Ninety minutes into the first, and likely last, vice-presidential debate between Ohio Senator JD Vance and Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, the moderators asked Vance, “Would you again seek to challenge this year’s election results, even if every Governor certifies the results?”
The following several minutes of the debate should not be singled out because it was Governor Walz’s best moment, but because Vance’s answers were wholly disqualifying for the office that he wishes to hold.
After Donald Trump lost the 2020 election, he and his allies organized a concerted effort to overturn the results. As they lost dozens of court cases, even those dealt with by Trump appointees, one of Trump’s lawyers, John Eastman, told him that Vice President Mike Pence could unilaterally refuse to certify a Biden victory during the joint session of Congress on January 6th. This was not true and had no legal or constitutional basis.
Pence refused to follow Trump’s whims, and instead, chose to protect the principles of democracy and the peaceful transfer of power. That is why the Trump-incited mob on January 6 chanted “Hang Mike Pence.” And, as Governor Walz pointed out, that is why Pence was not on the stage last night.
Very few principles have endured in America since its founding. As we learn in history (or government) classes, even democracy was not a bedrock principle of the United States when it was founded. Yet it is true, and it was true even then, that in America, no one gets to decide how much power they have. Under the original Constitution, and in our current electoral system, everyone’s power is given to them by someone else and can be taken away by someone else.
Senator Vance was asked whether he, a man who seeks to become one of the most powerful people in this country, believes in that principle, and whether he will uphold it. No answer other than the affirmative (which would correspond to a response of “No” to the original question from the moderators) should be acceptable for someone seeking political office.
What was Vance’s response?
“I think that we’re focused on the future.”
And then he spoke for two minutes about how the Democrats are censoring people on social media, and how that’s the real threat. (The Biden administration worked with some social media companies to limit harmful and/or threatening disinformation. Republicans, including Vance in his response, have consistently mischaracterized and exaggerated what occurred, largely because they were some of the ones who were spouting misinformation and whose social media accounts were limited.)
Vance’s inability to put his country over his fealty to Donald Trump, and his refusal to commit to honoring the democratic process, is disqualifying.
Overlooked, however, by pundits, is that this segment was also concerning because of its placement. Many people only watch the first several minutes of debates, and few watch all the way to the end. Yet CBS News and the moderators chose to make this the last question of the debate.
It should have been the first.
This irresponsible placement points to a fundamental problem in American politics: the inability of the system (and the media) to confront anti-democratic forces and to encourage organized, fact-based debate.
We have now normalized Trump and his behavior to the point where January 6th, and his actions on that date, have been relegated to the final question in the debate. We have now grown so complacent in our fact-checking that when one of Vance’s statements on immigration got clarified by the moderators, he complained that the rules, which said the moderators would not be fact-checking the candidates, were not being followed. And when the two candidates got the closest to having a nationally televised debate on specific issues, the moderators stopped their discussion and moved on to the next topic.
This debate showed that Vance is unfit for office, despite post-debate flash polls proclaiming the debate either a tie or a moderate Vance victory. This debate illustrated the inability of our system to ensure that the truth is paramount. Finally, this debate showed the inability of our political system to have a substantive debate on the issues that truly matter, even when the chaos agent that is Donald Trump is not on the debate stage.
