Tim Walz Wins With Humanity and Humility

In the only debate with GOP opponent JD Vance, the Democratic VP nominee proved that debating skill is not the most important thing

(Photo by Chip Somodevilla via Getty Images)

JD Vance was smooth, slick, smart. He sounded good. He’s a skilled, Yale-educated debater who knows how to avoid answering a question with a torrent of words. He went out of his way to appear civil rather than combative or extreme.

But Tim Walz’s essential humanity and basic decency came shining through on the debate stage Tuesday night as he made clear that he trusts women, respects the role of doctors, understands the value of experts, believes in the capacity of elected leaders to confront gun violence—and, in perhaps the most critical moment of the debate, accepts the outcome of an election.

Let’s start close to the end of this roughly 90-minute showdown in New York, hosted by CBS News and co-moderators Norah O’Donnell and Margaret Brennan. That’s when the topic turned to January 6 and Donald Trump’s refusal to accept that he lost the 2020 election.

Vance insisted that Trump wanted the protests to be peaceful—and that he “peacefully” handed over the White House to Joe Biden on Jan. 20 (even though Trump didn’t show up at Biden’s inauguration). Asked whether he would challenge this year’s results, just as he raised doubts about certifying the 2020 election, Vance obfuscated. “I think that we’re focused on the future,” he said, then shifted to what he said is a bigger issue threatening democracy: censorship.

Walz was not having it. Trump “lost this election and said he didn’t,” Walz asserted, then noted he’s “most concerned” about Trump’s desire to imprison his opponents. He then turned back to Jan. 6, addressing the meaning of what that deadly violent event meant to the country in his passionate and plain-spoken way. Walz’s words struck hard, exposing the fraudulence of Vance’s efforts throughout the debate to appear reasonable and even moderate:

To deny what happened on Jan. 6, the first time in American history that a president or anyone tried to overturn a fair election and the peaceful transfer of power…and here we are, four years later in the same boat. I have to tell you, when this is over, we need to shake hands…and the winner needs to be the winner. This has got to stop. It’s tearing our country apart.

Vance tried to backtrack: “If we want to say, we need to respect the results of the election, I’m on board with that.” But Walz was not done.

Walz: “Did he lose the election?”

Vance: “Tim, I’m focused on the future….”

Walz: “That is a damning non-answer.”

“Where is the firewall with Donald Trump?” Walz later asked. “Where is the firewall if he knows he could do anything, including taking an election and his vice president's not going to stand up to it?”

Looking straight into the camera, Walz summarized what’s at stake: “So, America, I think you have a real choice in this election on who’s going to honor democracy and who’s going to honor Donald Trump.”

It would be a misfortune if large swaths of the viewing audience had already switched off the debate and missed these last minutes. But there were more than a few other moments that revealed Walz’s authentic beliefs and Vance’s determination to stick by Trump and avoid saying what he really believes.

There were the lies and there were the non-answers: Vance refused to say whether climate change is a hoax. He falsely claimed Vice President Kamala Harris was the “border czar” and that he “never supported” a national abortion ban. Vance even insisted that Trump “saved” the Affordable Care Act rather than trying repeatedly to kill it. “Donald Trump worked in a bipartisan way to ensure Americans have access to affordable care,” he laughably said, and asked the audience to trust that he and Trump would not end protections for people with pre-existing conditions.

Vance also continued his lies about Springfield, Ohio, where “you’ve got schools that are overwhelmed, you’ve got hospitals that are overwhelmed, you’ve got housing that is totally unaffordable.” Why? “Because we brought in millions of illegal immigrants.”

Never mind that the Haitian immigrants in Springfield are, in fact, legal immigrants—a fact which co-moderator Brennan pointed out and which Vance complained was in violation of the “rule” that “you guys weren’t going to fact-check.”

And rather than acknowledge that he and Trump had been mistaken to say that the Haitians have been eating the town’s pets, Vance instead expanded upon the lie with false compassion: “The people that I’m most worried about in Springfield, Ohio, are the American citizens who have had their lives destroyed by Kamala Harris’ open border.”

In contrast, Walz took advantage of this debate night to emphasize the importance of trust—and the need for responsible leadership. He criticized Vance and Trump for their rejection of economists, scientists and national security experts who disagreed with them and therefore “can’t be trusted.”

“Look, if you’re going to be president, you don’t have all the answers,” Walz said. “Donald Trump believes he does.” Then he spoke directly to the audience: “My pro-tip is this: If you need heart surgery, listen to the people at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, not Donald Trump."

Walz continued with the theme of trust on the topic of abortion. “Donald Trump put this all into motion,” he said. “He brags about how great it was that he put the judges in and overturned Roe versus Wade, 52 years of personal autonomy. And then he tells us, ‘Oh, we send it to the states. It's a beautiful thing.’”

After detailing several horrific cases to illustrate the dangerous impact of stripping away abortion rights, he concluded, “We have seen maternal mortality skyrocket in Texas, outpacing many other countries in the world. This is about health care. In Minnesota, we are ranked first in health care for a reason. We trust women. We trust doctors.”

Walz had one particularly rocky moment, when he was asked about media reports contradicting his claims that he was in Hong Kong during the deadly Tiananmen Square massacre in the spring of 1989—that he actually came later in August of that year. He talked about multiple trips to China as a young teacher with students and sports teams and dancers—how these visits 35 years ago were an opportunity to learn. He acknowledged that he “misspoke” about the timing of his visit during the democracy protests.

But I would suggest that what most people will remember from his answer was his humility: “I have poured my heart into my community. I've tried to do the best I can, but I've not been perfect. And I'm a knucklehead at times.”

It was the kind of relatable answer I wanted to hear from someone seeking high elected office. It told me that he possesses self-awareness and he’s capable of acknowledging mistakes, far different than the Republican ticket that arrogantly refuses to apologize for anything.

It didn’t surprise me, but it did underscore that winning a debate is not just about scoring points with skillful answers. And it reminded me that, after the votes are counted in November, we need real leaders who have the self-awareness to question themselves as they search for solutions to make lives better.

Please consider becoming a paid subscriber for $50 a year or just $5 a month, if you’re not already. This helps sustain and expand the work of America, America, keeps nearly all the content free for everyone and gives you full access to the comment sections.

Prefer listening to this content? Check out this new, high-quality audio version of America, America. Click on this image for a free trial: