On Tuesday, October 1st, the CBS News event was hosted by Norah O’Donnell of “CBS Evening News” and Margaret Brennan of “Face the Nation,” where Senator J.D. Vance (Republican from Ohio) and Governor Tim Walz of Minnesota engaged in a debate.
This was the first and only vice presidential debate in 2024, characterized by continuous conflicts yet a friendly atmosphere. Both participants were upfront and courteous in their exchanges.
Vance staunchly defended former President Donald Trump’s “America First” policy, while Walz at times stumbled in defending his running mate, Vice President Kamala Harris, and President Biden’s joint leadership policies.
Vance’s outstanding performance in the debate earned him rare praise from liberal media. Out of thirteen columnists and writers surveyed by The New York Times, nine believed Vance won the debate. In a post-debate CNN poll, Vance emerged victorious with a slight 2% lead.
Here are the 5 highlights from the debate that showcase both the similarities and differences between the two Midwestern figures.
In his closing statement, Vance remarked, “If Kamala has such a great plan for solving middle-class issues, she should put it into practice now.”
The senator cited Harris’s record on immigration, the economy, and the ongoing housing crisis, accusing her of releasing billions of dollars in Iranian assets before the Hamas terrorist attacks in southern Israel on October 7 last year.
Vance posed the question, “When did Iran, Hamas, and its proxies attack Israel? It was under Kamala’s watch.”
Walz rebutted by stating that Trump’s leadership laid the groundwork for the turmoil in the region and that “we need the stable leadership Kamala brings.”
Vance described the recent influx of immigrants as one of the factors contributing to rising housing prices and attributed lower wages for domestic workers and other border-related issues to Harris and her administration.
Walz responded by stating that the border crisis could have been resolved through bipartisan legislation proposed earlier this year by Senator Jim Lankford and others, aligning with Harris and other Democrats’ viewpoints.
Vance also criticized Harris for implementing a “massive censorship system” on speech, claiming that the government’s coordination to suppress information from social media and other channels poses a greater threat to democracy than Trump’s discourse on January 6, 2021.
In his rebuttal, Walz pivoted to discuss the events of January 6, which initially prompted Vance to raise the issue of the censorship system.
Vance also addressed Harris’s record on energy policies, arguing that the U.S. must invest more in nuclear energy than during the Biden-Harris administration.
Walz defended the government’s energy policies by stating that natural gas production has reached historic highs, consistent with data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration. He did not mention nuclear energy.
At this critical moment of polarized public opinions, the two political adversaries from the Midwest engaged in a primetime television debate with pointed arguments yet maintained a sense of decency and decorum characteristic of Midwesterners.
While clashes were frequent, the two found common ground. Walz remarked in his closing statement, “We have a lot in common.”
Vance responded warmly, setting a conciliatory tone between the two candidates.
When discussing the devastation caused by Hurricane Helene, Vance suggested they pray for the victims together.
Upon Walz recounting how his 17-year-old son witnessed a shooting incident, Vance expressed his sympathy.
The senator said, “May the Lord have mercy!”
Their understanding extended beyond words to substantive policy areas.
Walz, discussing the resurgence of American manufacturing, commented, “I agree with much of what Senator Vance said,” and referred to the Schumer-Manchin Bill supported by his running mate to drive growth in manufacturing jobs.
On the topic of housing prices, Walz mentioned that he and Vance could “find some common ground.”
Vance stated that some of his opponent’s remarks, including the commodification of housing and the down payment assistance program in Minnesota, he found “reasonable,” while disagreeing with others.
He further pointed out his agreement that housing should not be treated as a commodity.
Regarding the issue of insufficient childcare, Vance noted that his opponent emphasized the lack of flexibility in funding sources, which he acknowledged as correct due to the current challenge for churches and other models to easily secure support.
The senator added, “Unfortunately, against our will, we will have to spend more money.”
Walz said, “I don’t see much disagreement between Senator Vance and me, I don’t oppose the proposals he put forward.”
