On October 1, Republican Ohio US Senator JD Vance and Democratic Minnesota Governor Tim Walz debated and clashed on everything from economic and gun policy to immigration and school shootings in the only vice-presidential debate of the 2024 election. The two candidates kept things cordial and civil personally, even appearing friendly at times and saying they could work with each other. However, they repeatedly savaged each other’s running mates and defended their party policies and tickets.
Following are key takeaways from the debate as reported by the national news organizations CNN by staff reporters Eric Bradner, Daniel Strauss, Arit John and Gregory Krieg and NBC News staff reporter Sahil Kapur:
IT WASN’T REALLY ABOUT VANCE OR WALZ
“It was immediately clear the two prominent politicians on stage were merely proxies for their running mates, using the questions as vehicles to attack their top-of-the-ticket rivals and on many occasions going out of their way not to personally attack each other.
Walz used his first question, regarding Iran’s strikes on Israel, to hit at Trump’s age: “A nearly 80-year-old Donald Trump talking about crowd sizes is not what we need in this moment.” He went on to assail “Donald Trump’s fickle leadership” around the world.
Vance replied, “Who has been the vice president for the last three and a half years? And the answer is your running mate, not mine. Donald Trump consistently made the world more secure.”
In the next section, about climate change, Walz hit Trump again: “Donald Trump called it a hoax, and then joked that these things would make more beachfront property to be able to invest in.”
On immigration, Vance sidestepped when asked how Trump would carry out his mass deportation promise, and repeatedly attacking Harris: “I’ve been to the southern border more than our border czar, Kamala Harris, has been.”
Notably, both men said they believed their on-stage rival wants to solve the problem at the border, as well as other areas of policy disagreement.
“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.
Vance replied, “I actually think I agree with you. I think you want to solve this problem, but I don’t think that Kamala Harris does.”
The most tension between them came toward the end, when Walz asked Vance point-blank if Trump lost the 2020 election. Vance wouldn’t give a straight answer, instead throwing a question back at Walz about censorship about the Covid-19 pandemic on Facebook.”
VANCE DEFENDS HIS FLIP ON PAST CRITICISM OF TRUMP
Vance was well-prepared with an answer when asked to explain his past criticisms of Trump, including saying he could be “America’s Hitler” and his critiques of Trump’s economic record as president.
“Sometimes, of course, I disagree with the president, but I’ve also been extremely open about the fact that I was wrong about Donald Trump. I was wrong, first of all, because I believed some of the media stories that turned out to be dishonest fabrications of his record,” Vance said, treading over territory he and his campaign have talked about in media interviews and responses to stories.
Vance continued: “But most importantly, Donald Trump delivered for the American people, rising wages, rising take home pay, an economy that works for normal Americans, a secure southern border… When you screw up, when you misspeak, when you get something wrong, and you change your mind, you ought to be honest with the American people.”
He also partially blamed Congress, saying there “were a lot of things on the border, on tariffs” that “could have done so much more if the Republican Congress and the Democrats in Congress had been a little bit better about how they governed the country.”
WALZ AND VANCE PICK THROUGH THEIR RUNNING MATES’ ECONOMIC RECORDS
Walz came equipped with an argument to attack Trump on the economy, which is one of the GOP nominee’s strongest issues, according to polls that ask voters who they trust to handle it.
“Kamala Harris’ day one was Donald Trump’s failure on Covid that led to the collapse of our economy. We were already, before Covid, in a manufacturing recession — about 10 million people at work, largest percentage since the Great Depression,” Walz said.
Vance responded by attacking the Biden-Harris economic record as “atrocious” and defending Trump.
“Honestly, Tim, I think you got a tough job here, because you got to play Whac-A-Mole,” he said, accusing Walz of having to “pretend” that Trump’s economy improved wages and had lower inflation.
Walz also attacked Trump on taxes and trade policy.
