If American politics were what was seen last night in the first and only debate between vice presidents that will be held in this campaign, the extremism and polarization that exists in the times of Donald Trump would not exist. His second, Ohio Senator JD Vance, 40, put aside the hoaxes about dogs and cats to offer a sensible and moderate image that appeals to undecided people looking for change. The same change that his rival, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, 60, promised in the person of Vice President Kamala Harris, despite having been in government for three years.
It was a refreshing parenthesis of civility in a radicalized electoral campaign that has been punctuated by two assassination attempts. According to debate rules, the microphones were open, but the candidates rarely interrupted each other and the moderators only had to close them once. Both said they enjoyed a dialogue of ideas and contrast of policies, in which they often agreed, even by omission. None of them wanted to commit to answering whether they would support or oppose a preemptive attack by Israel on Iran, if they were in the ‘Situation Room’, where Joe Biden and Kamala Harris were yesterday coordinating the defense of Israel.
The two men who accompany them as vice presidents on the November 5 ballots had the mission of presenting and defending their policies and dismantling the inconsistencies of the opponent. Vance sought to connect all of the country’s big problems to illegal immigrants, whom Trump has promised to deport “massively.” Yesterday he estimated this population at “20 or 25 million,” and proposed starting with the estimated million who have committed some type of crime, in addition to illegally crossing the border. “I think if you start deporting these guys, it will be more difficult for illegal immigrants to undermine the wages of American workers,” he resolved.
His rival, nervous in the first half, where he frequently hesitated and mixed up his words, went so far as to confuse Israel with Iran and say that he had been “a friend of school gunmen.” But it grew as the debate progressed without personal attacks or trips, becoming an exposition of ideas more tailored to the old high school teacher, who seemed to find himself more comfortable in the sincerity of the ideas he displays. His most eloquent responses came on issues in which he believes, such as the right to abortion, health reform or respect for democratic norms.
“We are pro-women”
Walz did not let Vance get away with the fallacy that Trump had saved Obama’s healthcare reform from his own regulatory failures, nor did he let him pigeonhole him as pro-abortion. “We are pro-women, we trust them and we defend their freedom to make decisions,” he argued. That is the winning card of the Democratic Party candidacy, which will take advantage of the mobilization of women in the referendums on the right to abortion that some states will hold in parallel to the general elections. Trump’s Republican candidacy dances a delicate balance so as not to lose the women he claims to protect, nor the Christian right that trusts him to finish the dismantling of reproductive rights.
His insistence on linking all the country’s ills to illegal immigrants, scapegoats for the poor economic situation and even the housing shortage, reflects national concern about the porosity of the southern border. Yesterday, Trump’s partner was in favor of clean air, which he aims to improve by increasing domestic production of natural gas. Where he failed to compromise, knowing he was being watched by his boss, was in acknowledging that he had lost the previous elections, although he managed to avoid a direct response. However, he did accept something fundamental that distresses millions of Americans. “If what we mean is that we need to respect the results of the election, I agree,” the Ohio senator pledged.
His rival, as a former high school football coach in Minnesota, the rural Midwestern state he mentioned 31 times, urged him to shake hands when the Nov. 5 results come in and ‘work with the winner.’ With all the civic approaches they had, it is there, in the final climax of the debate, where Walz managed to draw the line that separates them. «Will you stand? “Will you keep your oath of office even if your president doesn’t?” he asked. “That is where the United States has a clear choice in these elections: Between who is going to honor democracy and who is going to honor Donald Trump,” he said.
#Moderation #common #sense #mark #debate #candidates #vice #presidency #Basque #Journal