JD Vance vs. Tim Walz: What the TV duel means for the election campaign

Ring free for the numbers 2! The debate between JD Vance and Tim Walz is likely to be heated – and could decide the election. There is no second chance to make the last impression.

At 9 p.m. Eastern time, in the middle of the German night, two archetypes step into the ring. In the left corner: Tim Walz, 60, Governor of Minnesota. In the right corner: JD Vance, 40, Senator from Ohio. It will be a fight somewhere between truth and dare; few constellations represent the United States of America so much.

But even if opposites repel each other in this case: perhaps the US culture of debate has not yet completely degenerated. Will the TV duel between the Wanna Be vices end up being just a repeat of Kamala Harris’ knockout victory against Donald Trump? Or will the young, wild Vance succeed at what his old, wild master failed so spectacularly: a substantive debate about the future of the USA?

TV station CBS gives license to lie

CBS broadcasts live for one and a half hours from its television studio in the heart of New York. 90 minutes can be an eternity – like in June, when Joe Biden buried his political future in a duel between the elderly. 90 minutes can also be short – like three weeks ago, when Biden heiress Harris Trump grinned at the wall in every way.

The sequel, Walz vs. Vance in Manhattan, is likely to be a lot, but certainly not boring. Especially since there is a questionable comeback: the right to one’s own facts is back. During the number one duel, the moderators corrected false statements made by the participants. According to CNN, the lying ratio in the end was 30 to 1 for Trump. He makes no secret of the fact that Apprentice Vance has a similarly loose relationship with the truth. “If I have to create stories so that the American media actually pays attention to the suffering of the American people, then I will do that,” he said in a CNN interview.

Nevertheless, the decision was made completely against a corrective measure for the fight between those behind it, and broadcaster CBS essentially gave them license to lie. With one exception: In the (very likely) worst case scenario, the producers reserve the right to mute microphones. In addition, a team of experts should examine any stretched facts in a live blog and correct them after the debate. The question is: How many Trump fans will put up with the relatively left-wing CBS for even a minute longer than necessary?

Otherwise everything remains the same: no opening statements, short response times of a maximum of two minutes (plus an additional minute at the discretion of the moderators, accusations of manipulation are therefore inevitable), two commercial breaks and probably little respect.

Walz vs. Vance – who is “weirder”?

It’s ready, all the ingredients for a mud fight are there. But who brings what into the ring?

Walz has to “tempt the bear”

The governor from the north masters the role of the nice Uncle Timmi, the always friendly guy next door, perfectly. That’s enough alongside Harris. But in a duel with Vance, a rhetorically skilled radical with schoolyard bully vibes, the former high school teacher has to prove that he can do things differently.

Experience doesn’t necessarily speak for him – at least when it comes to this election campaign. According to the news portal Axios, Vance has given more than seven times as many interviews and press conferences as Walz and Harris combined.

Walz only has one chance, but a big one: The 60-year-old will pursue a strategy similar to that of his boss against Trump. She had infuriated her competitor with constant smiles and targeted taunts. “Don’t poke the bear,” goes the saying. But that is exactly the method of choice to disenchant thin-skinned MAGA men. And Walz’s right-wing counterpart is certainly no exception.

Vance can’t get “weird” or angry

Vance, on the other hand, has a much more difficult starting position. Because there is that damned word. The predicate “weird”, meaning strange, strange, sticks to him like building foam. He just can’t get rid of it. As if he had a kitten tattooed on his forehead. The name – a Walz invention of all things – also appeals to Vance so much because he, a social climber from a humble background, had to fight all his life to be taken seriously by “those up there”. It’s hard to imagine that the man with the ice-blue eyes would face his opponent with a cool head.

Where Trump lies without remorse and dismisses unpleasant facts as fake news, a caught Vance snaps back, writes the US magazine “The Atlantic”. It bothers him to be exposed as a liar. But it doesn’t help: the self-proclaimed hillbilly with the elite university smile has to keep himself under control. Will that work? “Even at my best, I am a delayed explosion,” he wrote in his award-winning book “Hillbilly Elegy.”

It is the core task of a running mate to compensate for the weak points of the presidential candidate. But instead of helping Trump, Vance has been stumbling over his own feet since his appointment. For the 40-year-old, Tuesday evening is about a lot, maybe everything. The TV duel may be his last chance to prove himself within the circle of the New Right and win back the lost trust of the party patriarch. Trump can’t afford a block in the leg in the last few meters. Vance wouldn’t be replaced so close, but Trump probably wouldn’t let him off the leash.

The duel could decide the election

Usually, visual duels are purely a formality. Not this year. Because it’s going to be tight, damn tight. A few thousand votes in swing states will decide the future of America. It sounds dramatic, and it is, because the error tolerance is correspondingly low. A single slip-up can be the nail in the coffin for the entire campaign. Every slip of the tongue has meme potential. And memes spread across fiber optics like an ulcer, emotionalizing, inciting, making opinions. They are the election campaign spots of our time.

The war of words between Walz and Vance is likely to be the last TV debate; there are no plans to “continue”. Trump has already rejected another exchange of blows with Harris – a decision more thoughtful than any statement in the duel. What Walz and Vance did on Tuesday evening can hardly be ironed out by their bosses – there are only five weeks left until the election. Tick. Tack. There is no second chance to make the last impression.

In the end, whoever portrays the other person as “weird” more believably will win. “Winning” is almost cynical. If winning a debate is only possible through insults and defamation, in the end everyone loses.

Sources: “New York Times”; “The Hill”; “Axios”; “Mother Jones”; “The Atlantic”; CNN; AP; “Sky News”