Vance tries ‘nice’ but after dog-eater episode we know it’s a con

Republican vice presidential nominee Sen. JD Vance, R-Ohio, talks with Democratic vice presidential candidate Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz after the vice presidential debate hosted by CBS News Tuesday, Oct. 1, 2024, in New York. (AP Photo/Matt Rourke)

I saw that vice-presidential debate, and I could understand if both sides want to say “Hang JD Vance.”

Vance was good in a bad way. Like a prisoner out on good behavior. But after all the lies he spread about dog-eating in Springfield, Ohio, you know it’s a con.

It had to be agonizing for Republicans. Vance was so “nice” and “likeable” he reminded folks about what kind of ass Donald Trump really is.

To Democrats, however, Vance reminded them how as the No.2, Vance is worse than Pence. Vance is the guy who once thought Trump was Hitler, until he realized he could benefit from a Trump/Hitler. Unlike Pence who ultimately did the right thing, Vance would do Trump’s bidding right down to certification day. Of course he would, judging from how he lied at yesterday’s debate about Jan. 6 and how Trump honored the peaceful transition of power. (We all know what Trump did on Jan.6).

So don’t be taken in by Republicans praising Vance post-debate. Vance was nice, but Tim Walz was nicer. Not perfect, just nicer. After the debate, Walz favorability rating was 59 percent to Vance’s 41 percent, according to MSNBC.  An 18 pt. gap.

In 2024, I’m predicting nice wins. In a political climate where everyone’s tired/distrustful of rude and in your face, people really would rather vote nice.

Democratic vice presidential nominee Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz speaks during a vice presidential debate hosted by CBS News, with Republican vice presidential nominee Sen. JD Vance, R-Ohio, Tuesday, Oct. 1, 2024, in New York. (AP Photo/Matt Rourke)

You want to go deeper than nice?

If you’re honest, there’s only one way to grade the vice-presidential debate.

Ask yourself who spoke the truth with honesty and integrity—at least most of the time.

That would be the self-proclaimed knucklehead, every man, hunter, gun guy, pro-choice, pro-ACA/health care governor from Minnesota, Tim Walz.

Walz was authentically nervous at first, but got his bearings and delivered the knockout blow at the end of the debate when he asked JD Vance point blank about Donald Trump: “Did he lose the 2020 election?”

Remember that. Vance’s failure to answer tells you why he can’t be trusted. Ever. No matter how nice he is.

“Tim, I’m focused on the future,” Vance said in that slimy chummy way. Then he slipped the question and asked, “Did Kamala Harris censor Americans from speaking their mind in the wake of the 2020 Covid situation?”

You heard it. Vance just dodged the real question by answering it with an irrelevant new question.

At least, Walz was sharp enough to memorialize the moment.

“That is a damning non-answer,” Gov. Walz proclaimed, because it was.

But Vance, who was showing up his boss, Donald Trump, by packing his fangs and being nice and civil throughout the debate, had a comeback. He displayed his chameleon-like Yale Law skills as he rebutted Walz.

“It’s a damning non-answer for you to not talk about censorship,” Vance said, sharpening the irrelevancy that has nothing to do with whether Trump lost the 2020 election. Censorship?  “Obviously, Donald Trump and I think there were problems in 2020. We’ve talked about it, I’m happy to talk about it further.”

Except when he did talk about Jan. 6, Vance made it sound like Trump was so totally cooperative and ceded power gracefully. We know what happened.

And so did Gov. Walz.

“I’m pretty shocked by this,” Walz said. “He lost the election. This is not a debate. Where is the firewall with Donald Trump?…If he knows he can do anything including taking and election and his vice president’s not going to stand to it. I think you’ve got a really clear choice on this election of who’s going to honor that democracy and who’s going to honor Donald Trump.”

Forget the policy stuff. As important as that stuff is, the details of future policy are always so fluid and subject to change.

But the truth on something like elections and Jan. 6 does not change. Trump lost the election, and JD Vance couldn’t answer a straight question.

That was Walz’ mic drop moment.

This is not to suggest Walz didn’t misspeak or had his facts wrong. He had a few bad moments. Like when he talked about the government registering abortions and knowing your every pre-natal move? That’s not true.

But Walz did speak effectively about women in danger forced to travel long distances for abortions.

JD Vance was caught lying about being for a national abortion ban. And he actually talked about giving women more options besides abortions like he might be progressive and caring. He’s not.

On health care, Walz stood by the Affordable Care Act. Vance lied so much about ACA, it sounded like Trump was a champion for it. Oh, yeah, the kind of champion who would still like to see ACA dead.

Walz also bumbled on representations of his China trip to Hong Kong in 1989. He wasn’t near Tiananmen Square. Was it as bad a lie as any misleading, misrepresentative statement or outright lie that Vance made last night?

But who really cares where Walz was. As he self-proclaimed, “I’m a knucklehead.”

Misspeaking about when he was in China is not disqualifying. Not like Vance making Jan. 6 sound like a minor disagreement among a few hundred violent people as Trump amicably left office. There’s that lie again.

In general, JD Vance tried to make the last four years about Harris and not Biden, making her not an agent of change, but the reason for all that’s wrong. The essentially powerless vice president was to blame? That’s funny.

Walz kept to the Harris themes about how the Harris/Walz administration is for optimism and opportunity. Where government is nice.

And when he talked about the immigration bill that Trump had killed because he didn’t want the problem solved, Walz was the nice church-y guy.

“I don’t talk about my faith a lot,” Walz said as he talked about the immigration bill. “But Matthew 25:40 talks about ‘to the least amongst us, you do unto me.’ I think that’s true of most Americans. They simply want order to (the immigration process). The bill does it. It’s funded. It’s supported by the people who do it. And it lets us keep our dignity about how we treat other people.”

Vance didn’t read scripture. But at one point, when Walz’ talked about how his 17-year old kid witnessed a shooting, Vance showed concern and offered a blessing. Just like a good converted Catholic.

Donald Trump would have called the kid weak for not taking out the shooter.

But that made it clear, Vance was wearing his ambition, a bit too well. He was a Yale, Washington elitist who serves as Trump’s wrinkle cream. But he’s not looking at being veep. Vance was looking ahead when he can leapfrog Trump.

Frog? Did someone say frog?

Walz was simply the guy who pointed out how anti-democratic Trump was after the election in 2020. And he used a frog as a figure of speech.

“The fact is, that I don’t think we can beat the frog in the pot and let the boiling water go up,” Walz said like a true Midwesterner. “I mean, he lost the election and he said he didn’t.”

Walz was the pro-democracy, regular guy all throughout this one.

Vice presidential candidates don’t win elections so this debate shouldn’t really matter. But we got to peer into the souls of the people in the No. 2 spot. And it told us a lot about their No. 1.

And the campaign style that really cuts through in 2024.

This year, nice wins.

Emil Guillermo is a journalist, commentator and humorist. He writes a column for the Inquirer.net’s USA channel. Watch his microtalk show on YouTube.com/@emilamok. Contact: www.amok.com