JD Vance slams Biden on immigration, Tim Walz questions Trump’s economic policies

Democrat Tim Walz and Republican JD Vance on Wednesday held their highly anticipated vice presidential debate, the only one before the November 5 US election, with the first question focusing on the Middle East conflict following a day of Iranian strikes on Israel. Held at the CBS Broadcast Centre in New York City, the debate covered critical topics such as migration, climate change, the economy, and foreign policy, with the candidates offering sharply contrasting views.
Walz flipped the question about how to handle Iran by saying “an 80-year-old Donald Trump talking about crowd sizes”. He insisted on “Israel’s ability to defend itself,” he criticised Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, saying that Iran is closer to a nuclear weapon than it was before due to Trump’s “fickle leadership.” Vance shot back, praising Trump for “delivering stability” in the world through a policy of deterrence.
On Donald Trump’s claim that climate change was “a hoax”, Walz remarked “My farmers know climate change is real”. Vance ducked this question, saying if Vice President Kamala Harris “really believed that climate change is serious, what they would be doing is more manufacturing and more energy production in the United States of America”.
The debate got intense as the leaders commented on immigration, with JD Vance claiming, “We’ve got 20-25 million illegal aliens who are here in the country”. “The people that I’m most worried about in Springfield, Ohio are the American citizens who have had their lives destroyed by Kamala Harris’s open border,” Vance says. “It is a disgrace.”
Walz responded by accusing Vance and Trump of villainising the legal immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, Vance’s home state. He said, “This is what happens when you don’t want to solve it, you demonise it,” he said, saying not doing so would allow people to “come together”.
The leaders sparred on the economy, with Walz accusing Trump of not paying taxes. He also blamed Trump’s Covid-19 pandemic response for the economy. Vance, responded, saying judging economic issues doesn’t require “listening to experts” but instead “common sense”.
Walz touted his track record on policies to boost the middle class and also criticised Trump for being out of touch with the middle class. Vance replied, “If Kamala Harris has such great plans for how to address middle class problems, then she ought to do them now,” he said.
The Democratic vice-presidential candidate took a stronger stance against Trump on abortion rights. Echoing Kamala Harris’ approach of labelling abortion restrictions as “Trump abortion bans,” Walz emphasised Trump’s role in appointing the three Supreme Court justices who overturned the constitutional right to abortion, leading to widespread restrictions in Republican-led states. “Donald Trump set this all in motion,” Walz stated.
Vance argued that individual states should determine abortion policy. “The proper way to handle this… is to let voters make these decisions, let the individual states set abortion policy,” he said. However, Vance seemed to adopt a more “compassionate” stance instead of presenting a hardline view. He also denied claims that Republicans would create a federal registry to track pregnancies.
Through the debate, Vance accused Harris of doing enough to address inflation, immigration and the economy while serving in President Joe Biden’s administration, and even mentioned the “Kamala Harris administration”. Walz described Trump as an unstable leader who had prioritised billionaires.
Walz, 60, the liberal governor of Minnesota and a former high school teacher, has spent much of his career focused on education, public service, and progressive policies. He will go head-to-head with JD Vance, 40, a bestselling author and political newcomer from Ohio.
JD Vance, a staunch conservative senator, has gained national attention for his outspoken views and fiery rhetoric. Both men hail from the Midwest and will likely emphasise their regional roots, but their political philosophies and policy positions couldn’t be more different.
Political analysts do not expect the debate to drastically change the trajectory of the election, but it offers a crucial moment for both campaigns to make their case to millions of voters watching at home.