Most vice-presidential debates are simply sideshows, like the warm-up act at a big-name rock star concert. Even a particularly strong or weak performance by either candidate is ordinarily set aside based on the simple proposition that people vote for the leading man or woman, not the understudy. The best example might be the 1988 VP debate between an unsteady Dan Quayle and veteran politician Lloyd Bentsen, who delivered his famous line after Quayle compared his youth and experience to John F. Kennedy’s, saying, “Senator, you’re no Jack Kennedy.” Bentsen and presidential candidate Michael Dukakis still lost badly.
Considering the many unknowns about presidential candidate Kamala Harris, there is good reason to believe that more is at stake than usual when Sen. JD Vance and Gov. Tim Walz square off in New York tonight at 9:00 pm on CBS, with other platforms simulcasting. The format will mirror that of the Trump-Harris presidential debate in September with one notable exception: If all goes according to plan, the microphones for both candidates will be kept on at all times, allowing for the kind of sparring, retorts, and one-liners that were not allowed to materialize between Donald Trump and Harris because of their muted mics.
Walz will be tasked with demystifying Harris, who remains a wild card to a significant chunk of the electorate. Is she the San Francisco progressive who was rated the most left-wing member of the Senate and championed every radical issue du jour in 2020? Or is she, as she now claims, a middle-of-the-road Democrat, prosecutor, and friend of capitalism who will finally crack down on illegal immigration after almost four years of an open border? It will be up to the Minnesota governor to make the case for the latter.
Unlike Trump, Vance is a famously disciplined debater who welcomes hostile questioning, and he will have much to work with considering the governor’s uber-progressive record in Minnesota. Vance’s principal task will be in some sense the opposite of Walz’: to present Trump’s agenda in a more coherent fashion than Trump and to define Walz and, most importantly, Harris as dangerously progressive and out of touch with average Americans. At the same time, he will likely repeat his accusations that Walz has engaged in “stolen valor” by inflating his service record in the National Guard.
The Debate Expectations Game
Walz has mostly melted into the background since he was selected for the ticket, so nobody is quite sure what to expect from him, other than the near-certainty that he will use the word that put him on the map, “weird,” to describe Vance and, of course, Trump and that he will likely attack Vance for his comment about Democrats being dominated by “childless cat-ladies.” Can Walz’ self-proclaimed authenticity be enough to convince voters that his failure to respond when Minneapolis was burning in the wake of the George Floyd affair and his pro-Black Lives Matter stance do not now represent his values? If he could, Walz would likely enter the stage dressed in the camo gear he favors on the campaign trail to demonstrate how he’s just an average Joe who can feel your pain.
Having reviewed his congressional and gubernatorial debates, The New York Times concluded that Walz “may not be a lofty orator, but he has shown an ability to deliver punchy critiques with everyman appeal.” With Harris making her “middle class” background a constant theme of her campaign, Walz’ signature line from his first debate in 2006, “I live in the world that most of you live in,” is likely to be his overriding theme on the debate stage.
At the same time, Vance represents the quintessential rags-to-riches, “only in America” success story. From his impoverished youth, he joined the Marines, built a successful business career, wrote a best-selling book, and was elected to the Senate in 2022. He is clearly more well-known than his opponent and has excelled on the campaign trail. But Walz has the chance to paint on a largely blank canvas.
Most informed observers agree that Pennsylvania is a must-win for Harris and perhaps for Trump. But with Trump continuing to lead in the Sun Belt swing states (North Carolina, Georgia, and Arizona), Harris must also be intent on carrying Michigan and Wisconsin. For her, it’s the whole ballgame, so this debate will likely be primarily if not singularly focused on Rust Belt voters. Tonight could be the time when Harris’ decision to bypass the popular moderate, Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, in favor of the leftist governor of a blue state will reach critical mass.
A crucial factor tonight will be the fairness of CBS co-moderators Norah O’Donnell and Margaret Brennan. Will CBS continue the pattern of ABC by making corrections only on the Republican? After all, if there had been a fair balance in the Trump-Harris debate — if Harris had been fact-checked on her claims about Charlottesville and Project 2025 for starters, and her blatant distortions of Trump’s statements that he would be a “dictator on day one” or that there would be a “bloodbath” if he loses — the perceived outcome of the debate might well have been different.
The widespread belief among everyone but hard-core Democrats that ABC co-moderators David Muir and Linsey Davis were nakedly biased has resulted in the loss of almost one million viewers, or 12% of the audience, for Muir’s evening news broadcast. Will CBS gladly take a similar hit for the sake of promoting Harris, or will the network play it straight? Tune in and find out.
