To the Journal editor:

My sense is that JD Vance improved his image during the VP debate. He was articulate and appeared more likable than many people expected. That said, on technical debating points Vance made so many inaccurate and misleading statements that it is hard to declare him the winner.

Tim Walz also had good moments, but he muffed some easy questions, obfuscated on others, and failed to respond to many of Vance’s misleading statements. Walz’s responses became more focused and effective as the debate progressed, especially when Vance dodged the question about who won the 2020 election.

Finally, I was struck by the extent to which the affable and reasonable image that Vance was attempting to project stood in stark contrast with Trump’s usual nastiness and irrationality. Was this a conscious “good cop, bad cop routine”, or will Trump be angry because Vance made him look like a cranky old man?

Robert Kulisheck

Marquette