Actually, the opinions of American voters have long been formed. Nevertheless, the TV duel between the vice presidential candidates is significant, especially in the Midwest.
Minnesota Governor Tim Walz and Senator JD Vance during the televised debate in New York.
Fresh Mike / Reuters
The survey results are in place, the election forecast is still: undecided. Nothing seems to be able to change the race between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris, neither the second attempted assassination attempt on Donald Trump nor the incredible sums of money on election advertising that both campaigns are currently wasting. A month before the elections, the two political camps are maximally polarized, both nationally and in the swing states. And so you understand voices that ask who actually cares about the debate between J. D. Vance and Tim Walz.
But in this bitter election campaign in which 10,000 voters in Pennsylvania could decide who goes to the White House, everything matters. It certainly matters if the man who is supposed to win over working people in the Midwest for the Democratic candidate weakens. Tim Walz, the governor of Minnesota, was recruited for this purpose. He is supposed to build a bridge for the dark-skinned politician from left-liberal California to the average white American in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. Because if Harris thinks this blue wall is for the Democrats, then on January 20th she will be sitting in the Oval Office and governing. But in the television duel with Vance, Walz did the vice president no good service.
The angry football coach
Portraying Vance as an intolerable vice president was Walz’s most important task. He had a hard time with it. From the beginning, Vance dictated the pace of his speech, and it was rapid. However, fast-talking is not the strength of the leisurely governor of Minnesota. He didn’t have to do the same as Vance, but he didn’t realize it until the end of the 100-minute duel. With a reddened head and pressure in his voice, Walz debated strenuously and with the manner of an angry football coach. In front of the cameras and an expected audience of 50 million, he missed the ease with which Kamala Harris had launched her campaign in August.
JD Vance, who has a popularity problem because of his disrespectful remark about childless cat owners, managed to distinguish himself as a smooth, well-mannered debater. In terms of content, Vance and Walz were quite equal in the debate, which for once focused on factual policy. Both had their strong moments: Vance blamed Kamala Harris for the surge in immigration and the high cost of living. Walz described the deadly consequences of abortion bans for women and denounced Vance as an enemy of democracy when he refused to answer a question about whether he would accept defeat at the ballot box.
Vance manages to correct his image
But Walz debated so heatedly that he forgot who he was addressing: the undecided voters in the swing states. There are only a few of these left – estimated 3 percent don’t yet know who they will vote for. They need to be convinced in the coming weeks. In the debate, Vance cleverly pointed to his background in precarious circumstances in Ohio and omitted his later studies at the elite Yale University and his work in the financial industry in California. Walz, however, neglected to point out that he, who grew up on a farm and worked for many years as a high school teacher, lived closer to the people than Vance. In the end, Vance seemed approachable and Walz seemed aloof, an unexpected role reversal.
Shortly before the elections, the uncertainty of citizens in the USA is increasing: there is the war in the Middle East, which threatens to escalate, the devastation caused by Hurricane Helene, and a dock workers’ strike that is partially disrupting trade will paralyze and will likely drive up inflation again. In times of crisis like this, you want a steady hand in the White House, not an agitated football coach. If this idea crept into voters’ minds during the debate, Trump can applaud his vice president.
