In fact, the views of American voters have long been united. However, the televised duel between the vice presidential candidates is significant, especially in the Midwest.
Minnesota Governor Tim Walz and Senator JD Vance during the televised debate in New York.
The survey results are in, the election forecast is still: undecided. Nothing seems to be able to change the race between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris, neither the second assassination attempt on Donald Trump nor the incredible sums of money on election advertising that both campaigns are currently wasting. A month before the elections, the two political camps are polarized to the extent, nationally and in the swing states. And so you understand voices asking who really cares about the debate between JD Vance and Tim Walz.
But in this bitter election campaign where 10,000 voters in Pennsylvania could decide who goes to the White House, everything matters. It certainly matters if the man who is supposed to win over working people in the Midwest weakens the Democratic candidate. Tim Walz, the governor of Minnesota, was recruited for this purpose. It is supposed to build a bridge for the dark-skinned politician from left-liberal California to the average white American in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. Because if Harris thinks this blue wall is for the Democrats, then on January 20th she will be sitting in the Oval Office and ruling. But in the televised duel with Vance, Walz was not the vice president any good service.
The angry football trainer
Walz’s most important task was to portray Vance as an unacceptable vice president. He had a hard time with it. From the start, Vance dictated the pace, and it was fast. However, quick talk is not the Minnesota hazy governor’s forte. He didn’t have to do the same with Vance, but he didn’t realize it until the end of the 100-minute duel. With his head alight and his voice full of pressure, Walz was debating with intensity and the demeanor of an angry football coach. In front of the cameras and an expected audience of 50 million, he lost the ease with which Kamala Harris campaigned in August.
JD Vance, who has a popularity problem due to his disparaging remarks about childless cat owners, has managed to distinguish himself as a gentle, polite debater. In terms of content, Vance and Walz were fairly even in the debate, which for once focused on factual policy. Both had their strong moments: Vance blamed Kamala Harris for the rise in immigration and the high cost of living. Walz described the deadly consequences of the abortion ban for women and criticized Vance as an enemy of democracy when he refused to answer a question about whether he would accept a victory at the ballot box.
Vance corrects his image
But Walz debated so passionately that he forgot who he was talking about: the undecided voters in the swing states. There are only a handful of these left – estimated 3 percent still don’t know who they will vote for. They must be lying down for the next few weeks. In the debate, Vance cleverly pointed out his background in precarious circumstances in Ohio and left out his later studies at the elite Yale University and his work in the financial industry in California. However, Walz neglected to point out that he, who grew up on a farm and worked for many years as a high school teacher, lived closer to the people than Vance. In the end, Vance seemed approachable and Walz seemed absent, an unexpected role reversal.
Shortly before the elections, the uncertainty of citizens in the US is increasing: the war in the Middle East, which threatens to escalate, the devastation caused by Hurricane Helen, and a dock workers’ strike that is partially disrupting paralyzed trade and is likely to fuel inflation again. In a time of crisis like this, you want a steady hand in the White House, not an agitated football coach. If this idea entered the minds of voters during the debate, Trump can praise his vice president.