The vice presidential debate is tonight and while I don’t see it moving the election needle one way or the other, each of the men involved has an obvious personal stake in the outcome. Given his high unfavorable ratings, J.D. Vance presumably wants to assuage voters’ concerns about him, if not for this election then for his political future. And given Tim Walz’s cloistered campaigning (excluding his sit-down joint interview with Harris on CNN, he has taken questions from the press for precisely — and this is insane — 90 seconds), the Minnesota governor presumably wants to prove that tactic is somehow a fluke, not a necessity.
Frankly, I think Walz has more to prove tonight. Perceptions of Vance are so strong that all he has to do is act reasonable to help himself. Walz, on the other hand, has to live up to Democrats’ carefully crafted portrayal of him in an unscripted setting. It’s not do or die. Like I said, this debate won’t move the needle, but if he comes up short of expectations, his attack dog position on the ticket (which every VP candidate fills) could take a hit.
Of course, nowhere in this intro is a mention of substantive policy discussion. So that’s where today’s column comes in. Maybe the author is engaging in wishful thinking, but you can’t blame a man for dreaming. Voters do crave substance. Maybe the candidate who gives it to them will come out on top.