The “Midwest Nice” Debate: Vance and Walz embroil the “bourgeois” in civil war

It wasn’t the knife fight it could have been. That became clear when Walz answered the inevitable question about why he embellished some of his life stories. Why did he say he was in Hong Kong during China’s crackdown on democracy protesters in Beijing in 1989 when he didn’t arrive until later that summer? Walz described his upbringing in Nebraska, briefly described his teaching trips to China, admitted to a “knucklehead” error, but missed his mark.

That could have been a sign for Vance to get involved with Walz. In conservative media — and outside the CBS Broadcast Center, where pro-Trump protesters waved tampons to mock Minnesota’s policy of handing them out to high school students of all gender identities — Walz was mocked as a fist-wielding clown, the Minneapolis rioter in Brand got stuck and gave up his own National Guard unit by withdrawing before getting to the fight.

But the moderators then asked Vance about one of his own rhetorical errors — he said his current counterpart “could be America’s Hitler” — and the senator immediately moved on. “I also said very openly that I was wrong about Donald Trump,” he said, repeating an answer he has often given when asked about his MAGA conversion. He never mentioned some of the negative aspects that some ardent conservatives believe should disqualify Walz from holding office.

“He chose not to take it out because he thought the guy had already called himself an idiot,” Howard Lutnik, a co-chair of the Trump transition team, said in a post-debate interview.

Likewise, Walz missed several opportunities to portray Vance as the “weird” extremist obsessed with Americans’ reading habits and personal lives. At times he referred to the senator as a potentially rational figure misled by his domineering vice president.

“I believe Senator Vance wants to solve this problem, but by standing with Donald Trump and not working together to find a solution, it becomes a talking point,” Walz said in a panel on immigration, sticking with the Harris Position That Stalled the Senate A border law could solve the problems Trump talked about.

Vance returned the favor: “I think you want to solve this problem, but I don’t think Kamala Harris does.”

Some Democrats watching were less than happy with this exchange. Vance’s biggest weakness in the polls entering the night was that he was seen as a repugnant social conservative; Walz’s greatest advantage was that he was seen as a lovable epitome of Middle America. They feared that a debate in which both appeared sympathetic would have a positive impact on Vance.

Still others were happy to have a break from the usual tenor of presidential politics. Rep. Norma Torres, a California Democrat, said she liked “the civility between the two.”

“The American people got a beautiful glimpse of Walz,” she added. “He seemed knowledgeable, articulate, with grace and humility. The other one was good, it’s a shame it was all lies.”

Another potential bank-shot advantage that Democrats mentioned afterward: If it appears that Vance had a good night, Trump might feel overshadowed and reconsider not having another debate with Harris .