The September 10 presidential debate between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump was barely over before the Harris campaign called for a second joust. That's a reasonably good indicator that the vice president's team was not confident that its candidate had bested her opponent. Trump said no. After all, he had debated Joe Biden, whose performance led him to fold his reelection campaign. In the wake of the vice-presidential debate between Tim Walz and JD Vance, the Democrat nominee again called for a second bite of the debate apple. The 45th president stuck to his guns and declined the challenge once more. From Trump's perspective, that may have been the smart move.
Debate Perspectives
A couple of questions here are open to debate, and the answers depend on a person's perspective and political preferences. Did Trump or Harris come out on top in their televised confrontation? Did Vance win his debate against Walz, or was it the other way around? That one is probably less open to dispute. Vance was calm and collected, delivering reasonable and thought-provoking answers to the moderators’ questions in the manner of a man who appears ready to step into the role of vice president of the United States.
By contrast, Walz appeared unprepared and ill-equipped to give substantive answers. He wore a deer-in-the-headlights expression for most of the debate, and, on a few occasions, he tossed out word salads that might have put Harris to shame. Then there were the gaffes – the funniest, but perhaps the most disturbing of which was, “I've become friends with school shooters.” In truth, only the most rabidly partisan left-winger would suggest that Walz won the debate or that there was perhaps no clear victor.
The other result of the vice-presidential showdown was the implosion of a rather childish and gratuitous narrative spawned by the Harris-Walz team. JD Vance is “weird,” they claimed. And certain Democratic Party stenographers within the establishment media picked up on that word, “weird,” to describe Vance or Trump – or both.
It was a very transparent ploy. The vice president's campaign obviously thought it would come across as hip and cool to the youngest generation of voters by simply describing its opponents as “weird.” The problem is, during the VP debate, Vance did not come across as weird by any stretch of the imagination. He was reasonable, thoughtful, assertive, civil, and seemingly in good spirits – nothing weird about any of that. In fact, it is fair to say he comported himself much better than Donald Trump did during his head-to-head with Kamala Harris.
Is One Presidential Debate Enough?
All this leads us to why the Democratic Party contender’s campaign was again quick to call for a second debate with Trump. In the eyes of many people, be they political operatives, journalists, or members of the public, Kamala Harris, even if she didn't lose the debate to Trump, failed to move the needle in her direction. The only people who came away from that debate determined to vote for Harris were people who planned to pull the lever for her anyway. The same is almost certainly true for supporters of Donald Trump.
How much do presidential debates influence presidential elections? If they have any meaningful impact at all, it is fair to say vice-presidential debates have even less effect. Still, the Harris campaign may well have believed that Tim Walz going up against “weird” JD Vance was, essentially, a second bite at the apple. It seems apparent that the hoped-for outcome was that Walz’s folksy middle-America regular Joe persona might save the day and put the Harris-Walz ticket firmly on course for 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
When things didn't turn out that way, Harris was hardly going to call for a second VP debate, so she returned to the strategy of trying to frame Trump as too chicken to debate a second time. But beyond the surface-level soundbite, this is far from an effective tactic, given that Trump was willing to participate in an additional showdown if Fox News hosted it, the one network he knew would not put its thumb on the scale in Harris' favor. The vice president’s unwillingness to participate in a Fox-hosted debate was, in all likelihood, for that very same reason.
Trump has brought up another excuse not to debate Harris again – and it appears pertinent. Early voting has already begun in some parts of the country, and so, at this point, it's a little late to do another presidential debate.
Psychologically, the Trump-Vance ticket may have come out on top – at least, if one believes these debates have a notable effect on election results. As Liberty Nation’s Editor-in-Chief, Mark Angelides, observed, “It's often the last voice that leaves the most significant impression.” The last voice in these debates belonged to JD Vance, but even if he does become the next vice president, we will never know if the dynamics of either debate had anything to do with it. Clearly, Kamala's campaign believes it's significant – or perhaps they are simply grasping at straws.
