On Tuesday, the American people got to see and hear the vice presidential picks of the two major parties outline their visions for the country. The debate was both more substantive and polite than the presidential debate between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris. It was almost a breath of fresh air, a reminder of how politicians vying for their spot in the executive branch used to talk.
Almost.
Ohio Sen. JD Vance clearly came away the “winner” of the debate, offering a slick and smart performance for the most part. Unlike Trump, he stayed on point and delivered coherent answers.
Of course, he was a little too well-prepared in dodging a question about whether Joe Biden won the 2020 presidential election. Asked point blank if Trump lost, Vance responded, “Tim, I’m focused on the future.”
That kind of answer no doubt is what Trump and his base would prefer to the truth, which is that Trump clearly lost the election. It’s also the sort of answer that shows why Trump picked Vance, which is that Vance will be an uncritical Trump loyalist and is willing to look silly in public if it means protecting the ego of Trump.
Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, meanwhile, seemed nervous on the big stage. Setting aside his verbal fumble that he was “friends with school shooters,” Walz once again stepped in it when confronted with another one of his fabulist tales.
Walz previously claimed he was in Hong Kong during the deadly 1989 protest in Tiananmen Square, an interesting if true anecdote. But it wasn’t true, he in fact was in America at the time and didn’t visit Asia until months later.
Asked to explain this discrepancy, Walz pivoted quite sloppily.: “Yeah. Well, and to the folks out there who didn’t get at the top of this, look, I grew up in small, rural Nebraska, town of 400. Town that you rode your bike with your buddies till the streetlights come on, and I’m proud of that service.”
And so he rambled on for quite some time. It was only when pressed again if he could explain himself that he responded, “No. All I said on this was, is, I got there that summer and misspoke on this, so I will just, that’s what I’ve said.”
Being a storyteller isn’t totally disqualifying for the electorate. Just see President Joe Biden and his tall tales about his son Beau dying in Iraq (he didn’t), that he “was sort of raised in the Puerto Rican community at home” (he wasn’t), and that he graduated in the top half of his law school class (he was actually near the bottom).
But being a serial storyteller is becoming Walz’s signature, especially after his past lie about having served in war came back to bite him.
These observations aside, both candidates were more comfortable on the attack than in presenting a more positive vision.
Only Walz spoke directly and accurately on fiscal matters, correctly noting that on Trump’s watch the national debt skyrocketed and that Trump’s proposed tariff plan would destabilize the economy and cause the cost of goods to skyrocket. But his proposal is to raise taxes.
Vance, meanwhile, ripped into global trade, complaining that Americans are worse off today than before. “They said if we shipped our industrial base off to other countries, to Mexico and elsewhere, it would make the middle class stronger. They were wrong about that,” he said.
These sorts of populist appeals might make some people in the Rust Belt feel good, but they’re economic gibberish and blame on trade (the erosion of traditional factory jobs) what were mainly the result of technological advances, namely automation.
Alas, Vance and Walz are the candidates of the Big Government Right and the Big Government Left.
