'Pretty straightforward verdict': 13 writers offer views on Walz-Vance debate — and who won

Four weeks after Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump held their highly contentious debate in Philadelphia, their midwestern running mates — Democratic Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and Republican Sen. JD Vance of Ohio — met in New York City for a vice presidential debate hosted by CBS News. The latter had a much more polite and civil tone: Although Walz and Vance disagreed on a wide range of issues, they avoided the type of scathing attacks that characterized the Harris/Trump debate.

On Wednesday morning, October 2, the New York Times published debate analysis featuring 13 writers. And they had different views on whether Walz or Vance won.

Liberal Times columnist Charles Blow argued, "Walz won. You could tell that he was a teacher, because he clearly did his homework."

READ MORE: 'Totally out of luck': How Project 2025 would gut relief for Hurricane Helene victims

But another liberal Times columnist, Jamelle Bouie, said, "It's a pretty straightforward verdict: Vance won this debate. It's not hard to see why. He has spent most of his adult life selling himself to the wealthy, the powerful and the influential. He is as smooth and practiced as they come. He has no regard for the truth. He lies as easily as he breathes."

According to Times opinion writer Jane Coaston, "Vance seemed smoother and more practiced, but 'won' is a very strong term here."

The Times' Gail Collins considers the debate a "draw," describing Walz as "so bad in much of his delivery" and Vance as a "forceful speaker" intent on "spewing lies."

Times columnist Ross Douthat contends, "For Vance, it was a commanding performance. For Walz, it was a nervous ramble. For the audience, it was the most civil and substantive debate of the Trump era."

READ MORE: 'Extremely biased anchors!' Trump melts down on Truth Social over vice presidential debate

Reason Editor Katherine Mangu-Ward, a libertarian, and Modern Age's Daniel McCarthy believe that Vance won, while the Times' Megan Stack argues that Vance "ran circles around" Walz. And Never Trump conservative Peter Wehner said that Vance "did a lot to repair his tattered image."

The Times' Farah Stockman described the debate as a "tie," and Slack Tide's Mark Labash said that "nobody truly dominated" the debate — although Labash gave Walz "a slight edge."

Very Serious' Josh Barro described Vance as "far nimbler than the nervous Tim Walz." And the Times' Binyamin Appelbaum argues that Vance "made Trumpism sound polite, calm and coherent."

READ MORE: 'How dare you': MAGA Republicans rage at 'bimbo' moderators for cutting Vance's mic during debate

Read the New York Times' full analysis at this link (subscription required).