“If you’re listening tonight and you want billionaires get tax cuts,” Trump is your candidate, Walz told voters while looking through the TV screen. “How is it fair that you’re paying your taxes every year and Donald Trump hasn’t paid any federal tax in the last 15 years?”
VANCE’S REVISIONIST HISTORY ON TRUMP’S OBAMACARE REPEAL PUSH
Vance rewrote the history of Trump’s years-long efforts to destroy the Affordable Care Act, or “Obamacare,” instead repeating the campaign’s claim that Trump rescued it.
“Donald Trump could’ve destroyed the program. Instead he worked in a bipartisan way to ensure that Americans had access to affordable care,” Vance said when asked about Trump saying he has “concepts of a plan” to replace the 2010 health care law.
The claim distorts the facts. As president, Trump worked in a partisan way with Republicans to try and destroy ACA, endorsing legislation that would have rescinded the law’s insurance subsidies and prohibitions on charging higher prices to people with pre-existing conditions; the push fell one vote short in the Senate. He used executive actions to cut funding for programs to sign people up for coverage on the law’s marketplaces. He also asked the Supreme Court to wipe out the ACA in its entirety in 2020 — the case failed.
The link to the quoted NBC news source with photos is here:
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/5-takeaways-walz-vance-presidential-debate-economy-health-care-defendi-rcna172591
VANCE DODGES ON JANUARY 6
The clearest divide of the night came when Walz put Vance on the spot during a discussion of the January 6, 2021, insurrection and Trump’s false claims that he won the 2020 election.
“Did he lose the 2020 election?” Walz asked Vance, attempting to force the Ohio senator to acknowledge a reality that Trump himself won’t.
“Tim, I’m focused on the future,” was how Vance began his response.
“That is a damning nonanswer,” Walz shot back.
Vance tried to sidestep the violent attack by Trump supporters on the US Capitol on the day Congress was gathering to officially count Electoral College votes and certify Joe Biden’s victory.
“On January 6, what happened? Joe Biden became president; Donald Trump left the White House,” Vance said.
Walz, though, drilled into the details of the costs of Trump’s efforts to overturn the election results.
“He lost this election, and he said he didn’t. One hundred and forty police officers were beaten at the Capitol that day, some with the American flag, and several later died,” he said. “The democracy is bigger than winning an election.”
Vance tried to redirect the discussion of democracy into a debate about social media censorship. But each time he tried, Walz pushed back, arguing that Trump was already laying the groundwork to reject the outcome of the 2024 race if he loses.
“Here we are four years later, in the same boat,” Walz said. “The winner needs to be the winner. This has got to stop. It’s tearing our country apart.”
MIDWESTERN NICE, UP TO A POINT
In many ways, this vice-presidential debate reflected the way typical Americans argue about contentious issues.
There was no name-calling, few canned zingers and a clear directive for both Vance and Walz not to get personal – unless they were aggressively agreeing that the issues were, in fact, issues. The housing crisis, they agreed, was a crisis. Gun violence, both said, needed to be reduced.
Instead of jousting among themselves, Vance and Walz behaved agreeably in the service of trying to depict the respective presidential candidates as uniquely divisive or misguided.
“I agree with a lot of what Sen. Vance said about what’s happening – his running mate, though, does not,” Walz said when the debate turned to abortion. “And that’s the problem.”
Even after Walz rejected Vance’s claim that housing prices were being driven up by undocumented immigrants, the Republican offered his rival some kind words.
“Tim just mentioned a bunch of ideas. Now some of those ideas I actually think are halfway decent, and some of them I disagree with,” Vance said, before regaining his focus and adding, “But the most important thing here is: Kamala Harris is not running as a newcomer to politics. She is the sitting VP.”
SPRINGFIELD PET-EATING CLAIMS FEATURE IN IMMIGRATION CLASH
During a debate over immigration and border security, Walz invoked Vance’s false claims about Haitian immigrants eating the pets of residents in Springfield, Ohio.
