Tim Walz showed how a coach can win the game! His strategy to save the power question for last was an effective "score"!

Echo opinion published in The New York Times:

Produced by ‘The Ezra Klein Show’

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNCIfsrQ9ws

The most consequential and revealing exchange during the vice-presidential debate on Tuesday came toward the end, when JD Vance was asked whether he would seek to challenge this year’s election results. That one moment proved that he can’t be trusted with the office he seeks.

But the 85 minutes preceding that moment had a lot of interesting policy discussion, so we couldn’t resist talking about that, too.

Vice-presidential debates are strange. They are this contest between two people who, even if they win, they’re not going to have decision making power. 

So, they’re there trying to convince the country to vote for their ticket by arguing the other person on their ticket, who is not there debating tonight, is going to be good at making decisions.

As a result, it’s always hard for me at least to know what I’m looking for in these debates. Is it, which candidate is the better debater? Who won? Is it, which candidate did more to help and defend and make the case for their running mate? Is it, which candidate did the least to hurt their running mate? Does any of this matter at all? Is anybody watching but those of us who professionally have to do it?

If you’re scoring it as a debate, technically, JD Vance is the better debater. He won that debate over Tim Walz. He’s quicker on his feet. JD Vance lies more smoothly — and, Lord, he lied a lot last night. He’s much better at seeming like he’s answering a question when he’s doing anything but answering the question. But that’s debating. Those are relevant skills. You can’t take it away from him.

Walz was often nervous and fumbling. But I didn’t think Walz did a bad job. He made his arguments. He seemed like a decent, genuine person up there. He did nothing to hurt the ticket.

And it was Vance, in the final minutes of the debate, who might have caused himself and Donald Trump real damage. The vice president doesn’t have many official jobs. John Nance Garner, Franklin Roosevelt’s first running mate, famously said the vice presidency isn’t worth a pitcher of warm piss. But one job the vice president does have is certifying election results. This hasn’t, for most of American history, been consequential or notable.

But in 2020, it became both. Donald Trump lost the election, but insisted he won it. He demanded that Vice President Mike Pence refuse to certify the results. He demanded he throw it into chaos by rejecting the state electors, declaring the results illegitimate. Pence refused Trump’s demands. That’s why the crowd that stormed the capitol was chanting that Mike Pence should be hung. That’s why Donald Trump ended up looking for a new vice president when he ran again in 2024.

There’s been no end of commentary and speculation on how JD Vance ended up as Donald Trump’s running mate. 

Many Republicans want to see Donald Trump’s movement turned into something ideological and intellectual and reproducible. And they hoped that Trump picked Vance for that job. I’ve always thought that was a little absurd. What matters to Donald Trump is loyalty, and Vance has long been willing to say something that other top Republicans don’t quite want to say. He has said he would’ve done what Mike Pence did not do. He has said he would not have certified the 2020, election. He would have thrown it back to the states. And then, towards the end of last night’s debate, Vance was asked about that position again.

This was a threat to our democracy in a way that we had not seen, and it manifested itself because of Donald Trump’s inability to say, he is still saying he didn’t lose the election. I would just ask that. Did he lose the 2020 election❓

JD Vance:     "Tim, I’m focused on the future."  

TIM WALZ:  "That is a damning non-answer."💥❗