At the start of the debate, host Brennan stated that the debate would provide the candidates with the opportunity to fact-check each other’s statements, but CBS News reserved the right to mute the microphones to maintain decorum.
The policy was tested on Tuesday night.
During an exchange on immigration, Walz referenced Vance’s remarks on Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio.
In response, Vance said, “In Springfield, Ohio, what I am concerned about most are American citizens whose lives have been destroyed by Kamala’s open border policy.”
Following Walz’s response, Brennan clarified, “There are indeed many legally protected Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, who have obtained temporary protection.”
Earlier this year, the Biden-Harris administration extended temporary protected status to 300,000 undocumented Haitians residing in the U.S.
Vance countered, “The rule is, you cannot fact-check the facts. Since you are fact-checking me, I think it is necessary for me to clarify the truth of the matter.”
The hosts ignored Vance as they tried to move on to the next question, prompting Walz to interject. CBS then muted the microphones of both candidates, but Vance continued to explain the asylum process for immigrants in Ohio and contrasted it with the green card application process that immigrants usually must follow.
Brennan said, “Gentlemen, the audience cannot hear you because your microphones are cut off,” before transitioning to economic issues.
While the two candidates found common ground on some issues, including aspects of the housing crisis, Vance and Walz ultimately disagreed on the fundamental causes.
Vance argued that the soaring cost of housing was not solely due to rising prices but also was attributed to Harris “letting millions of illegal migrants into the country.”
He stated, “25 million illegal migrants competing with Americans for scarce housing is one of the most significant factors causing the soaring house prices in the U.S., which is why the drastic rise in house prices occurred as illegal migrant populations grew significantly under Kamala’s leadership.”
Vance commended Trump’s proposals to restore housing affordability by utilizing federal lands, streamlining bureaucratic processes, providing tax breaks, and reducing immigration.
He highlighted that lowering energy prices is also a strategy to reduce housing costs.
Vance calculated, “If a truck driver has to support 40% more in diesel costs than the price of the lumber he transports to construction sites, then housing prices will become much more expensive. By opening up American energy, citizens will immediately obtain affordable housing.”
Walz disagreed that illegal immigration is a primary factor in record-high housing prices.
In a recent congressional hearing, Chris Clem, former chief patrol agent of the Yuma Sector, described the increase in transit numbers during the Biden administration compared to the Trump administration.
He testified, “Since the beginning of the fiscal year 2021, the nation has seen over 10.5 million illegal border crossing events, with around 8.5 million occurring in the southwest border. In contrast, U.S. Customs and Border Protection recorded approximately 3.1 million such events nationwide from fiscal year 2017 to 2020.”
Harris’s campaign team proposed constructing 3 million new affordable and rental housing units through appropriations, tax breaks, and reducing bureaucratic processes. She aims to provide $25,000 in down payment assistance for first-time homebuyers.
Both candidates were questioned about their past statements.
Walz was questioned about his claim that he was in Hong Kong during the Tiananmen Square massacre in June 1989, which was later revealed that he only arrived in China in August of that year and could not have been in Hong Kong at the time.
Upon the host’s second inquiry on the matter, Walz admitted his mistake.
He added that he sometimes acts foolishly and gets caught up in rhetoric when making statements.
Vance was asked about his past comments regarding Trump, including his criticism of the economic conditions during Trump’s presidency published by The Washington Post.
While not denying the contents of the report, Vance shifted responsibility to Congress for obstructing Trump’s agenda, stating, “There were many issues regarding the border and tariffs.”
He said, “Trump could have done more if both the Republican-controlled and Democratic-controlled Congress could manage the country better.”
Vance discussed critiques he made about his running mate in the past and reiterated his regret for those comments. He said, “My view of Donald Trump at the time was wrong.”
Vance continued, “What Donald Trump brought to the American people was wage increases, income growth, an economy that benefitted the average American, and security at the southern border. When you make a mistake, misspeak, do wrong, and change your mind, you should be honest with the American people.”
In conclusion, the debate between Vance and Walz revealed the nuances and complexities of their policy positions and personal histories, providing insights into the challenges and priorities shaping the 2024 vice presidential race.