Walz Vance debate/ Midwestern nice debate/ VP debate 2024/ Walz vs Vance/ civil debate 2024/ Newslooks/ NEW YORK/ J. Mansour/ Morning Edition/ In a surprising departure from the usual intensity of political debates, Tim Walz and JD Vance engaged in a polite and substantive discussion during the vice presidential debate. Despite sharp differences on key issues, they maintained a cordial tone, focusing criticism on their running mates rather than attacking each other.
Walz and Vance’s ‘Midwestern Nice’ Debate: Quick Looks
- Cordial Atmosphere: The debate maintained a respectful tone, with both candidates emphasizing common ground and avoiding personal attacks.
- Policy Discussions: While they disagreed on critical issues like abortion, climate change, and taxes, the candidates focused on policy differences without descending into heated rhetoric.
- Regional Appeal: Both candidates represent Midwestern states, bringing a calm and cooperative approach reflective of their heartland roots.
- Debate Dynamics: Vance and Walz primarily aimed their critiques at their presidential running mates, Kamala Harris and Donald Trump, rather than each other.
Vance & Walz’s ‘Midwestern Nice’ Approach Surprises in VP Debate
Deep Look
Americans tuning in to the vice presidential debate between Democrat Tim Walz and Republican JD Vance were greeted by a refreshing change: a civil, policy-focused conversation without the typical heated exchanges. The debate between the two Midwestern candidates offered a striking contrast to the fiery tone that has characterized much of the 2024 presidential race.
The candidates, representing their respective regions in Minnesota and Ohio, displayed a “Midwestern nice” approach throughout the debate. Shaking hands at the start and staying afterward to introduce their wives, Walz and Vance set a calm, polite tone. This demeanor, which dominated the more than 90-minute debate, was a welcome break from the intensity of recent political discussions, especially for voters who have been increasingly frustrated by the vitriol.
One voter, Robert Rubin-Beman from Orlando, Florida, expressed his relief on X (formerly Twitter), saying, “So refreshing to have a normal debate for once… I can’t wait for Trump to leave politics so we can go back to this.”
Walz, currently the governor of Minnesota and running alongside Vice President Kamala Harris, and Vance, the Ohio senator paired with former President Donald Trump, both hail from America’s heartland. This shared geographic background shaped much of their debate dynamic, with both candidates emphasizing common ground and avoiding personal attacks.
Midwest Influence
The idea of “Midwestern nice” was evident in the way both candidates navigated policy disagreements. Walz and Vance, despite representing different parties, found areas of agreement, especially when discussing housing availability. “Now, Tim just mentioned a bunch of ideas,” Vance remarked at one point. “Some of those ideas I actually think are halfway decent, and some of them I disagree with.”
Molly Bentley, a nurse who once studied under Walz, attended a debate watch party in Minnesota. Reflecting on his performance, she said it reminded her of her high school days when Walz taught her global geography. “He respectfully disagreed with JD Vance… he built on ideas rather than dismissing them.”
In stark contrast to the previous presidential debate between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump, where the tone turned sharply confrontational, Walz and Vance managed to keep their discussion grounded in policy. Even when the conversation turned to topics like immigration, climate change, and taxes, they largely avoided turning on each other and instead focused on their running mates.
Criticisms of Running Mates
While they avoided personal attacks on each other, Walz and Vance were quick to criticize their respective presidential running mates. For example, Walz took aim at Trump’s handling of border security and his promise to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border. “Less than 2% of that wall got built, and Mexico didn’t pay a dime,” Walz pointed out during a discussion about immigration.
Vance, on the other hand, turned his critique toward Harris, blaming her for failing to act on key issues during her vice presidency. He accused her of not making housing more affordable, stating, “If Kamala Harris has such great plans for how to address middle-class problems, she ought to do them now.”
Despite these jabs at their running mates, both candidates maintained their respectful tone toward one another. Even in moments of sharp disagreement—such as when Walz pressed Vance about Trump’s refusal to concede the 2020 election—neither raised their voice or resorted to insults. Walz emphasized that they were “miles apart” on the issue and asked Vance, “Did he [Trump] lose the 2020 election?” Vance sidestepped, responding, “Tim, I’m focused on the future.”
Political Calculations
Some political analysts believe this measured approach reflected the candidates’ strategic goal of appealing to undecided voters, especially in battleground states where the outcome of the 2024 election will be determined. “Both sides were trying to look like they could act reasonably,” said Jeremi Suri, a professor of public affairs at the University of Texas at Austin. “Both were trying to appeal to the few undecided voters.”
The debate’s civil tone offered a stark contrast to much of this year’s presidential campaign, which has been marred by political divisions, Trump’s incendiary attacks on Harris, and even two attempted assassinations targeting Trump. During the debate, Trump took to social media to mock Walz, calling him “Tampon Tim,” a reference to a Minnesota law Walz signed mandating menstrual products in school restrooms, including for transgender students. Walz did not respond to the taunt, choosing instead to stay focused on the debate.
Election Outlook
While polls suggest Harris holds a slight lead over Trump—FiveThirtyEight puts the margin at 2.6 percentage points—the election is expected to be decided by slim margins in critical swing states like Georgia, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. The vice presidential debate offered both Walz and Vance an opportunity to appeal to those crucial voters by projecting a reasonable and civil demeanor, qualities that may resonate with voters seeking stability in a deeply polarized political climate.
Even when tackling contentious topics like abortion and climate change, both candidates managed to navigate the discussion without letting it devolve into a shouting match. This level-headed debate, while far from changing the deep divides in U.S. politics, was a rare instance of civility in a highly charged election cycle.
