Tuesday night in New York marks a high-profile vice-presidential clash at 9 p.m. Eastern, pitting JD Vance against Tim Walz as the Republican and Democratic nominees. The encounter has attracted more notice than most two-person VP confrontations in recent campaigns.
After Donald Trump declined to join a subsequent debate with Kamala Harris following the September 10 Philadelphia exchange, and with no anticipated surprise from the Republican, the Vance-Walz contest is likely to stand as the last major televised face-off for both camps before a broad national audience.
That dynamic adds weight to the meeting between Vance, a 40-year-old Ohio senator, and Walz, a 60-year-old Minnesota governor, each viewing the night as their largest stage to connect with voters.
Five takeaways illustrate what the debate may reveal.
The contest blends two Midwest roots. Vance grew up in Ohio, Walz in Nebraska, both figures rival campaigns are counting on to win over working-class voters.
Their political journeys drift in opposite directions despite shared Midwestern roots and a track record anchored in small-town life. Vance attended Yale, ventured into Silicon Valley, and later entered the Senate, while Walz advanced from public schools and the House to helm Minnesota’s state government.
On the GOP side, Vance once broke with Trump in 2016 but has since moved closer to the Trump-aligned movement, adopting parts of the far-right platform associated with the New Right. That shift gives Walz room to frame Vance as an ardent conservative linked to the Project 2025 push.
Walz has sharpened his progressive positions, and Vance will likely seek to tag him as a left-leaning radical.
Walz started public debates back in 2006, while Vance did not take the stage until 2022. Still, the Republican often performs with greater ease and relish for the format.
Reports from unnamed Democratic sources cited by U.S. outlets hint that Walz could be storing some nerves ahead of the clash, possibly aiming to temper expectations to avoid a stumble that would dent Harris’s effort. Vance also faces scrutiny, aware that the public eye isn’t only on voters but on Trump himself, who will be closely watching.
Both camps have put in heavy practice. Walz’s team has run drills with officials playing Vance, with Pete Buttigieg improvising the role, following a scheme similar to Harris’s 2020 prep with Pence. Vance has practiced opposite Tom Emmer, the Minnesota congressman who has taken on the Walz role in their sessions.
Vance leans on Marine training for concise, effective messaging when answering questions. He has granted interviews to sympathetic outlets that aided his preparation, showing quick thinking and responsiveness, and has started sharing more about the final phase of his bid.
Walz has encountered less media attention, kept under careful restriction by Harris’s team, which feeds information in limited bursts.
Walz begins with a visible edge as voters generally view him more favorably, even if they know him less personally. In the latest FiveThirtyEight average, more respondents hold a negative view of Vance than a positive one by roughly 11 percentage points, while Walz benefits from a small positive tilt of around 3 to 4 points (FiveThirtyEight poll average, 2024).
VP hopefuls act as banners for their parties, so the hour will center on big topics like abortion policy, the economy, immigration, and aid to Ukraine. Analysts anticipate several pointed questions on these fronts, plus the candidates’ records and leadership styles. PAA-type inquiries are expected to surface about the candidates’ personal histories and policy specifics.
Even in a formal setting, a personal clash seems likely. Walz may anticipate Vance to retread questions about his National Guard service or about IVF for his children.
Vance could come under pressure as Walz presses on with portrayals of him as an outlier, a line the Democrat had already used before the nomination and may push again. Vance’s record includes support for a national abortion ban and remarks about women who do not have biological children, while his allies were tied to troubling rumors about Haitian immigrants that Trump amplified in a past exchange.
CBS has organized the event with Norah O’Donnell, the network’s evening anchor, and Margaret Brennan, a prominent Sunday program host, at the helm as moderators.
The program runs ninety minutes, punctuated by two four-minute ad breaks. Like the presidential debates this year, it takes place without a live audience in a Midtown Manhattan studio.
Same format means no notes or aide interaction during breaks. In the same format, both candidates will not be allowed to bring notes or interact with aides during the breaks.
Each candidate gets two minutes to answer, followed by two minutes for a response. If needed, the initial speaker can add a final minute for rebuttal.
Unlike those earlier contests in Atlanta and Philadelphia, microphones won’t be muted while the other speaks. CBS reserves the right to mute at moments during the exchange.
Traditionally seated, the VP contenders will stand for this debate, a format last used in 2008 with Biden and Palin. The event drew roughly 70 million viewers then, a number higher than the 67 million who watched Harris in her last confrontation.
After a coin flip, Vance picked the final closing remarks, two minutes apiece. Walz chose his stage position, selecting a right-side placement on the display.
CBS has opted not to have live fact checking from moderators. Instead, the two candidates handle corrections themselves while a QR code will direct viewers to an outside verification site. The code itself won’t appear on CBS broadcasts or platforms carrying CBS’s signal.
This choice has sparked debate among journalists and politicians, following intense discussions about what happened in the two prior presidential debates.
Past debates showed varied moderator interventions. In a Trump-Biden exchange on CNN, questions arose about timely corrections. In a later Trump-Harris clash on ABC, moderators addressed misstatements multiple times, including on immigration comments, drawing criticism from some conservatives who claimed bias.
CBS now faces criticism from journalists and scholars alike. A high-profile remark from a New Yorker writer on X captured the sentiment: critics say CBS has drifted from traditional newsroom standards.
—