Poli Alert Politics & Civics
Related Articles
Jimmy Williams
Minnesota Governor Tim Walz and Ohio Senator JD Vance took the stage for a substantive policy discussion on Tuesday, marking what may be the final debate of the 2024 campaign. The debate provided an opportunity for both candidates to draw sharp contrasts between their respective running mates—Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump—just five weeks before Election Day.
Set against the backdrop of escalating international crises, including Iran’s ballistic missile attack on Israel and the aftermath of Hurricane Helene, the candidates presented opposing views on leadership and foreign policy, each pointing to their presidential candidate’s record and vision for the future.
Leadership in a Time of Crisis
The debate opened with a focus on foreign policy, specifically Iran’s recent attack on Israel. Walz, representing Harris, emphasized the need for “steady leadership” in turbulent times, taking aim at Trump’s leadership style. He criticized the former president for his often impulsive responses to global crises, referencing Trump’s tendency to use social media as a primary means of communication during high-stakes situations.
“What’s fundamental here is that steady leadership is going to matter,” Walz said, contrasting Harris’ approach to foreign relations. “We need a president who can lead, not tweet.”
Vance, defending Trump, countered with a promise of “peace through strength,” citing Trump’s deterrence policies during his administration. He argued that the Biden-Harris administration’s foreign policy had led to instability, including the recent conflict in the Middle East. “The attacks on Israel happened on Kamala Harris’ watch, not Donald Trump’s,” Vance remarked.
Attacks on Harris and Trump Dominate
While both Walz and Vance presented their own policy ideas, much of the debate centered on the top of the ticket, with the candidates repeatedly attacking Harris and Trump rather than each other. Walz focused on Trump’s unfulfilled promises, particularly criticizing his inability to complete the U.S.-Mexico border wall. “Less than 2% of that wall got built, and Mexico didn’t pay a dime,” Walz said.
Vance, on the other hand, consistently tied Harris to the administration’s perceived shortcomings on immigration and border security. He called Harris the “border czar” and argued that her policies have led to increased illegal immigration and drug trafficking. “I don’t think Kamala Harris wants to solve this problem,” Vance claimed.
Substantive Debate on Domestic Policy
The debate also took a deep dive into domestic issues, with both candidates engaging in detailed discussions on healthcare, housing, and climate change. Walz highlighted his work on the Affordable Care Act and efforts to expand healthcare access, while Vance focused on immigration’s impact on housing prices and local economies.
On climate change, Vance reframed the issue through a domestic lens, arguing that bringing manufacturing jobs back to the U.S. would lead to cleaner energy production. Walz, meanwhile, touted the Biden administration’s renewable energy investments and painted an optimistic picture of America’s future as an “energy superpower.”
Abortion and Immigration Take Center Stage
Abortion rights became a focal point, with Walz fiercely defending a woman’s right to choose and criticizing the patchwork of state-by-state laws as inadequate. He referenced the tragic case of Amber Thurman, a Georgia woman who died after being denied timely care, to which Vance agreed the outcome was unacceptable but reiterated his belief in a state-driven approach to abortion legislation.
On immigration, Vance echoed Trump’s hardline stance, promising to use military resources to assist with deportations. Walz, however, blamed Trump for derailing bipartisan immigration reform that could have enhanced border security and streamlined the asylum process.
Closing with Democracy and the Jan. 6 Insurrection
The debate took a pointed turn when Walz asked Vance whether Trump lost the 2020 election, a question Vance dodged by shifting the conversation to censorship and social media. Walz, visibly frustrated, called Vance’s non-answer “damning” and underscored the importance of upholding democratic processes, referencing former Vice President Mike Pence’s role in certifying the election results.
“America, I think you’ve got a really clear choice in this election—who’s going to honor our democracy and who’s going to honor Donald Trump,” Walz concluded.
