TL;DR Summary (Opinion):
In the debate between JD Vance and Tim Walz, Vance was widely seen as the winner. Both candidates maintained a civil and polite tone, unlike other contentious debates in the campaign. Vance came across as warm, detailed in his policy responses, and successful in appealing to key voters, particularly women, while shaking off past criticisms of being "weird."
Walz, on the other hand, appeared to struggle. He stumbled over his words, missed opportunities for key attack lines, and even admitted to "misspeaking" about his presence during the Tiananmen Square massacre, which damaged his credibility. His performance was compared to President Biden’s occasional confusion, and his reliance on pre-scripted attacks did not land effectively against Vance's more measured responses.
Vance demonstrated a strong command of the issues, particularly on topics like border control, linking the crisis to fentanyl, which resonated with working-class voters. Walz's responses felt outdated and ineffective in comparison. While vice-presidential debates don't typically sway elections significantly, this performance could hurt Walz's image in the eyes of key voters, giving Vance a clear advantage.
Full Article:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/won-vance-v-walz-debate-030331156.html