Midwestern voters expressed their appreciation for the tone of the vice-presidential debate on Tuesday night between Ohio Senator JD Vance and Minnesota Governor Tim Walz. This debate offered a chance for voters to evaluate the two tickets, especially significant since both Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump selected running mates from the Midwest to appeal to crucial swing states.
Many Midwestern residents viewed the 90-minute debate as a refreshing display of civility. While it didn’t necessarily change their voting preferences, it provided a welcome contrast to previous debates. One voter, Latim, praised the return of decorum, noting the respect the candidates showed each other despite the contentious nature of the discussion. He acknowledged J.D. Vance’s strong debating skills but felt Walz could have performed better.
Another voter emphasized Vance’s victory, highlighting his balance of style and substance. Despite traditionally viewed as less consequential, this debate was seen as more significant and grounded in policy than others in recent memory.
Shana, while her views on the election remained the same, found hope in the bipartisan exchange demonstrated during the debate. She noted the camaraderie and willingness of both candidates to agree on certain issues, which was refreshing to witness.
Christina, a potential Harris-Walz supporter, appreciated the civil discourse and the fact that both candidates engaged in meaningful discussions about gun violence. She felt optimistic about the possibility of progress in addressing such concerns.
A long-time Republican remarked that Vance’s civil demeanor reinforced his support for the Trump-Vance ticket. He noted that Vance’s respectful and factual approach stood in contrast to Walz, who he accused of being caught in inaccuracies during the debate.
On the other hand, Kristin, a Democrat, intends to vote for the Harris-Walz ticket, primarily due to their stance on abortion. While she found Vance’s behavior somewhat condescending, she acknowledged that the candidates focused more on policy than expected and managed to avoid heavy personal attacks.
Lastly, Sainaga, a second-time voter, described the debate as closely contested. He commended both candidates for their politeness but observed that Walz appeared more confident as the debate progressed, particularly in addressing issues surrounding the January 6 Capitol events. Ultimately, he felt Walz edged out Vance, albeit narrowly.