VP Debate Could Determine the Next President in a Historic Showdown

As the 2024 presidential campaign enters its final month, Americans will have a chance to size up the two running mates this Tuesday, October 1, when Democrat Tim Walz takes on Republican JD Vance in a nationally televised debate from New York City.

Most political experts and historians point out that vice presidential candidates usually don't matter that much. The one exception being 1960 when Lyndon B. Johnson helped John F. Kennedy, a Roman Catholic, carry the Protestant South and win the White House.

However, 2024 may be different.

"Normally Vice-Presidential debates do not have a huge impact in races for President but this year that could change given how pollsters are predicting an incredibly tight race between Harris and Trump,"  argues John Dempsey, former news director at Chicago's iconic WLS-AM.

Dempsey believes that Walz can be expected to tie Vance to his many past statements that have been seen as sexist towards women, while Vance will most likely paint Walz as a far-left radical, given his record as Governor of Minnesota. 

He further states that both candidates will also try to tie each other to the most unpopular positions of their respective running mates.   

One hot button issue expected to take center stage during the debate is illegal immigration.

"Walz will highlight Vance and Trump's false statements that Haitian immigrants are eating pet dogs and cats in Springfield, Ohio," Dempsey says, "while Vance will use the fake story to highlight his argument that Harris and Walz are weak on border security."

Ernest Wiggins, an independent scholar and professor emeritus at the University of  South Carolina's School of Journalism, agrees but emphasizes that the Haitian immigrants are in the country legally.

"The Haitian migrants in Ohio are not in Springfield unlawfully," he maintains. "Haitians have been immigrating to the United States for generations."

Wiggins maintains that Vance will likely drum the immigration question throughout the debate whether germane to the question asked or not. 

"As a counterpoint, Walz should remind Americans that a bi-partisan border bill was set to help address the illegal  immigration question but was sabotaged by Trump in order to continue the broken border narrative for his campaign," he says,

With both candidates on stage, Americans will have an opportunity to compare and contrast their qualifications and respective records. 

"Walz, in addition to his service as governor, has held several governmental posts, while Vance, who is in his first term as a US senator from Ohio, has a relatively paltry record in comparison," Wiggins observes.

He further points out that vice presidential candidates, by the very nature of the "back-up" role of the office, must present themselves as loyal to the top of the ticket.

"At the same time, they must be their own person as well," he states.

Asked how to parlay the fact that most polls show Walz with a more favorable rating than Vance, Wiggins suggests taking a more cautious approach.

"I don't think giving in to "performance" would be a smart choice for someone who appears to be as unalloyed and genuine as Walz.  If he pushes the "joy" too hard, it might strike some people as artificial and disingenuous."

Richard Greb, a retired journalist who has written for Reuters, the Associated Press and the Chicago Tribune, agrees but emphasizes that Walz should still echo the more positive  "moving forward not back" theme articulated by Vice President Harris in her debate with Trump.

"Historically, candidates that have offered a more upbeat message like FDR in 1932, JFK in 1960 or Reagan in 1980 have gone on to win," Greb observes.  

He notes that both Harris and Walz have come off as likeable while generating lots of enthusiasm and interest.

"If Walz can continue to project that optimism throughout the debate, he should do very well."

One criticism of Walz voiced by Vance and other Republicans is the governor's military service and whether he embellished his record.

Wiggins believes that Walz has already addressed that issue on multiple occasions.

"If Vance asks those questions again, he opens himself up to questions about his own service record, which is not lengthy or stellar," he says.

Asked about the chances that the VP debate will generate any surprises, Wiggins observes that there may be little of the point-counterpoint that marks traditional debates and that the format may not appeal to viewers wanting to see a good "fight."

"Still, you never know what will happen in these debates," he maintains. 

At the end of the debate, Wiggins, Dempsey and Greb all agree that voters need to ask themselves one major question.

"Which of these two candidates most comes across as a capable, competent leader who can step in and assume the presidency should the need arise," Wiggins says.