Walz stumbled in debate, but that may soon be the least of Kamala Harris’ problems | Opinion

Heading into the vice presidential debate between JD Vance and Tim Walz, there was a lot of analysis suggesting that running-mate debates don’t have much effect. When the debate was over, Democrats had to be hoping that’s true.

Tim Walz had multiple jobs Tuesday night — to appear worthy of a title one heartbeat away from the presidency, to introduce himself favorably to viewers unfamiliar with him, and to make it appear that Kamala Harris was wise to choose him.

That’s 0-for-3.

From his halting delivery to a clumsy accounting of past inconsistencies and untruths to an over-rehearsed failure to answer the questions asked of him, it was an underwhelming performance that had even liberal commentators admitting to a superior night for Vance.

With good reason. Vance’s multiple jobs were to make his staunch conservatism palatable to swing voters, to skillfully parry hostile framing from biased moderators, and to make it appear Donald Trump was wise to choose him.

When suggestions arise that maybe moving forward, Vance should be out there explaining things more often than Trump, you could say the night was a success.

Comparisons to the Sept. 10 presidential debate are instructive. Trump underperformed and Harris overperformed, which enabled a media culture friendly to her to label it as a win. But the expectations game giveth, and it taketh away. From disagreeing Democrats to the braying Trump-hesitant malcontents in the GOP, Vance has been portrayed as a snotty, ill-fitting lightweight who brings little more than a hymnal of MAGA-friendly themes designed to boost the boss.

Well, he boosted the boss all right, delighting Trump and his voters with a performance that was as calm and measured as it was sharply effective. The Ohio senator pushed back against Walz’s mischaracterizations of the Trump agenda, and he spoke up when overmatched moderators Norah O’Donnell and Margaret Brennan attempted to “fact-check” him, in violation of the guidelines CBS had established.

It wasn’t quite the corrupt disaster crafted by ABC in the presidential debate, but the topic selection made sure to provide ample time for abortion, climate change, Jan. 6 obsessions and even government spending on child care, while ignoring China and Ukraine and providing wholly inadequate time to address the widening Middle East war that will fill the news every day until the election.

The reason was clear. Deep dives into our dangerous world would have given Vance the opportunity to remind millions of viewers about the relative stability of the world under Trump, his success with the Mideast Abraham Accords and his hesitancy to pour countless additional billions of taxpayer dollars into Ukraine. And while Walz has been to China as often as I’ve been to Austin, that doesn’t mean most voters crave the prospect of Harris going toe to toe with Xi Jinping.

Part of the optics problem for the Harris-Walz ticket is its avoidance of any challenging media scrutiny. It is hard to imagine a properly tough global countenance from people who can’t even stand up to Fox News.

The dangers of such untested campaigning were painfully obvious as Walz struggled through various issues, leaning too heavily on lines clearly practiced for cut-and-paste delivery.

So will this debate “move the needle,” as the saying goes? With razor-thin poll margins in various swing states, a middling night for Walz up against a broadly recognized win for Vance could be significant. But countless variables will continue to churn in the month leading to Election Day. Walz will be better at rallies than he was on the debate stage. It appears there will be no more debates to attract 90 minutes of hyper-focused attention.

Actual events are more likely to sway any remaining undecided voters. With the Middle East on fire and a dockworkers’ strike threatening to rock an already fragile economy, the Harris-Walz ticket may now face more daunting challenges than a subpar debate night.

This story was originally published October 2, 2024 at 1:41 PM with the headline "Walz stumbled in debate, but that may soon be the least of Kamala Harris’ problems | Opinion."