VP debate reader verdict: ‘Walz melted like a stick of butter next to Vance’

As the US vice-presidential candidates go head-to-head, Telegraph subscribers decide who came out on top

Many Telegraph readers agreed that JD Vance dominated the US vice-presidential debate in comparison to Tim Walz.
A poll conducted by The Telegraph showed that 72 per cent of those who voted thought the Republican vice-presidential candidate came out on top.
Reader David Pritchard said: “Vance was far and away the winner. He took on the moderators and Walz without losing his patience. He’s very articulate and well-reasoned.”
Foo M. emphasised: “A gormless Walz melted like a stick of butter next to Vance. Did we just witness the first VP debate to end a presidential campaign?”
Meanwhile, Jeremiah JP was pleased that Mr Vance gave “nobody a reason to dislike him by acting erratic or getting angry” during the debate.
And Michael Currie summarised: “Vance was very restrained, political and confident. Walz? He looked and sounded like Biden. A clear Vance win.”
Readers were keen to measure the Democrat vice-presidential candidate’s debating skills after claims that he and Kamala Harris, the vice president, had been avoiding interviews on the campaign trail.
Michael Poland, another reader, said: “Tim Walz is not fit for purpose. He demonstrated that tonight.”
On the issue of abortion rights, reader Edward Lord suggested: “Walz was lost from start to finish. Not knowing that you’ve signed into law a right to abortion from conception to birth showed Walz had no grasp of the laws he actually signed.”
He added: “Walz’s self-description as a ‘knucklehead’ was a sad attempt at being thought of as an average Joe – it simply made him look foolish.”
On the other hand, Alistair Sullivan argued: “Walz’s demeanour is genuine and honest. In contrast, Vance is slick but not to be trusted.”
Similarly to our experts’ verdict of the debate, reader Claire Bagley felt that “Walz’s answer to the Tiananmen Square question was entirely unresponsive” after the Minnesota governor said he “misspoke” over his repeated claims that he was in Hong Kong during the Tiananmen Square protests.
Recommended
Readers were surprised by the cordial interaction between the two candidates. Some suggested that they would “make a good pair” as president and vice president.
Jonathan Lloyd said: “At least it was a substantive and cordial debate… They impressed more than their potential bosses.”
Similarly, Claire Bagley thought Mr Walz and Mr Vance were “much more credible than their respective running mates” as both performed well and came across as “essentially reasonable people”.
David Pritchard was struck by the idea that “if the two were running for the presidency and vice presidency of the United States, they would make a pretty good pair”.
However, some readers were sceptical about Mr Vance’s integrity. David Harper suggested: “Vance is a good speaker but changing your tune just to get elected shows he has zero ethics. Vance will say whatever advances himself. A perfect match for Donald Trump.”
Sharing a similar sentiment, Alistair Sullivan said: “Vance has no moral compass, he changes his views for political expediency.”