“There’s consequences for this,” Walz said, pointing out that Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine, a Republican, dispatched state troopers to Springfield to ensure the safety of children after a series of bomb threats.
Vance shot back, “The people I care most about in Springfield are the American citizens.”
In the Ohio city and others like it, Vance said, because of an influx of migrants, “you’ve got schools that are overwhelmed, you’ve got hospitals that are overwhelmed, you’ve got housing that is totally unaffordable.”
What Vance didn’t say: The 12,000 to 15,000 Haitian migrants in Springfield are in the United States legally.
But Walz didn’t fact-check Vance on that matter. And when he didn’t, CBS moderator Margaret Brennan explained those immigrants’ legal status.
The clash over Springfield came during a lengthy back-and-forth over immigration policy. Vance repeatedly referred to Harris as President Joe Biden’s “border czar,” a label that refers to her 2021 assignment to tackle the root causes of migration from Central American countries. And Walz hammered Trump for his role in thwarting a bipartisan border security bill earlier this year, saying the former president did so in order to keep immigration alive as a campaign issue.
“We could come together and solve this if we didn’t let Donald Trump continue to make it an issue,” Walz said.
WALZ SAYS HE ‘MISSPOKE’ ABOUT HIS PRESENCE AT TIANANMEN SQUARE
New reporting by Minnesota Public Radio News and APM Reports in the lead up to Tuesday’s debate called into question Walz’s claims about how frequently he traveled to China, which he has previously said was as many as “about 30 times.” Reports contradicted those claims and specifically whether the Minnesota governor was in Hong Kong during the Tiananmen Square protests in 1989.
CNN also reported additional information on Walz’s claims earlier on Tuesday.
When asked about the reports and the discrepancy, a Harris campaign spokesperson said it was “likely closer to 15” times.
And when asked directly during the debate Walz filibustered, first describing his upbringing and rise in electoral politics before conceding that he can sometimes get caught up in the moment, be a “knucklehead,” and said he “misspoke.”
Vance didn’t seek to directly capitalize on Walz’s concession, but alluded to it in a different question shortly thereafter, saying, “When you misspeak, you ought to be honest with the American people about that.”
ASSERTIONS OVER ABORTION
As the debate turned to abortion, both candidates were asked to address claims about their ticket’s stances on reproductive rights.
Walz was asked to respond to a false assertion from Trump that the Minnesota governor supports abortion in the ninth month. In one of his stronger moments of the night, Walz brought up the personal stories of women who faced health crises or died due to state abortion bans.
“In Minnesota, what we did was restore Roe v. Wade,” Walz said. “We made sure that we put women in charge of their health care.”
While discussing abortion, the governor incorrectly claimed the Trump campaign and the conservative Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 would create a “registry of pregnancies.” The organization’s proposal would require the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to collect data on abortions.
Vance was asked if the Trump campaign wants to create a “federal pregnancy monitoring agency,” referencing another past claim by Walz.
“Certainly we won’t,” Vance said. The Ohio senator defended the repeal of federal abortion protections, pointing to a 2023 ballot initiative in his state that enshrined abortion rights in the state constitution. Vance argued that the Republican Party needs to do a better job of advancing “pro-family” policies, including access to fertility treatments and make housing more affordable.
CONVERSATION ON GUN VIOLENCE
Vance and Walz had something approaching a constructive conversation about gun violence in America, agreeing that it is bad, getting worse and needs to be addressed – especially in schools.
That this bears noting underscores just how fruitless past Democratic-led efforts have been in stemming the bloody tide. But the question of how to deal with it, despite the friendly nods between the two onstage, remained unresolved.
Vance at one point even suggested that the current administration’s border policy (or, as he put it, “Kamala Harris’ open border”) was a driving factor – a non sequitur given the length and depth of the crisis. He did, however, also acknowledge it was a more complicated issue.
Walz mostly agreed with that sentiment but fought to keep the conversation from turning into a stalemate. When Vance pointed to mental health and drug use as another cause of gun deaths, Walz sought to refocus the conversation.
