Reactions to Vance's debate performance tell the story: 'Most lopsided vice presidential debate ever'



Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio) faced off against Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D) Tuesday night for the vice presidential debate in New York City. In an uncustomarily civil engagement by recent standards, the two men advanced disparate visions for America, traded barbs, and demonstrated — or tried to demonstrate — their value to their respective running mates.

Despite efforts by the CBS News moderators to help Walz and hinder Vance, it quickly became clear — even to liberal talking heads — that the Democratic governor was grossly outmatched.

In response to Van Jones calling Vance "slick, slick, slick" after the debate, fellow CNN panelist David Urban said, "Ten out of ten for JD Vance. Ten strike. ... He landed a lot of good punches, but he did so with an iron fist in a velvet glove. He was very smooth. He was likeable. He looked presidential."

Donald Trump Jr., who leaned on his father to choose Vance as his running mate, told CNN, "I thought it was a master class. It was just an incredible performance — just real command of the facts."

Fox News' Kayleigh McEnany wrote, "JD Vance was very clearly a masterful pick for Vice President. His heartfelt response to questions and kind demeanor was very powerful. Really excellent judgment by @DonaldJTrumpJr and all those instrumental to the pick."

'I've never seen a national candidate look as nervous as Tim Walz.'

New York Times columnist Ross Douthat noted that the debate revealed why Vance was a great choice of running mate for Trump, stressing that the Ohio senator delivered "one of the best debating performances by a Republican nominee for president or vice president in recent memory and making a case for Trump's record far more effectively than Trump has ever been capable of doing."

"You've got a tough job here. You've got to pretend that Donald Trump didn't deliver rising take-home pay, which of course he did," Vance said during the debate.

"You've got to pretend that Donald Trump didn't deliver lower inflation, which of course he did," continued the senator. "And then you've got to defend Kamala Harris' atrocious economic record, which has made gas, groceries, and housing unaffordable for American citizens."

Extra to defending Trump's record and contrasting his running mate's successes with Harris' failures, Vance, who managed a chipper tone throughout, steamrolled Walz for much of the debate.

Walz often proved incapable of hiding his panic, such as when Vance raised the matter of censorship and extracted an admission from the governor that a Harris-Walz administration would criminalize speech deemed hateful.

On another occasion when Walz again looked utterly beaten, Vance said, "You blame Donald Trump. Who has been the vice president for the last three and a half years? And the answer is your running mate, not mine."

National Review editor Rich Lowry later noted, "I've never seen a national candidate look as nervous as Tim Walz when he's not speaking."

"Walz looks rusty and nervous," wrote Josh Rogin of the Washington Post. "Maybe he should have done some press interviews to better prepare."

In an apparent attempt to expedite several of the beatings, Walz simply nodded in agreement and in one case rushed to surrender. When it came to addressing his lie about being in Hong Kong during the pro-democracy protests at Tiananmen Square in 1989, he admitted he was a "knucklehead" prone to getting "caught up in the rhetoric."

Rachel Maddow said after the debate that she "wouldn't describe them as evenly matched." Her fellow MSNBC talking head Chris Hayes admitted, "JD Vance is very good at this."

'My condolences to Tim Walz.'

Although loath to pay Vance a real compliment, Ben Davis of the Guardian, a leftist British publication, wrote, "This project — nationalism, protectionism, welfare chauvinism, and a sort of communitarian-sounding social conservatism — floundered two years ago with candidates like Blake Masters or Vance himself. Vance was able to maneuver it to sound almost moderate and reasonable."

Jacobin founding editor Bhaskar Sunkara admitted that Vance "overall gave a slightly stronger performance."

Polling expert Frank Luntz ran a focus group during the debate with over a dozen people, only five of whom were leaning toward supporting President Donald Trump and Vance at the outset. He noted that the final vote was 12-2 in favor of Vance.

There was a similar response on the betting website Polymarket. Shortly after the debate began, confidence in Walz's ability to win the debate bottomed out.

According to CBS News' own polling data, Vance not only won the debate but saw his favorability rating jump afterward.

Lawmakers also recognized Vance's clear victory.

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) wrote, "Most lopsided vice presidential debate ever. JD Vance was on his game. Tim Walz was nervous, uninformed, and didn't explain why he lies all the time."

"JD Vance won big and demonstrated why he was a fantastic pick by President Trump," wrote Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.). "He skillfully contrasted Trump's record of peace and prosperity with Kamala's record of disaster."

Vivek Ramaswamy tweeted, "Very proud of JD for a stellar performance tonight. And my condolences to Tim Walz - it was unkind for them to put him in this position."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Check out what Joe Rogan and Aaron Rodgers had to say about the media’s blistering attacks



Joe Rogan and Aaron Rodgers are no strangers to controversy. The fact that these two have dared to share thoughts contrary to those promoted by the radical left have resulted in both men being crucified by the liberal-owned media.

But that hasn’t stopped either of them from fighting the woke mind virus. Dave Rubin is encouraged by Rogan and Rodgers’ willingness to share their red-pilling experiences because it’s people like them who are encouraging others to “wake up.”

