The debate between the two lieutenants.

Focus on Israel, avoid talking about Ukraine.

Conflicts in the Middle East significantly altered the debate's agenda. Shortly before the debate began, Iran launched a missile attack on Israel, so the first question raised was the candidates' stance on what the U.S. should do on this issue.

For a Republican, this beginning is a gift. It's an opportunity for JD Vance to accuse the Biden administration and the Democrats of limitations in U.S. Middle East policy, which Republicans consider "too soft on Iran."

Republican vice presidential candidate, Senator JD Vance (left), and Democratic vice presidential candidate, Governor Tim Walz (right), participate in a debate at the CBS Broadcast Center on Tuesday in New York City, USA. Photo: Getty

The Democratic Party is trying to balance its tradition of supporting Israel with the interests of the left wing that supports Palestine and those sympathetic to it. Democrats are particularly concerned about the presence of Green Party candidate Jill Stein, who supports the boycott and sanctions movement against Israel. In battleground states like Wisconsin and Michigan, Green Party candidate Jill Stein often leads among Muslim voters, ahead of both Kamala Harris and Donald Trump.

The debate between the two vice presidential candidates once again demonstrated a tendency for both sides to push the topic of the Ukraine crisis out of the pre-election context. Throughout the hour-and-a-half-debate, not a word was spoken about Ukraine, even though a week earlier President Vladimir Zelenskyy had met with Donald Trump and Joe Biden to deepen relations between the two countries and discuss the current situation on the battlefield in Ukraine.

But while for the Republican Party, omitting the Ukraine issue might be seen as a political move, for the Democratic Party, removing Kyiv from the agenda is an attempt to divert public attention from an issue on which the Democratic Party itself is struggling.

Tim Waltz lost himself.

During the debate, Democratic vice presidential candidate Tim Waltz appeared unconvincing, seemingly unprepared for the pressure. Waltz attempted to maintain the image of a businessman from Minnesota, constantly appealing to voters with his experience as governor. However, in American tradition, this approach was not very helpful and even detrimental to presidential candidate Kamala Harris.

According to Reuters, Tim Waltz's "simplicity" stems from Harris's reluctance to create a running mate of equal power, rather than the prominent Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro, who had previously been mentioned in American tradition as a potential vice presidential candidate should Harris win.

During the debate, Tim Waltz displayed anxiety and a lack of composure, leading to several "mistakes," such as talking about "befriending school shooters" (according to Reuters) and making "mistakes" about his past. He claimed to have been in Hong Kong during the Tiananmen Square events of 1989. The media quickly discovered that this was untrue, as was his statement about his time in the military.

JD Vance is not Mike Pence.

In contrast to Tim Waltz, JD Vance clearly learned from the failures of his running mate Donald Trump and quickly shifted the conversation to the past four years and other limitations and difficulties of the Democratic administration. At the same time, Vance completely shed the unconvincing image that Donald Trump had portrayed.

Political analysts suggest that the Ohio senator indirectly confirmed that he could not only be the second most powerful person in the US if Donald Trump wins the election, but also his successor. When conservative media mentioned this, Vance demonstrated his prowess in the debate, outperforming not only his direct opponent, but also Donald Trump and Kamala Harris.

Vice presidential candidates JD Vance and Tim Waltz shake hands during the debate. Photo: Reuters

According to Sergei Mikhailov, a leading expert at the Russian Institute for Strategic Studies, JD Vance stood out among the four politicians participating in the debate. “The debate between the two vice presidential candidates was clearly of much higher quality than the debate between Trump and Harris. Everything was constructive and positive, clarifying key issues facing the United States. JD Vance, among the four, seemed to be the most intelligent, thoughtfully addressing truly pressing issues in American politics. However, until recently, JD Vance received relatively low ratings among the debaters. In this regard, fluctuating ratings will play a decisive role,” Mikhailov stated in the Izvestia newspaper.

Meanwhile, Vladimir Vasiliev, head of research at the American and Canadian Institute, emphasized that Donald Trump had drawn conclusions from his first term, and his reliance on JD Vance as his running mate was not only due to Vance's dedication, but also to create an official backup plan for himself.

“Trump was burned during his first presidency when his chosen Mike Pence later denounced him in connection with the events of January 6, 2021. Now, Trump has chosen someone very similar to himself. Initially, the media and political analysts judged this decision a mistake, but now we can say that JD Vance has proven himself to be a distinct political figure.”

"In some ways, he's presenting himself as the 'Trump of the future,' but he could create his own variations of 'Trumpism' in the future. Furthermore, the pre-election context could allow for various other taboo tactics. Trump has been shot twice. Now he has a formidable number two figure. Meanwhile, the Democrats don't have such options," the expert concluded.

Clearly, it is difficult to accurately assess the impact of JD Vance's compelling performance in the debate on the overall landscape of the US presidential election. However, the debate further highlighted the deepening polarization in American political and social life.

Ha Anh

Source: https://www.congluan.vn/bau-cu-my-2024-chi-tiet-man-tranh-luan-giua-hai-pho-tuong-post315205.html