“Sometimes it just is the guns,” Walz said. “It’s just the guns.”
The Minnesota governor agreed that lawmakers “should look at all the issues” but stopped there to add a line of caution.
“This idea of stigmatizing mental health – just because you have a mental health issue doesn’t mean you’re violent,” Walz said.
The candidates also shared concerns over how schools were responding to the threat of active shooters. Again, though, Vance treated the issue as something more like a force of nature than a policy question.
“I unfortunately think we have to increase security in our schools,” he said, acknowledging that it was not a pleasant prospect. “We have to make the doors lock better. We have to make the doors stronger. We’ve got to make the windows stronger.”
Walz agreed, in part, but, in urging tighter restrictions, asked viewers, “Do you want your schools hardened to look like a fort?”
The link to the quoted news source with photos is here:
https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/01/politics/vp-debate-takeaways-vance-walz/index.html
CBS FLASH POLL: THE DEBATE WAS A DRAW
CBA conducted a flash poll to gage public opinion on who won the debate. The following CBS news story was written by CBS staff reporter Steven Shepard:
“Voters who watched the VP debate rendered a split decision in a flash poll conducted by CBS News and YouGov.
Roughly equal shares of debate-watchers scored JD Vance (42 percent) and Tim Walz (41 percent) the winner, the poll showed. The remaining 17 percent called it a tie.
That stands in contrast to the two presidential debates earlier this year. In flash polls conducted by CNN, Donald Trump was seen as a clear victor over Joe Biden in their June debate, while Kamala Harris clearly beat out Trump in last month’s meeting between the two nominees.
And in another turnabout from the top of the ticket, the vast majority of debate-watchers, 88 percent, described the tone of the VP debate as “generally positive.” Only 12 percent said it was “generally negative.”
Both running mates improved their image ratings among voters who watched the debate. Walz entered the night with 52 percent of this sample holding a favorable opinion of him; 60 percent said they did after it was over. Among the same group, Vance’s favorable rating improved by roughly the same margin, from 40 percent to 49 percent.
A reminder: Polls of voters who watched the debate are not representative of the broader electorate. The CBS News/YouGov poll was conducted online among voters who said in advance they planned to watch the debate and has a margin of error of plus or minus 2.7 percentage points.
On issues, debate watchers said Walz gave the better answers on abortion (62 percent to 38 percent) and health care (59 percent to 41 percent). The two candidates were roughly even on the conflict in the Middle East, the economy and immigration.
And a majority of debate watchers said Walz spent most of his time explaining his own views (54 percent) as opposed to attacking the other side (46 percent). Those results were flipped for Vance: 55 percent said he spent most of his time attacking the other side.”
The link to the quoted news source with photos is here:
https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2024/10/01/vance-walz-vp-debate-tonight/cbs-flash-poll-results-00182122
COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS
The match-up between Walz, 60, and Vance, 40, is expected to be the last debate of the 2024 presidential election cycle. Former President Donald Trump has signaled that he will not debate Vice President Kamala Harris again before the election, which is less than 40 days away.
The Vice-Presidential debate between Vance and Waltz was a stark contrast with the Presidential debate between former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamal Harris. It was a debate that was amazingly normal given the vitriol of the campaign and the Presidential debate.
Gov. Walz was noticeably less comfortable on stage than Vance but eventually settled in after a nervous start. He cast Trump as a liar who ignores experts and rejects the truth as he offers “alternative facts” that are many times simply made up.
The two VP candidates were cordial and polite to each other concentrating their attacks on the presidential candidates and focusing largely on policy differences. Vance repeatedly hit Vice President Kamala Harris on border security, while Walz lambasted former President Donald Trump on abortion rights.
Both candidates did no harm and did not make a fool of themselves. They acted like adults. It’s unlikely the debate will change the trajectory of the presidential race with the race that is still considered a toss up. .