A couple of days ago, Rodgers, who the media has painted as a “conspiracy theorist” and a “racist,” was invited on “The Joe Rogan Experience” again to discuss Big Pharma’s iron grip on the narrative.

“They are f***ing controlling the message,” Rodgers said, adding that “the alphabet companies,” such as the CDC and the NIH, “have been lying and misleading the public for so long.”

Rodgers explained that the reason people, including himself and Rogan, get “slaughtered by the media” for speaking out or even questioning the narrative is because it’s Big Pharma “who’s paying [the media].”

“It’s corporate controlled,” agreed Rogan, and “it's not beneficial to the greater good of society.”

Dave remembers how, during the height of the pandemic, “they'd be covering COVID on NBC News, CNN, ABC, etc. and then they'd cut to commercial – ‘Brought to you by Pfizer.”

“Oh really? So you're taking money from the very people who you are supposed to be objectively talking about and criticizing where criticism is due?” he scoffs.

CNN specifically went to great lengths to villainize Rogan for his position on COVID. Dave plays an old clip from CNN of Rogan explaining how he used “ivermectin” and other tried-and-true medications to treat COVID next to the original clip Rogan posted himself.

In CNN’s version, Rogan’s face is a sickly shade of greenish-gray, whereas in the original clip, his coloring is completely normal.

“At the exact same time as all of this was unfolding, suddenly for two weeks the entire mainstream media was calling Joe Rogan racist because they unearthed videos of him saying the n-word even though he was not saying it in a racist way; he was saying it to mock the people who actually are racist,” Dave recounts, clearly showing the media’s obvious motivation to de-platform and defame Rogan for being a nonconformist.

On the subject of motivation, Rodgers had something to say about what fuels companies like CNN and people like Jimmy Kimmel, who also blasted Rogan on his show for taking “horse goo” instead of getting vaccinated.

“I lost friends, allies in the media [and] millions of dollars in sponsorship because I talked about what worked for me, my own beliefs, and my own health reasons [behind] why I didn't get vaccinated,” Rodgers explained.

“They vilified all early treatments,” including widely used ivermectin — a Nobel Prize-winning drug — because if they hadn’t, they wouldn’t have gotten “the [user acquisition].”

“The point of all this,” says Dave, “is that when you stand up, there is going to be a cost.”

Luckily, “the truth does work over time.”


Want more from Dave Rubin?

To enjoy more honest conversations, free speech, and big ideas with Dave Rubin, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Hillary Clinton's 'would-be victory speech' will be featured in a new Masterclass



Former Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton finally revealed what would have been her victory speech had she defeated former President Donald Trump in the 2016 election.

Clinton revealed that she never actually wrote a concession speech, because even though her campaign experienced many difficulties the during the final 10 days, she knew that she would win the presidency.

The former secretary of state decided to share her "would-be victory speech" with the world as part of a new class she will be teaching in partnership with the platform "Masterclass."

The primary thrust of Clinton's speech focuses on her journey in politics and her mother's personal story, Clinton told "Sunday Today" host Willie Geist. Clinton told Geist that she wrote the speech as a way of "making it clear that she would be be the first woman president, but she stood on the shoulders and lived the lives and experiences of those who came before her."

MasterClass Presents The White House. Soon, members will be able to learn from the world's best leaders. Two former U.S. Presidents. Two U.S. First Ladies. Three women who have served as U.S. Secretary of State. Coming soon to MasterClass. #MasterClassFirstLookpic.twitter.com/Hqo09tMJUm
— MasterClass (@MasterClass) 1636593998

In a video preview of her tabled speech, Clinton gets emotional as she speaks of a dream in which she tells her mother that she would become the president of the United States.

"Look at me, listen to me. You will survive. You will have a good family of your own and three children, and as hard as it might be to imagine your daughter will grow up and become the president of the United States," Clinton said.

For the first time, @HillaryClinton is sharing the speech she would have made if she had won the 2016 presidential election. Watch more of the conversation on #SundayTODAY with @WillieGeist.pic.twitter.com/iRLbKUGINc
— TODAY (@TODAY) 1638970134

"In this lesson, I’m going to face one of my most public defeats head-on by sharing with you the speech I had hoped to deliver if I had won the 2016 election," Clinton says in the video preview.

"Today, with your children on your shoulders, your neighbors at your side, friends old and new standing as one, you renewed our democracy," she said in the speech she didn't get to give five years ago, according to "Today." "And because of the honor you have given me, you have changed its face forever. I’ve met women who were born before women had the right to vote. They’ve been waiting a hundred years for tonight."

The former first lady's speech will be part of the "MasterClass Presents the White House" series. Her husband, former President Bill Clinton will be featured in the following episode of the series.

Clinton says that "sexism and misogyny" played a role in her election loss in 2016.

"Any of you who’ve read my book about 'what happened' know that I think misogyny and sexism was part of that campaign — it was one of the contributing factors," Clinton said at Georgetown University in 2018.

Hillary's MasterClass will be available Dec. 9.