Over at CNN and MSNBC, the two liberal cable news networks, the mood was not jovial when the debate was over.
"I think there was a clear lack of preparation and execution here," CNN anchor Abby Phillip, seated with a panel of fellow Democrats, said of Walz.
“I think [Walz] had too much preparation,” Dana Bash shared. “He had so many lines that he was clearly trying to say.”
A CNN survey of debate watchers, oversampled by Democrats at 5%, concluded with 51% saying Vance won and 49% saying Walz won.
Over on MSNBC, anchor Nicole Wallace struggled to get out her words in a post-debate analysis. What she appeared to be stating was the CBS moderators didn’t stop the “audacity” that Vance represented on the debate stage.
“I mean, I, they should've just, uh, we…this is a debate,” an exasperated Wallace stammered. “This may be the only chance people have to see the difference."
The faceoff Tuesday night was, in fact, a one-and-done debate for the V.P. nominees before Election Day.
Among the more bizarre defenses of Walz, a Politico story about body language defended the Governor’s bug-eyed expressions on stage. “Eye-popping can sometimes be a sign of surprise,” the article stated, “but for Walz, it simply revealed his emotional intensity – like this moment during an exchange about abortion.”
Vance felt bad for Walz's 'tough job'
Over at the liberal New York Times, a post-debate poll of its own columnists concluded with a majority reluctantly agreeing Vance had won. Some of the left-wing opinion writers insisted Vance did so only because show better prepared than Walz to tell “lies” about the 2020 election, abortion, and immigration.
Ross Douthat, a conservative writer at the Times, wrote in an X post he had just watched “the most successful Republican debate performance of this century, eclipsing Romney in the first debate with Obama in 2012.”
Conservative activist Gary Bauer reached a similar conclusion after the debated ended. "I thought the debate was an hour-and-a-half lesson on how to win a debate conducted by Senator Vance," he tells AFN.
Vance remained calm throughout the debate while Walz was nervous and even "befuddled," Bauer says.
Among the best zingers of the debate, Vance summarized Donald Trump’s one term in office compared to the Biden-Harris term.
“You've got a tough job here,” Vance told his opponent. “You've got to pretend that Donald Trump didn't deliver rising take home pay, which of course he did. You've got to pretend that Donald Trump didn't deliver lower inflation, which of course he did. And then you've got to defend Kamala Harris's atrocious economic record, which has made gas, groceries, and housing unaffordable for American citizens."
Civility didn't go unnoticed
In a post-debate analysis on American Family Radio, show host Jenna Ellis also said Vance “clearly” won the debate against a nervous-sounding Walz.
Beyond the who-won argument, Ellis told her audience she was pleased to see the two V.P. candidates acting civil and – at least at times – debating substantive issues.
“They were actually interacting on a couple of policy issues, not with a fighting way, or some of these ridiculous, nonsensical kind of potshots,” she observed. “They were actually debating back and forth.”
Tony Perkins, who leads the Family Research Council, made a similar comment in an X post.
“Tuesday night’s debate between Walz and Vance displayed more than policy differences; it displayed a refreshing demonstration of civility,” he wrote.
