It felt different. If you tuned into the face-off between Governor Tim Walz and Senator JD Vance expecting the verbal fireworks and mid-sentence interruptions of the presidential debates, you were probably pretty surprised. Honestly, it was a throwback. For nearly 90 minutes in New York City, the two vice presidential hopefuls traded policy specifics and polite "I agrees" more than they traded insults. It was wonky. It was surprisingly civil.
But don't let the Midwestern "niceness" fool you. Beneath the surface, the vice presidential debate highlights revealed two very different visions for where the country is headed.
Vance was slick. He leaned into a polished, debating-coach style that aimed to soften his image. Walz, on the other hand, had a bit of a shaky start—literally. He looked nervous, fumbled some early lines, and at one point even said he’d "become friends with school shooters" when he clearly meant to say he’d met with the families of victims. It was a massive verbal slip that the internet pounced on immediately.
The Mid-East Tension and the First Big Question
The night didn’t start with the economy or the border. It started with a crisis. Iran had just launched a massive missile attack on Israel, and the moderators went straight for the jugular: Would you support a preemptive strike by Israel on Iran?
Walz took the first crack. He talked about "steady leadership" under Kamala Harris and then immediately pivoted to attacking Donald Trump’s "fickleness." He brought up Trump’s tweets and his relationship with Vladimir Putin. It was a classic "answer the question by not answering the question" move. Vance did basically the same thing. He introduced himself, gave a bit of his backstory, and eventually said it was "up to Israel" to decide what to do.
Both men wanted to look like the grown-ups in the room. They both agreed Israel has a right to defend itself. But the real takeaway was how quickly they both turned the focus back to their bosses.
When the Mics Actually Went Mute
One of the most talked-about vice presidential debate highlights wasn't even a quote. It was a moment of silence. Well, forced silence.
🔗 Read more: When is the Next Hurricane Coming 2024: What Most People Get Wrong
CBS News had said they wouldn't fact-check in real-time, leaving that to the candidates. But when the conversation turned to immigration and the legal status of Haitian migrants in Springfield, Ohio, things got heated. Vance tried to explain the "CBP One" app and how he believed the administration was using it to bypass legal hurdles. The moderators tried to move on. Vance kept talking. Walz started talking over him.
Then, it happened. The mics went dead.
For a few seconds, you could see their mouths moving but heard nothing. It was the only time the "mute" button was used the entire night, and it served as a stark reminder of how thin the veneer of civility actually was when it came to the border.
The "Damning Non-Answer" on Jan. 6
If the first half of the night belonged to Vance’s polished delivery, the final minutes definitely swung back toward Walz. The topic was democracy. Walz looked directly at Vance and asked a simple question: "Did Donald Trump lose the 2020 election?"
Vance didn't say yes. He didn't say no. Instead, he said he was "focused on the future" and then pivoted to talking about "censorship" by the Biden-Harris administration.
"That is a damning non-answer," Walz replied.
💡 You might also like: What Really Happened With Trump Revoking Mayorkas Secret Service Protection
It was the most forceful moment of the night for the Minnesota governor. He pointed out that Mike Pence wasn’t on that stage because he chose to certify the election. For a debate that had been mostly about "risk pools" and "tax credits," this was a sudden, sharp reminder of the high stakes regarding the transfer of power.
Policy Deep Dives: Housing and Healthcare
You've gotta give them credit for actually talking about the stuff that affects your wallet. They spent a significant amount of time on housing.
Vance argued that the influx of illegal immigration is driving up the cost of homes. He cited a Federal Reserve study to back it up, though economists generally say it's way more complicated than just one factor. Walz countered by talking about his record in Minnesota, where they’ve been cutting red tape to get more houses built. He treated housing like a basic right; Vance treated it like a supply-and-demand problem exacerbated by the border.
On healthcare, Vance made a pretty bold claim: that Donald Trump "saved" the Affordable Care Act (ACA).
- Fact check: Trump spent years trying to repeal the ACA.
- The Nuance: Vance argued Trump tried to make it work better by introducing "choice."
- Walz's counter: He reminded everyone that the GOP tried to repeal it "over and over again" without a real replacement.
Abortion: The Personal vs. The Political
Abortion was always going to be a heavy hitter. Vance looked for middle ground, admitting that the American people don't fully trust the GOP on this issue. He even used the word "pro-family" several times. Walz, however, kept it personal. He brought up the story of Amber Thurman, a woman who died in Georgia because she couldn't get timely medical care after an abortion complication.
Vance acknowledged the tragedy, saying "Amber Thurman should still be alive." It was a rare moment of agreement on a deeply divisive topic. But Walz pushed back hard on the idea of a state-by-state "patchwork" of laws, arguing that a woman’s rights shouldn’t depend on her zip code.
📖 Related: Franklin D Roosevelt Civil Rights Record: Why It Is Way More Complicated Than You Think
The "I'm a Knucklehead" Moment
One of the more human—and slightly awkward—highlights was when Walz had to address his past comments about being in Hong Kong during the Tiananmen Square protests in 1989. Reporting had recently shown he wasn't actually there until later that year.
When asked about it, Walz didn't have a great answer at first. He talked about his background as a teacher and how he’s "tried to do his best." Eventually, he just admitted it: "I’m a knucklehead at times." He said he misspoke. It wasn't exactly a "win," but it was an attempt to look honest in a world of political spin.
Practical Takeaways for Voters
So, what does this actually change? Probably not much in terms of the polls, but it gave us a clear look at how these two will govern.
- Watch the pivot: Both candidates are experts at taking a question about "Point A" and turning it into a 2-minute speech about "Point B." Pay attention to what they don't answer.
- Civility matters: The tone of this debate suggests that there is still an appetite for polite disagreement in America, even if it feels rare.
- The "Top of the Ticket" focus: Most of the time, they weren't even defending themselves. They were serving as shields for Harris and Trump.
If you’re trying to decide based on this debate, look past the polite nodding. Look at the specific answers on the 2020 election, the plan for mass deportations, and the future of the ACA. Those are the areas where the "Midwestern nice" ends and the real policy differences begin.
Actionable Next Steps:
To get the most out of these vice presidential debate highlights, you should compare the candidates' claims against their actual legislative records. For Vance, look at his votes in the Senate regarding IVF and border security. For Walz, check the specific Minnesota housing bills he referenced. Most importantly, watch the full 90-second exchange on the 2020 election results—it was the most revealing moment of the night regarding their views on the Constitution.