Who won the Vance-Walz vice-presidential debate?

Tuesday night’s vice-presidential debate between Republican JD Vance and Democrat Tim Walz felt like a civil and relatively restrained conversation about the issues at the top of American voters’ minds going into the 5 November election.

In that, it was unlike the two presidential debates earlier this year.

The two men spent much more time attacking the other’s running mate than each other during 90-plus minutes on the CBS News stage in New York.

Walz had a shaky start but hit his stride when talking about abortion and the Capitol riot.

But the even-tempered, policy-focused debate, with few political body blows, probably served Vance – a polished public speaker – best in the end.

If Vance was picked because he puts ideological meat on the bones of Trump’s conservative populism, on Tuesday night he put a polite, humble face on them, as well.

“Something these guys do is they make a lot of claims about if Donald Trump becomes president, all of these terrible consequences are going to ensue,” he said. “But in reality, Donald Trump was president. Inflation was low. Take-home pay was higher.”

There were moments when the Republican candidate bristled at what he thought was unfair fact-checking from the two CBS moderators, and at one point microphones of both candidates were temporarily muted.

But for the most part, the exchanges on stage were even-tempered.

And there were several moments when the two men agreed on issues – and said so.

“There’s a lot of commonality here,” Walz said toward the end of the evening.

When Walz spoke of his 17-year-old son witnessing a shooting at a community center, Vance seemed genuinely concerned.

“I’m sorry about that and I hope he’s doing OK,” he said. “Christ have mercy, it is awful.”

The most vigorous disagreements came toward the end of the debate, on the topic of Trump’s repeated and false claims that the 2020 election was stolen from him.

Vance, when asked if Trump lost the last presidential election, dodged the question and criticised what he said was Kamala Harris’s censorship.

Walz quickly noted that it was a “damning non-answer”.

“To deny what happened on January 6, the first time an American president or anyone tried to overturn an election, this has got to stop,” he said. “It’s tearing our country apart.”

Walz went on to say that the only reason Mike Pence, Trump’s previous vice-president, was not on stage was because he certified President Joe Biden’s victory.

Vance had no answer to that, highlighting that beyond his friendly demeanour and agreeability, he would not break from Trump’s position.

Vance and Walz entered this debate with different skill sets. Vance has sparred with journalists on television in heated exchanges. Walz is at home on the campaign stump, using his folksy style in contrast to more polished politicians.

In the early part of this debate, with both candidates standing behind podiums in a New York City television studio, Vance seemed much more comfortable. His answers were smooth, and relentlessly on-message, constantly reminding the audience that for all of Vice-President Harris’s promises, Democrats have held the White House for the past three and a half years.

“If Kamala Harris has such great plans for how to address middle class problems, then she ought to do them now,” he said.

Walz, for his part, seemed halting and unsure on the opening topic, dealing with Tuesday’s Iranian missile attack on Israel and if the candidates would support an Israeli pre-emptive strike on Iran. The Minnesota governor rarely talks about foreign policy, and his discomfort on the subject was apparent.

The Democrat settled in as the debate moved along, and during his exchanges with Vance on the topic of immigration – an area of strength for the Republicans – both delivered well-honed messages.

Vance deflected accusations that he amplified false claims about Haitian immigrants stealing and eating pets in Ohio.

“The people I’m most worried about in Springfield, Ohio, are the American citizens who have had their lives ruined by Kamala Harris’s border policies,” he said.

Vance said undocumented migration burdens city resources, drives up prices and pushes down wages.

Walz pointed to Trump’s opposition to proposed bipartisan immigration legislation earlier this year.

“I believe Senator Vance wants to solve this, but by standing with Donald Trump and not working together to find a solution, it becomes a talking point, and when it becomes a talking point like this, we dehumanise and villainise other human beings.”

When the topic turned to abortion rights – an area of strength for Democrats, according to polls – it was Vance who played defence, acknowledging that Republicans had to do more to earn the trust of American voters.

“I want us as a Republican Party to be pro-family in the fullest sense of the word,” he said. “I want us to make it easier for moms to afford to have babies. There’s so much we can do on the public policy front just to give women more options.”

Walz countered by saying that the Democratic view on abortion was simple: “We are pro-women. We are pro-freedom to make your own choice.”

If Walz was more pointed on abortion, he declined to push his attacks when the subject turned to gun control.

After Vance said that it was important to increase security in schools, making doors and windows “stronger”, Walz talked up background checks rather than endorsing Democratic calls for bans on assault weapons and other limitations on firearms.

As a congressman, Walz regularly voted in favour of gun rights and against many gun control measures, winning the praise of the pro-gun National Rifle Association. During the debate, he said his views on gun control changed after the 2012 Sandy Hook school shooting, but some Democrats may be disappointed he did not press Vance more on Tuesday night.

American political history suggests that vice-presidential debates don’t really matter.

In 1988, Democrat Lloyd Bentsen dismantled Republican Dan Quayle. A few months later, Quayle was sworn in as vice-president after his ticket won in a landslide.

It may turn out that this debate is similarly irrelevant to November’s results. Unless there is a last-minute debate announced, however, it will be the last word both parties have on a debate stage before election day.

Walz did no harm to the Democratic ticket and showed some of the Midwestern charm that made him Harris’s choice.

But Vance’s strong performance is likely to buoy Republicans in the days ahead.

And the debate’s lasting impact may be to convince members of his party that the Ohio senator – who is only 40 – has a future in national conservative politics, given his ability to clearly advance their ideological priorities on the brightest of stages.