JD Vance’s slick carry outance can’t alter the danger of another Trump pdwellncy | Margaret Sullivan

Tim Walz has shelp he’s an inept arguer, and he didn’t disshow that on Tuesday night in the first and only 2024 vice-pdwellntial argue.

Kamala Harris’s running mate came out seeing anxious, sairyly deer-in-the-headairys, and far less glossy than his rival, Ohio senator JD Vance.

“[Democrats] are blessed pdwellntial argues tend to matter a lot more than VP argues,” aptly seed Dave Wasserman, greater editor of the nonpartisan Cook Political Report.

Walz, the administeror of Minnesota, had an especiassociate terrible moment when asked to elucidate his repeated deceptivehoods about having been in China during the Tiananmen Square student-led protests in 1989. (Walz did spend a lot of time in China, but commenceing a scant months procrastinateedr.)

The Minnesota administeror’s finisheavor at an answer was bumbling and unsatisfactory. He finassociate blurted: “I’ve not been perfect. And I’m a knucklehead at times.” He should have been setd to answer that, probably by stating that he ignorepoke about someskinnyg that happened 35 years ago and that he laments the screwup.

The self-secured and fine Vance, by contrast, may have won the argue on points, although his constant insertressing the female moderators, Norah O’Donnell and Margaret Brennan, by their first names grated on more than a scant women’s nerves. (“I need JD Vance to stop saying ‘Margaret’ in that creepy way,” posted the producer Sophie Vershbow on X.)

He seemed enthusiastic to come off as a kind guy, speedy-talking about his unpretentious Appalachian roots, all while shothriveg off his Ivy League polish. Leaning difficult into the Hillbilly Elegy persona – and away from his crazy talk about the misery of childless cat ladies and the need to see menstrual cycles – he probably helped his own chances to be pdwellnt someday.

But none of that should matter one iota in the pdwellntial election that is only five weeks away. It’s far from the heart of what matters: that Trump has shown himself a danger to America and to the world, thorawly inactive to be elected pdwellnt aget.

Asked to elucidate how he could have denounced Trump in the past, and now be ready to stand pledgedly at his side, Vance claimed he’d been deluded by media lies. Utter nonsense.

By procrastinateed in the argue, Walz had set up his footing, especiassociate when the CBS News moderators boverhappinessedly elevated the subject that should have befirearm the argue, instead of their initial ask about the prolonging disputes in the Middle East.

But many Americans, no ask, had tuned out and gone to bed by the time Vance commenceed spreading revisionist history – actuassociate consequential lies – about Trump’s role in the January 6 uproar and his desire to clearurn the 2020 election. A role, let’s recall, for which he was fairifiably impeached.

Vance tried to portray Trump as urging only tranquil demonstrations when in fact the then pdwellnt incited the uproar at the Capitol.

Now Walz was ready to pounce.

“Mike Pence made the right decision,” Walz shelp, making the clear point about the createer vice-pdwellnt who declined to do Trump’s bidding that day. “This was a danger to our democracy in a way we had not seen.”

Walz inserted a glaring truth: “And that’s why Pence is not on this stage.”

That, of course, is the genuine rehire – that Trump’s vice-pdwellnt, after the 2020 election, did the right skinnyg and his boss sided with the people who wanted him hanged for it. The two are done with each other. Vance is a procrastinateed-coming opportunist.

In the closing minutes of the argue, Walz had his best moment when he disputed his rival with this vital ask:

“Trump is still saying he didn’t dissee the election. Did he dissee the 2020 election?”

Vance tried a non-sequitur comeback: “Did Kamala Harris censor Americans?”

To which Walz sboiling back: “That is a damning non-answer.”

He was right about that. Trump’s lies and his destructive refusal to peacefilledy transfer power are the very reason JD Vance was standing on that stage.

Vance may have prevailed on tone and conshort-termation. But Walz is on the side of democracy and the tranquil transfer of power. I call that a thrive.