The Paw Print

By Kieran Blake, Sports Editor

Tensions were high entering October. Polls in key swing states remained extremely close, and the Harris and Trump campaigns were locked in a dead heat with just over a month to go until election day. Ever since Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz was announced as Kamala Harris’ vice presidential pick, he and Ohio Sen. JD Vance, Donald Trump’s running mate, had been butting heads with each other in the form of interviews, rallies and speeches. And at 9:00 p.m. EST, the first vice presidential debate kicked off on CBS.

With political partisanship and polarization dividing the country, the debate was more than a test to see which of the two men would better serve the American people as vice president. It was also a surprising show of respect and civility, the likes of which Americans haven’t seen in the political world since Trump’s election to office in 2016. Both candidates were respectful toward one another, and they actually complemented and somewhat agreed with each other on multiple issues. While the presidential debate last month felt more like an unhinged political circus, with Trump delivering the now-iconic line, “In Springfield, they’re eating the dogs” in reference to Haitian immigrants, the vice presidential debate felt drastically different. It felt like a debate.

On the Republican side, Vance spoke with clarity and eloquence, surprising many viewers who had previously seen him as the ultra-conservative nutcase he had been painted as since Trump selected him as his running mate. For the Democrats, Walz appeared like a man who didn’t belong behind that podium at first, but he found his footing as the debate progressed. In terms of appearance, many agree that a slick Vance easily took the cake over a less-kempt Walz.

When it came to substance, however, Walz appeared to have won by a mile. In the absence of fact-checking, both candidates lied in some of their answers, though Vance seemed to do so much more egregiously than Walz. However, with the aforementioned lack of fact-checking, people must wonder whether or not these lies will factor into the election as much as appearance does.

The debate itself kicked off (no pun intended) with a question on foreign policy, which is seen by many voters as a vital issue in this election, particularly regarding support for or opposition to a preemptive strike on Iran by Israel. Walz responded first, stressing the need to support Israel while also focusing more on general foreign policy by emphasizing the need for foreign allies and calling the release of hostages and end of the humanitarian crisis “fundamental” before taking a jab at Trump’s leadership capabilities. At first, Vance appeared to avoid the question, instead introducing himself and where he came from before preaching “peace through strength” and Trump’s plan to make “the American dream … attainable once again,” but he too expressed his support for Israel, while also blaming Harris for the crisis. Walz then replied that Trump ignored the plight of soldiers and that Harris would display the “steady leadership” and diplomacy that Trump lacked, with Vance pointing out that “diplomacy is not a dirty word” and that the conflict began under Harris.

As the next few questions were asked, there was one glaring similarity between this debate and the ones between Harris and Trump on Sept. 10 and Biden and Trump on June 27: avoiding the question with an answer about a different issue. A question about climate change and Hurricane Helene turned into a question about manufacturing and agriculture. A question about infrastructure and housing saw Vance talk about immigration. Vance talked about jobs and the economy when asked how Trump’s economic plan would affect the deficit. While there was less dodging of questions than there was back in September and June, there was still a great deal of dodging when it came to both Vance’s and Walz’s answers.

When the topic did officially turn to immigration, Vance slammed Harris for her “wide open southern border,” while also calling attention to the flow of fentanyl into the country and claiming that children were being used as drug mules. In response, Walz brought up Harris’ work prosecuting drug traffickers in California while also reminding voters of the bipartisan border bill that failed because Trump “told [Republicans] to vote against it” in order to make the border “campaign issue.” Vance replied, “What Tim said just doesn’t pass the smell test,” which Walz countered by quoting Vance as saying (with regard to the false claims about Haitian migrants in Springfield, Ohio), “I will create stories to bring attention to this.” This segment proved to be one of the very few moments of discontent during the debate, with Vance and Walz interrupting the moderators and each other at the end and having their microphones muted.

