It’s astonishing how good the pundit class has become at ignoring substance in favor of style. They are almost universally hailing the Vance/Walz debate as a return to civility, and are largely awarding the night to Vance. They ignore that his entire performance was based on lies and misrepresentations, and fly in the face of all of the awful things he has said and done.
More sanewashing.
Undecided voters appear to have thought that–by a fairly slim margin–Walz came out on top. Did he flub some answers? Yes. Did he try to avoid directly answering a question about being in Tiananmen Square during the protests? Yes. Did he give solid, substantive answers about the tax, economic, gun, and abortion policies a Vance/Walz ticket would persue? Yes. Meanwhile Vance claimed that abortion rights should be left to the states, that Trump “saved” the ACA, and he refused to say whether Trump lost the 2020 election. But sure, Politico et al, Vance won. If you say so.