On Oct. 1, the Vice Presidential debate between Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and Sen. J.D. Vance of Ohio took place. Described as more civil than the previous presidential debate, both men admitted to being wrong in past comments. With five weeks until the election, the debate consisted of policy topics that many expected, from gun control to abortion and immigration. 

“I thought [the debate] was very good. I think that they both have very good points, but I think Vance really showed his strides, and he made a lot of movement and was able to show Trump’s policies without the Trump mannerisms,” senior David Brazlavsky said. 

On the topic of abortion, Vance argued Minnesota’s abortion law allows doctors to avoid providing care to infants born alive after a failed abortion. Walz rejected this, defending his laws with evidence of the state’s legal requirements for medical care. 

Furthermore, on the topic of immigration, Vance criticized the Biden administration’s use of the app CBP One for asylum seekers, claiming it encouraged illegal migration into the U.S.. Walz supported the app’s humanitarian role in managing border crossings. 

At times, both candidates had interesting moments, with Vance having no answer to Trump’s defeat in the 2020 presidential election, and Walz claiming that he’s a “knucklehead at times.” 

Vance discussed Trump’s ideas with polish while avoiding being pinned down on the more controversial parts of the former president’s record. His performance delighted the Trump campaign and many of its allies. 

Walz depicted Trump as wrong on the issues and a chaotic leader. He delivered several points sure to please Democrats, including on abortion rights and democracy. 

“I objectively believe that Vance won, even though they both did a great job, and it was very respectful between the two,” Brazlavsky said.