent throughout the debate. When the debate turned to abortion and women’s reproductive rights, the senator acknowledged that many voters object to the anti-abortion statements he has made in the past and suggested Republicans need to reframe their position, saying, “We’ve got to do so much better a job at earning Americans’ trust back.”

Walz settles in after a rocky start

Walz appeared nervous and defensive early on, and although he seemed to get more comfortable as the night progressed, he occasionally misspoke or stumbled over his words. The governor had stronger moments when the debate turned to abortion and Trump’s role in the Capitol riot, but many viewers traditionally tune out after the beginning of a debate.

Some of his slipups were obvious mistakes, like when he said, “I’ve become friends with school shooters” when he seemed to mean survivors of school shootings. At other times, he failed to clearly explain what he called misstatements, such as a story he has repeated as recently as February that he was in Hong Kong during the Tiananmen Square protests in China in the spring of 1989. Minnesota Public Radio has reported that Walz didn’t go to China or Hong Kong until later that year, and on Tuesday he explained his claim by saying, “I’m a knucklehead at times.”

Both candidates dodge tough questions

While the debate delved into policy details far more than Harris and Trump did weeks earlier, both Walz and Vance pivoted when they were asked to explain how their running mates intend to pay for their economic plans.

When asked about their plans to lower housing costs, Walz dismissed the idea that offering tax credits to homebuyers would drive up costs and Vance defended Trump’s suggestion that the federal government could repurpose public lands to build more housing, but neither man clearly explained how their proposals would work.