Vance dispelled the caricature of him, drummed up by Walz on the campaign trail, as the ‘weird’ guy who hates women.
Senator J. D. Vance has been redeemed from his “childless cat lady” PR storm. Since this has devolved into a competition of which vice-presidential contender is better fit to be America’s Dad, Vance on Tuesday night came off as a reasonable and reassuring protector and provider. Minnesota governor Tim Walz came off as a nervous wreck.
Speaking diplomatically with conviction yet civility and composure, Vance dispelled the caricature of him, drummed up by Walz on the campaign trail, as the “weird” guy who hates women. As I watched Vance adeptly explain and carefully thread the needle on family issues such as child care and abortion that had been a major source of criticism of him months ago, I sensed that he was coaxing independent suburban women.
Judging from X discourse and personal friendships, I believe he left a good number of undecided female voters pleasantly surprised. Perhaps for women who were seeking permission to back Trump-Vance, last night’s performance was it.
First, presentation and wardrobe matter. The pink tie, which some had speculated on social media was for breast cancer awareness month, seemed like a strategic fashion choice. And I must admit, Vance’s intense blue eyes captured attention. Maybe his on-stage physiognomy only confirmed the priors of women who already supported him, but his genteel demeanor and approachable, conversational tone were also inviting to women. Even his glances at the camera to break the fourth wall became a trending meme that compared him to Jim Halpert, a beloved funny yet humble character in the Office who gave a similar look whenever Dwight Shrute said something absurd.
On the other hand, Walz’s silliness on serious matters and panicked expressions were just unappealing. While both were well-mannered, Kamala Harris’s running mate, when the moderators asked about his China visits, admitted that he loves to exaggerate his adventures. Asked why he falsely claimed that one of his many China visits coincided with the Tiananmen Square massacre, Walz unraveled.
He made an irrelevant detour about how he rode bikes with his buddies as a child “until the street lights come on” then talked about the student trips he organized to China as a high school teacher. Walz neglected to mention that the trips were partially sponsored by the Chinese Communist Party. As for the fib that he repeated to the media that he was in Hong Kong during the Tiananmen protest, Walz said: “I’m a knucklehead at times . . .” This is not the first tall tale Walz has peddled to make himself seem cooler than he is.
I believe Vance’s comprehensive answer on child care also resonated with women. He acknowledged the modern dilemma between career and family that young women face. While conservatives should pause at the idea of the federal government intruding further into American family affairs, Vance connected with working women and addressed their insecurities on balancing child-rearing in a way that Walz missed.
“The cultural pressure on young families and especially young women, I think, makes it really hard to choose the family model,” Vance said at the debate as Walz nodded along. “A lot of young women would like to go back to work immediately, some would like to spend a little bit of time home with the kids, some would like to spend longer at home with the kids. We should have a family-care model that makes choice possible.”
Vance’s message of “options” to mothers reclaimed the “freedom” line that the Walz and Harris campaign had hijacked.