So, the vice presidential debate happened, and if you watched it, you probably noticed something weird. JD Vance was incredibly polished. He was calm, he was polite, and he looked like a guy you’d grab a beer with—which is a massive shift from the "weird" label the internet has been slapping on him for months. But while he looked the part, a lot of what he said didn't exactly line up with, well, reality.
Honestly, it was a masterclass in "polite gaslighting." You’ve got to give it to him; he knows how to frame an argument so it sounds perfectly reasonable even when the foundation is shaky. We aren't just talking about a couple of minor slip-ups here. From immigration to healthcare and the literal events of January 6th, there was a lot of ground to cover.
Let's dig into the specifics of what did vance lie about during the debate and why those moments matter.
The Springfield "Legal" Status Mess
This was the moment everyone remembers because it’s when the mics actually got cut. JD Vance has been very vocal about Springfield, Ohio, and during the debate, he kept calling the Haitian migrants there "illegal aliens."
Here is the thing: they aren't illegal.
The moderators, Norah O'Donnell and Margaret Brennan, stepped in for a rare "clarification" to point out that these migrants are in the U.S. under Temporary Protected Status (TPS). This is a perfectly legal program that’s been around since 1990. Vance didn't like being corrected. He argued that the Biden-Harris administration used a "wand" to make them legal, but that's just not how the law works.
Why the Springfield claims were so off:
- Legal Status: These individuals have government-issued work permits and social security numbers.
- The "Border Czar" Myth: Vance repeatedly called Kamala Harris the "border czar." In reality, her role was focused on long-term diplomatic efforts in Central America, not managing the physical border or specific towns in Ohio.
- The CBP One App: Vance tried to claim the app is a "loophole" for illegal immigration. Actually, it’s a tool designed to organize the asylum process so people don't just cross the river randomly.
The Affordable Care Act Rebrand
One of the most surprising claims of the night was Vance saying that Donald Trump "saved" the Affordable Care Act (ACA). If you followed politics at all between 2017 and 2020, you know this is a wild take.
Trump didn't try to save it; he tried to kill it. Repeatedly. He backed a lawsuit that went all the way to the Supreme Court to have the whole thing tossed. He also supported the "skinny repeal" in the Senate, which famously failed only because John McCain gave it a thumbs-down.
Vance’s argument was that Trump "worked in a bipartisan way" to make it better. But the record shows his administration actually cut the budget for the "navigators" (the people who help you sign up for insurance) by 90%. That’s not saving a program; that’s pulling the plug.
January 6th and the "Peaceful Transfer"
Toward the end of the night, things got heavy. Tim Walz asked Vance a direct question: "Did Donald Trump lose the 2020 election?"
Vance didn't answer. He called it a "damning non-answer" in return. But before that, Vance claimed that Trump "peacefully gave over power on January 20th."
Technically? Yes, he left the White House. But ignoring the violent riot at the Capitol on January 6th—where people were literally trying to stop the certification of the election—is a huge omission. It’s like saying a wedding was "perfectly calm" while ignoring the fact that the groom tried to burn down the chapel five minutes before the vows.
Vance also claimed Trump told people to protest "peacefully." While Trump did use that word once, he also told the crowd to "fight like hell" and that they wouldn't have a country anymore if they didn't.
💡 You might also like: Why Did the Gov Shut Down? The Messy Truth Behind the Gridlock
The Housing Crisis and Immigration
Vance made a very specific claim that immigration is the primary reason housing is so expensive right now. He cited a Federal Reserve study to back it up.
Kinda.
Economists generally agree that a sudden influx of people can put pressure on rents, but they also point out that the U.S. has been under-building houses since the 2008 financial crisis. We have a massive supply shortage that has nothing to do with the last three years of migration.
Also, many of the people building those new houses? They're immigrants. It’s a complex cycle that Vance boiled down to a single "it’s their fault" talking point.
What You Should Actually Do With This Information
It is easy to get caught up in the "he said, she said" of a debate. But the goal of fact-checking isn't just to catch someone in a lie; it's to understand their actual policy goals.
If you're trying to figure out the truth behind these political debates, here’s how to handle it:
- Check the "Primary Source": When Vance says a law says something, go look at the law. For example, the Minnesota law he attacked regarding "born alive" infants is public. If you read it, you'll see it still requires medical care for infants, which is the opposite of what he claimed.
- Look for the "But": Most of Vance's "lies" are actually half-truths. He’ll take a real statistic (like grocery prices being up 25%) and then apply it to a cause that isn't entirely accurate.
- Watch the Vibe vs. the Fact: Don't let a calm demeanor trick you into thinking the data is correct. Someone can be very nice while telling you something that is factually wrong.
Vance is clearly the future of the GOP's "intellectual" wing. He is smart, he is articulate, and he is very good at moving the goalposts. Whether you call them lies, "alternative facts," or just "creating stories" (as he told CNN earlier this year), staying informed means looking past the performance.
Pay attention to the specific claims about immigration and healthcare over the next few months. Those are the areas where the rhetoric is most likely to diverge from the actual policy record.