The recent debate featuring J.D. Vance, the Ohio Senator and Trump’s Vice Presidential candidate, alongside Tim Walz, the Minnesota Governor and Harris’s Vice Presidential candidate, offers significant insights into the changing landscape of American politics as the 2024 presidential elections approach. This study also explores the political strategies, ideological foundations, and broader implications of the discourse presented during the debate.
As the United States (US) progresses in a politically divided environment, debates serve as critical arenas for candidates to express their policies, communicate with their opponents, and connect with voters. This debate has taken place against the backdrop of urgent national issues such as economic inflation, public health, and social justice, each of which influences voter sentiment and party alignment.
Candidates are highly aware that their performance in such sessions can significantly impact election expectations, especially in battleground states that are critical in determining the outcome of the presidential race.[i] Considering that the debate between Harris and Trump focused on these states and unresolved policy issues, the vice presidential debate holds a similar significance. The vice presidential candidates had the responsibility to articulate what the presidential candidates did not say in the previous debate or what they truly wanted to convey, while also having a crucial opportunity to showcase themselves.
The main theme of the discussion has been the economic situation, particularly inflation, which continues to affect American households. Senator Vance’s statements highlighted the emphasis Republicans place on fiscal responsibility and their criticisms of government spending under the Biden administration. This aligns with the broader Republican Party narrative that characterizes the Democratic Party as disconnected from the economic struggles faced by ordinary Americans.
In contrast, Governor Walz, alongside Harris, defended the administration’s economic policies by highlighting job growth and the exit from the pandemic as evidence of effective governance. Their approach reflects a Democratic strategy that aims to emphasize the positive outcomes of their policies while advocating for ongoing investment in infrastructure and social programs to promote long-term economic resilience.
The debate also touched on important social issues such as racial equality and gender rights. The candidates addressed these topics with different emphases that reflected their party affiliations and voter bases. Walz’s advocacy for gender equality resonated among progressive voters, while Vance’s criticisms of these policies, perceived as ‘woke,’ aimed to solidify support among conservative voters.
This division reflects the increasing importance of identity politics in the candidates’ election strategies, as they attempt to mobilize specific demographic groups while also appealing to a broader audience. The discourse surrounding these issues signals an ongoing cultural conflict within American society and has implications for party platforms and the positioning of candidates.
While the debates have primarily focused on domestic policy, foreign policy issues related to the U.S.’s role on the global stage have also occasionally come to the forefront. The candidates emphasized that challenges posed by rivals such as China and Russia are among the most significant concerns for national security. Vance’s assertive rhetoric on military readiness and economic competition reflects a broader Republican narrative that prioritizes a strong stance against external threats.
Walz, by advocating for diplomacy and strategic alliances, emphasized the importance of collaboration in addressing global issues. This contrast in foreign policy not only highlights the candidates’ differing worldviews but also illustrates how foreign policy intersects with domestic issues in the context of voter priorities.
The discussion sheds light on the sharp ideological divisions between the candidates and their parties. As the election process advances, the candidates’ ability to resonate with their base while reaching undecided voters will be crucial. The strategies employed by Vance and Walz are likely to shape the campaign’s trajectory and influence the overall narrative of the 2024 elections.
In addition, the debate’s emphasis on economic and social issues highlights the need for candidates to effectively communicate their positions and solutions to win an increasingly diverse voter base. As voter demographics evolve, particularly among younger and more progressive voters, candidates are adapting their messages to reflect changing societal values.
The recent debate among significant political figures is a snapshot of the broader political dynamics shaping the 2024 presidential elections. According to public commentary, the debate between Walz and Vance has been more effective than the debate between Harris and Trump2. This difference is attributed to the mutual respect both candidates showed for one another and the civility of the language used during the debate. [ii] While listeners emphasized the civility of the debate, such a tone was absent in the Trump and Harris debate, leading to widespread dissatisfaction. This suggests that the sympathy generated by the vice presidential candidates had a positive impact, while the same cannot be said for the presidential candidates.
The analysis of themes such as economic policy, social issues, and foreign relations provides valuable insights into the candidates’ strategies for gaining voter support. The continually changing political landscape indicates that the candidates’ ability to navigate these complex issues will be a decisive factor among an increasingly polarized electorate. As a result, these discussions will not only influence individual campaigns but also contribute to a broader discourse on American politics.
[i] “Vance and Walz keep it civil in a policy-heavy discussion: VP debate takeaways”, AP NEWS, https://apnews.com/article/debate-takeaways-vance-walz-harris-trump-5b6f219b555416ff579764048ac238a1 (Access Date: 09.10.2024).
[ii] “Vance and Walz stick to policy in polite VP debate-but who won?”, BBC.com, https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c5y0863ry88o, (Access Date: 09.10.2024).
