The big VP debate takeaway: Neither candidate delivered the goods

Tim Walz and JD Vance spent much of Tuesday night defending their running mates’ records. They were less successful promoting their bosses’ plans for the future.

The two vice presidential candidates spent the 90-minute debate relitigating the last eight years just as much as they focused on their visions for the next four, sparring over the intricacies of Donald Trump’s first term, President Joe Biden’s policies — and their own political baggage, including Walz’ false claim he was in Hong Kong during the Tiananmen Square protests and Vance’s past harsh criticisms of Trump.

The result was a wide-ranging, policy-heavy back and forth that often pushed Walz and Vance to play defense for the presidential nominees, affording them little opportunity to make a fresh and forceful case to undecided voters just weeks before they head to the polls.

At the same time, they missed opportunities to use much-used attack lines against one another: Vance didn’t grill Walz on his military record while the Minnesota governor didn’t go after Vance over his “childless cat ladies” comment.

On immigration, Vance spent a large portion of his time defending Trump’s border policies, as Walz attacked the former president for only building less than 2 percent of the wall when he was in office. Vance used questions on the economy to argue that Trump delivered rising take-home pay and lower inflation, while slamming four years of Harris’ leadership on the economy. On health care, the men sparred over the Affordable Care Act and prescription drug costs under their running mates. And on foreign policy, they engaged in lengthy back and forth, both blaming each other’s parties for deteriorating global instability.

“Gov. Walz, you blamed Donald Trump. Who has been the vice president for three and a half years? And the answer is your running mate, not mine,” Vance said at one point.

With no additional debates on the books, Tuesday night’s showdown may be the last significant national campaign event before November, increasing the weight of the vice presidential contenders’ closing arguments for their running mates. Polls show Harris and Trump in a neck-and-neck race, and Tuesday night was a chance for both men to pitch themselves and their party’s vision for the next four years.

Harris campaign co-chair Jen O’Malley Dillon said Walz “spoke passionately” about Harris’ “vision for a new way forward” and specifically highlighted Vance’s refusal to say Trump lost the 2020 election during what was perhaps the sharpest exchange of the night.

“That is a damning non-answer,” Walz said, after Vance was pressed multiple times on the issue.

Trump campaign managers Susie Wiles and Chris LaCivita said Vance “prosecuted the case” against Harris’ record, while articulating Trump’s vision for making America “safe again.”

But the debate devolved on several occasions into circular disputes over Trump and Harris’ decision-making over the last several years, blunting both candidates’ efforts to score points on a range of key issues.

Vance advanced a narrow series of attacks on Harris and Walz over immigration and the economy, in a marked contrast to Trump’s erratic performance during last month’s presidential debate. The Ohio senator sought to blame Harris for rising prices and voters’ persistent concerns about the southern border, arguing Trump would bolster both the economy and fix the nation’s immigration system.

But rather than detailing how Trump planned to accomplish those goals, Vance instead found himself struggling to explain Trump’s past actions — including the GOP candidate’s push to kill a bipartisan immigration bill backed by major border patrol groups.

“As soon as that was getting ready to pass and actually tackle this, Donald Trump said no,” Walz said. “What would Donald Trump talk about if we actually did some of these things?”

On other occasions, Vance appeared to spend just as much time backing away from his own prior insults of Trump in the years before becoming his running mate as he did making the case for Trump to return to the Oval Office.

“Sometimes, of course, I’ve disagreed with the president, but I’ve also been extremely open about the fact that I was wrong about Donald Trump,” Vance said when asked about reporting that he had privately disparaged Trump’s economic record in 2020.

Walz, for his part, tried repeatedly to turn the debate’s focus to abortion issues that have proven politically damaging to Trump throughout the campaign — at points detailing the stories of individual women who faced grave health risks because they were unable to receive abortions.

It was an argument that Vance made little attempt to parry, openly acknowledging that when it comes to reproductive care, Americans “frankly don’t trust us.” Soon, though, that potential opening for Walz was lost amid an extended back-and-forth over the specifics of a Minnesota state abortion law — and whether or not Vance had “misread” the legislative language.

“Trying to distort the way a law was written to try to make a point? That’s not it at all,” Walz said, as the discussion fizzled out.

Even as Vance’s performance on the national stage hasn’t been without blips, the Ohio Republican and his allies went into Tuesday night’s debate with confidence. The debate stage was a comfortable venue for the Yale Law School graduate, who’s known for his plainspoken, concise communication skills, as well as his reputation for being an agile and disciplined debater — a skillset that showed on the stage.

He was able to stay on message and deliver policy points in a way that Trump failed to during last month’s debate with Harris.

Ahead of the debate, Harris aides and allies sought to play down the stakes of the face-off, arguing that it won’t do much to move the polling. They viewed it more as another opportunity for Walz to present Harris’ agenda before a national audience, while Vance was forced to make up for Trump’s poor performance last month. While Walz got off to a shaky start on Tuesday, appearing nervous as he answered the initial question, he quickly eased into his role as the aggressive and energized communicator he’s often been on the campaign trail.

But by the end, even Walz seemed to acknowledge the debate may not have drastically altered the trajectory of the race.

“Most importantly, thank you to all of you if you’re still up and the folks who missed ‘Dancing with Our Stars,’” Walz said. “I appreciate it.”