VP Debate Preview: Tim Walz

10 clips from his previous debates gives insight into his substance and style

The lone Vice Presidential debate is on Tuesday night between Tim Walz and JD Vance. While many Americans who follow politics have become familiar with Vance over the last couple of years because of his prominent role nationally - as a Senate candidate from a major state, as a US Senator, and as Trump's running mate making constant appearances on cable news shows, not as much is known about Tim Walz as a debater outside of Minnesota.

I went back and watched several previous debates involving Walz against a variety of opponents when he ran for Congress and governor. Several key themes emerged and his debate style evolved over the years. While Walz was more affable and friendly when running for an office as an outsider, he was a little more forceful and combative at times while defending his record as governor of Minnesota when he ran for reelection in 2022.

The 2018 Debate for Minnesota Governor

His 2018 debate against Republican Jeff Johnson had a more relaxed and conversational style partly because of the format, where both were seated with moderators between them. However, only Walz seemed to be at ease in that setting, largely ignoring his opponent while Johnson stayed on the attack most of the debate by going after Walz. Walz never raised his voice or showed any outward sign of being upset at any point during the debate.

This first clip is interesting because it gives us an early preview of a topic that has become the centerpiece of the Trump/Vance campaign - immigration and the border. In an answer similar to what we are likely to see on Tuesday night, Walz complained about Republicans demonizing migrants and peddling fear while opposing any meaningful bipartisan reforms that could begin to solve the problem.

The next clip shows a tense exchange where Johnson complained that a 3rd party PAC supporting Walz was airing a false ad about him. When Walz said that he hadn't seen the ad, Johnson called him a liar and the expression on Walz's face immediately changed where he stopped and glared at Johnson as if daring him to say it again. Walz never lost his cool and responded, but you can see that there is a toughness beneath the friendly outward personality.

The next clip is a testy back-and-forth exchange about gun control. Johnson pointed out that when Walz first ran for Congress he was endorsed by the NRA and received an A-rating from them his first couple of years. Walz ended up his time in Congress with an F-grade from the NRA. Walz asserted that the number and nature of school shootings caused him to change his position in favor of common sense gun reforms, while Johnson argued that Walz moved to the left because he wanted to run for governor.

The question about affordable housing gave Walz a great opportunity to showcase how he is very much a Good Government Democrat who beliefs that government has an important role to play to better people's lives. Johnson's answers to just about every question was a free market solution - let the markets decide and capitalism always ends of producing the best possible result for most people. Walz continued to argue that government plays an important role, and used examples well to compare and contrast.

The final clip from this debate is a theme we will likely see Walz use with Vance. Walz pointed out that Johnson was often the dissenting voice in government on a variety of issues, rarely accomplished anything, and was good at identifying problems and criticizing while never offering any solutions. Walz noted that his strength is as a problem solver and consensus builder adept at bringing people together. Vance is Johnson on steroids in this area, so Walz could use the same tactic even effectively in the VP debate against him.

The 2022 Debate for Minnesota Governor

Although there were similar themes and style employed by Walz in his debate with challenger Scott Jensen, this time Walz was more assertive and forceful as he defended his record as governor. It was also clear that Jensen was far more abrasive a personality that Walz's previous opponent, which also resulted in some testy moments.

This debate happened right after Roe v. Wade was overturned, so it began with a question about abortion. This is certain to be a major topic in the VP debate, where Vance's own position on abortion has been much more draconian than even Donald Trump's. Walz's answer on the abortion question was passionate and eloquent. Walz did not address the fictitious "abortions after birth" claim that Trump constantly makes since Jensen (who is a doctor) never attempted to similarly assert that this is happening.

The question about opioid abuse probably showed better than any other that Walz can take the gloves off and go after his opponent personally as effectively as anyone where it is warranted. He noted that Jensen was a doctor who prescribed more opioids than over 90% of the doctors in the state, and he admitted doing so after he was wined and dined by pharmaceutical reps. This was a devastating response by Walz.

Another question showed that Walz can also show class and magnanimity towards his opponent, even after tense exchanges against someone he obviously doesn't like personally. Jensen and Walz were each challenged to say something nice about his opponent. Jensen was clearly uncomfortable with the question and came off looking like a jerk, saying only that Walz had "a nice smile." Walz then complimented Jensen as a strong family man who obviously loved his family and whose heart was in the right place, even though they disagreed on issues.

While a later question about mining in northern Minnesota was specific to the state, Walz's answer to the broader question of how to balance environmental concerns with energy and mineral production was excellent, and we are likely to see a version of this in the VP debate. While his opponent argued that government should get out of the way and let the mining industry do what they saw fit, Walz argued passionately that was a crazy approach and gave a great example of how he balanced industry concerns with protection of the environment.

The final clip involves Jensen's criticism of Walz's handling of the George Floyd protests which lead to rioting and destruction of property in Minneapolis. Jensen argued that Walz should have immediately sent in the National Guard and went after him for his previous comment that very few members of the Guard have any training on how to handle civil disobedience. Walz did a good job explaining how he handled the situation the way he did, on a topic that Vance has also criticized him for repeatedly.

This debate will feature a clear contrast in styles. Vance is a calm and smooth tech bro who rarely shows emotion. He is a right-wing "anti-woke" culture warrior who revels in making bombastic, inflammatory, and often false pronouncements for attention. Walz is a good-government Democrat who is more gregarious, friendly, extroverted, and emotional. Both are effective communicators to their respective base voters. The question is, who will be able to connect more with independent voters. 

That largely depends on how the debate unfolds. 

Join me live during the debate tomorrow in our chat.