Who won the debate

Did America finally get the debate it deserved? That's what a champion debate coach thinks

After the first big debate of 2024, there was more of a consensus on who lost than on who won it: President Joe Biden couldn’t make a coherent case against Donald Trump, a former president who peppered his comments with falsehoods. And the clock started ticking on when Biden would have to drop out of the race.

After the second debate, the polls and the pundits agreed: Vice President Kamala Harris defeated Trump by a wide margin.

And so, the Tuesday night debate between vice presidential candidates J.D. Vance and Tim Walz was the rubber match, the one that would decide which party made the best use of the 2024 debate season.

Who won? On one level, it was the moderators Margaret Brennan and Norah O’Donnell, who asked tougher questions of each candidate than Vance and Walz asked each other. But there is also a case to be made, as champion debate coach Todd Graham told me, that America won — by getting the substantive debate we’ve been waiting for. (For Graham’s detailed scoresheet, see below.)

The two candidates kept pointing out that they agreed with each other on some points and Vance showed a human touch when he empathized with Walz’s 17-year-old son having witnessed a shooting. “There was a lot of commonality,” Walz said. 

Each harshly criticized the other’s running mates, with Vance blaming Kamala Harris for surges in immigration and inflation and Walz calling out Donald Trump’s extreme stances on abortion, immigration and climate change.

But overall this was a debate that harked back to an older era in American politics, before the 2016 GOP presidential debates where Trump blew up the gentility of traditional campaigning and turned debates into the equivalent of Ultimate Fighting Championship matches.

In vivid contrast to Trump’s demeanor, Vance appeared smooth, calm and quick to parry his party’s weak points, trying to turn them into criticisms of the Biden-Harris administration without Trumpian name-calling.

Walz seemed to operate at a higher temperature, his brow furrowed, his mouth often downcast. Vance kept circling back to his three young children and Walz kept channeling national issues as if the real gauge was how they played with farmers in Minnesota.

Moderators Norah O’Donnell, left, and Margaret Brennan.

Walz struggled at times to counter Vance’s pirouettes on climate change, abortion and Obamacare. Vance sensed the unpopularity of his own party’s stances on those points and trotted out novel, though mostly unconvincing ways of turning them into attack lines against Harris and Walz. On substance, Walz often had the stronger argument but at times seemed to struggle to make the case effectively.

It was only at the end that the debate really came alive. In perhaps the sharpest exchange, Walz referred to Trump’s refusal to concede his loss to Biden four years ago and demanded of Vance, “Did he lose the 2020 election?”

"Tim, I'm focused on the future," Vance replied.

Walz called that a “damning non-answer…He lost the election. This is not a debate."

Ridiculously, Vance compared election denialism to the Biden administration asking social media companies to take down what it viewed as misinformation about the Covid pandemic.  

Walz closed strongly, touting the wide range of prominent people supporting Kamala Harris, not forgetting to mention Taylor Swift’s endorsement, and offering a note of optimism about the country if Trump were to lose. Vance’s closing statement largely came down to blaming Harris for everything he thinks ails America while praising Trump’s record as president.

The biggest takeaway? Imagine what kind of a debate we would have seen had the two candidates picked higher-profile running mates: Nikki Haley for the Republicans and Josh Shapiro for the Democrats.

A champion debate coach’s verdict

For a pro’s view of Tuesday’s debate, I turned to Todd Graham, who has coached five teams to national debate championships. His verdict: “Tim Walz and JD Vance had the debate we’ve been asking for.” 

Here’s Todd’s scorecard:

“My three criteria for judging vice presidential debates:

• Defend the top of your ticket.

• Attack the top of the other ticket.

• Demonstrate that you can be president.

J.D. Vance: 

Defended Trump when attacked: Vance did this mostly with two things. He added specifics (that Trump failed to provide in his debate) such as beginning deportations with immigrants convicted of committing crimes. And how reliance on producing more of our own oil will help drive down inflation.

Attacked the top of the other ticket: He did a strong job of trying to relate most topics back to Harris from the economy to immigration.

Demonstrated he could be president: He passed this test. If this is the only time you’ve seen Vance, he seemed someone way better than the top of his ticket. Indeed, three of four debaters this year seemed ready to be president. The irony is that according to this year’s debates, the one who is not qualified to be president of the United States is the person who already was: Donald Trump.

Side note: JD knows how to handle a fact check: Don’t get defensive and play victim: Simply cite more facts.

Tim Walz:

Defend the top of your ticket: Stressing that Harris supported keeping weapons out of bad guys’ hands and the Biden-Harris administration having negotiated drug prices were two examples.

Attack the top of the other ticket: Walz was strongest here. His Jan 6 indictment of both Trump and Vance on defending democracy was honest and impactful. 

Demonstrate that you can be president: Walz’s many examples of leadership in Minnesota were quite effective.

Side note: Walz earns points for reaching out to the other side because he also delineates times they agree — and this is rare in debates since Trump. But it also helps Walz when he decides to disagree with Vance. He had our attention, and that helped his arguments. 

Grades: 

Walz: A- (slow start, nervous, only looked at camera)

Vance: B- Best defense of Trump in any VP debate, but when you go back, you’ll notice he answered very few questions directly. Otherwise, he’d get an A as well.