CNN Panel Reaction To Vance-Walz Debate Is Not What You’d Expect

In a debate filled with sharp exchanges, J.D. Vance delivered an assertive and commanding performance, earning praise from political commentators for his ability to dominate the discussion.

Abby Phillip, a CNN political analyst, succinctly captured the general mood, saying, “J.D. Vance came to this debate to land a bunch of punches, and he did. He landed a lot of punches in between all the niceties and all of that.”

Vance, a seasoned public speaker and political candidate, appeared well-prepared, while his opponent, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, struggled to match his energy and precision.

Walz’s performance raised eyebrows among political pundits, as his nervousness and missteps became apparent. Phillip speculated that Walz’s discomfort might stem from facing a “lawyer type” like Vance, someone used to handling high-pressure exchanges and navigating public debates with ease.

According to previous CNN reports, Walz was indeed apprehensive about the debate, with sources close to his campaign revealing that the governor feared disappointing Vice President Kamala Harris.

Senior campaign aides and associates hinted that Walz’s nervousness leading up to the debate may have contributed to his underwhelming showing.

“There was a clear lack of preparation and execution on Walz’s part,” Phillip continued. She emphasized the missed opportunity for Walz to effectively counter Vance’s arguments, particularly when the debate focused on critical issues that could have been used to strengthen his own platform.

However, not all commentators agreed on the cause of Walz’s missteps. Dana Bash, another CNN contributor, presented an alternate theory.

Rather than being underprepared, Bash argued that Walz may have been too prepared. “I think actually it’s the opposite,” she said. “I think he had too much preparation. He had so many lines that he was clearly trying to say, that he didn’t listen.”

Bash highlighted moments in the debate when Vance launched several pointed criticisms at Vice President Kamala Harris. Walz, instead of seizing the opportunity to counter effectively, seemed more concerned with sticking to pre-rehearsed talking points.

This approach left him struggling to engage meaningfully with Vance’s attacks and contributed to the impression that he was out of touch with the conversation unfolding around him.

One of the more noticeable gaps in Walz’s performance was his lack of responsiveness to the media. According to Bash, the governor’s limited media appearances during the campaign may have played a role in his unsteady debate performance.

“I think the lack of interviews that he has done with national media, with local media, it showed. He needed more reps,” Bash remarked.

Walz’s campaign has been marked by relatively few interviews and public appearances, including only one with Bash herself.

The lack of consistent media engagement might have deprived the governor of crucial practice in answering tough questions, something Vance has had plenty of experience with in his political career.

Jake Tapper, another influential CNN host, also weighed in on the debate. He pointed out that Vance’s experience in public speaking gave him a natural advantage.

“J.D. Vance is much more experienced at this—at public speaking, at defending himself, at pivoting,” Tapper observed.

Vance’s ability to control the narrative and deflect criticism with ease made him appear more competent and confident compared to Walz, whose discomfort was evident throughout the event.

But the praise for Vance’s performance wasn’t limited to the CNN panel. Chris Cuomo, a former CNN contributor and now a host on News Nation, also commended Vance for his adept handling of difficult questions. Specifically, Cuomo lauded how Vance dealt with what he described as biased fact-checking from the debate moderators, Margaret Brennan and Norah O’Donnell.

Cuomo cited a moment when Vance attempted to correct misinformation regarding Haitian migrants’ entry into the United States. However, Vance’s clarification was interrupted by the moderators, which Cuomo found notable.

“Vance wanted to correct something about how Haitians got into this country, and he was right,” Cuomo explained. “And the moderators wouldn’t let him correct it, very interesting.”

This incident underscored Vance’s ability to remain composed under pressure, even when faced with interruptions and seemingly unfair questions.

The general consensus among political observers was that Vance performed strongly, while Walz struggled to keep up. The governor’s inability to respond effectively to Vance’s attacks or shift the conversation in his favor has raised concerns about his campaign’s strategy moving forward.

With the debate now behind them, both candidates will likely reflect on their performances as they continue their respective campaigns.

As the election season intensifies, the question remains whether Walz can recover from this perceived stumble or if Vance’s momentum will propel him further toward electoral success.

Only time will tell how the dynamics of this debate will impact the broader political landscape.