Tim Walz’s VP debate: Rambling robot to humble human

Sources close to Tim Walz, the Governor of Minnesota and running mate of Vice President Kamala Harris, said that he was nervous about letting Harris down, and a bad debater prior to his own matchup Tuesday. It showed.

In his Vice Presidential Debate on Tuesday against JD Vance, an Ohio senator who is the running mate of former President Donald Trump, Walz did not perform well, but by the end shined a human side that improved his debate showing.

At the very beginning, well, it was a nightmare for Walz. The first question about support towards a strike by Israel on Iran came right to the governor and he looked terrified. He mumbled multiple times in his response and repeated the word “fundamental” four times in roughly 25 seconds.

His response was indirect and he focused too much on attacking Trump. It couldn’t get much worse for Harris’s number two, but slowly but surely he turned it around.

Walz did bring his nerves down in the following questions which targeted immigration and climate change. However, the nerves were still visibly present in his body language and the way he spoke. Walz had fear in his eyes and rambled.

His thoughts weren’t concise and rushed. The answers were deliberately robot-ish as he demonstrated clearly scripted answers going after former President Trump.

These trends of rambling and scripted answers continued as the needle shifted to the economy and personal qualities. He avoided multiple questions, and didn’t drive home eloquent points like Vance did.

Another low point came when Walz failed to directly address his claim that he was in Hong Kong for the Tiananmen Square protests in May of that summer. He was asked again by the CBS News moderator, Margaret Brennan, and he brushed it off claiming he “misspoke” leading to an awkward silence where he was still indirect.

It was all uphill from there though. On the issue of abortion, the Governor hammered home personal anecdotes where women were hurt by the inability to get an abortion in their state. He delivered solid responses in rebuttal to Vance’s claims.

“No we’re not. We’re pro-women. We’re pro-freedom to make your own choice,” Walz claimed in opposition to Vance’s rhetoric that democrats are “pro-abortion”. Also, Walz diligently made the point that rights shouldn’t be a state-by-state issue, directly opposing the Trump and Vance opinion.

After a commercial break, Walz was fully settled in. While he still wasn’t as concise as Vance, he showed a more human side. This is the real side of Walz. The side of having a career as a teacher and a high school football coach. This human side is what is best about the running mate.

“Alright, here’s where being an old guy gives you some history,” claimed the Governor before delving into healthcare issues, representing the more approachable nature he has.

“If you’re still up, and the folks who missed Dancing with the Stars, I appreciate it,” the Minnesotan stated in his closing remarks, further appealing to real people that will have the vote on Nov. 5.

Not only did this human side show towards the end but so did constructive criticism of Jan. 6. He included an anecdote of how the protestors of the election jeopardized the safety of his son and questioned Vance directly about if he accepts the results of 2020 to which the senator dodged.

“Jan. 6 was not Facebook ads,” Walz rebutted. It shot down Vance’s opinion that Hillary Clinton also thought there was election fraud in the 2016 election through Russian Facebook ads. This was the best quote of the debate for the “coach” (Walz’s nickname by his supporters), and it highlighted the violence that took place on that day as unacceptable and unprecedented.

Walz’s closing remarks represented an optimistic ticket of the Democratic pair. It focused on the positives of the country and a “new way forward”. He criticized Trump’s negativity and fear he imposes, juxtaposing his optimism.

It was the cherry on top of how approachable and genuine Walz proved he can be when the nerves fall off.

While Walz proved his own claims that he was a bad debater, that second half demonstrated promise. Promise that he’s a humble humane guy that says “sorry” to moderators and one that acknowledges the common ground of his opponent.

This promise is that he can be a leader that understands the middle-class struggle. That understanding may be the difference in a swing state for the construction worker. That may change the election.

Brooks Markle is a first-year majoring in communications. To contact him, email bfm5562@psu.edu.