When asked about the budget deficit and the economy, Walz layed out Harris’ plan and how it would potentially benefit the middle and working classes while also criticizing Trump’s tax cuts for the rich that added trillions more to the national debt. Vance countered by claiming that Harris “will make middle class life unaffordable for a number of Americans” and that the economists analyzing Trump’s plan “have PhDs but they don’t have common sense.” Vance also described how in 2017, there was an “economic boom” under Trump. Walz then criticized Trump and Vance for disregarding experts, with Vance then criticizing the loss of American jobs to China, and Walz claiming that those jobs were lost largely due to Trump.

When abortion came up, Walz referenced the death of Amber Thurmond due to the overturning of Roe v. Wade, as well as Project 2025’s plans to limit access to birth control and contraception. He also brought up his successes as governor in Minnesota: “In Minnesota, we are ranked first in health care for a reason. We trust women. We trust doctors.” Vance then came out as surprisingly moderate with regard to reproductive rights, saying Republicans should support fertilization in order to win back the trust of voters and denying that he had ever supported a national abortion ban. Walz put forth the idea that Democrats were “pro-freedom for women,” while Vance attacked them as “pro-abortion” in contrast with the “pro-family” Republicans.

When the focus shifted to gun violence, one of the standout moments of the debate came when Walz described how his son, Gus, witnessed a shooting, to which Vance audibly responded, “awful,” before consoling Walz. While the two did disagree in their approaches to preventing gun violence, Walz wanting an assault-weapons ban and more gun control and Vance believing in strengthening school security and improving mental health, this was a show of respect and unity that was comforting to see in a divided America.

There were still some lies told on both sides. For his part, Walz fumbled a question on his false claims regarding his being in Hong Kong during the infamous 1989 Tiananmen Square protests. Rather than saying he simply misspoke, he appeared to entangle himself in a ball of words about how he went to China a few months later, wasn’t there during the protests, and organized trips to China during the protests. Vance pushed many blatant falsehoods about healthcare and the Affordable Care Act, explaining how supposedly Trump saved it from its disastrous state under the Obama administration. Walz then called out Vance’s lies and reminded voters of how “the courage of John McCain” saved the ACA.

Perhaps the defining moment of the debate came toward the very end, when the final question was asked regarding Trump’s refusal to accept the results of the 2020 election. When Vance was asked if he would have certified the results, he pivoted to talking about how Harris is engaged in widespread censorship. Walz then referenced the storming of the U.S. Capitol Building on Jan. 6, 2021 that he said was spurred on by Trump. Vance then replied by saying that “it’s really rich” to call Trump “a unique threat to democracy when he peacefully gave over power on January the 20th.” Vance then accused the Democrats of protesting the election results in 2016 and claiming it was stolen “because the Russians bought, like, $500,000 worth of Facebook ads.” Walz definitively responded by saying, “January 6 was not Facebook ads.” He went on to indirectly condemn GOP censorship by stating, “Censorship is book banning.”

Then, Walz asked Vance one simple question: “Did [Trump] lose the 2020 election?” Vance dodged the question. He took the attack to Democratic censorship during the COVID-19 pandemic. Walz called him out for not answering the question, and the two went back and forth before the moderators were finally able to interject and give Walz the floor. Walz closed out his response by posing the question: “Who’s gonna honor that democracy, and who’s gonna honor Donald Trump?”

When the two candidates gave their closing statements, Walz emphasized the diversity of a Harris coalition that includes everyone “from Bernie Sanders to Dick Cheney to Taylor Swift.” He also emphasized how Trump professes “American carnage,” while Harris will bring the American people “a politics of joy.” Vance, on the other hand, attacked Harris’ energy and economic policies, as well as her lack of action as vice president (despite the fact that the vice president holds very little actual power), before appealing to the need for change to protect the American dream.

Then, as the debate closed, civility and respect again quite literally took center stage. Vance and Walz smiled and shook each others’ hands. Then their wives came up and shook hands, and they shook each others’ wives’ hands. They then conversed with each other briefly before networks began to return to their analysis panels. In the troubled state that America is in right now, civility and respect are lacking, but they need to return. Americans need to respectfully disagree with each other, not vitriolically argue. Democrat or Republican, liberal or conservative, Americans need to reach across the aisle and shake hands. As Barack Obama proclaimed at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, “We are one people, all of us pledging allegiance to the stars and stripes, all of us defending the United States of America.”