VP Debate or Balancing Act?
How the VPs’ ideals were lost in the effort to offset their running mates’ shortcomings
By Priya Sarma
The Progressive Teen Analysis Editor
CIVILITY, POISE AND EFFECTIVE DISCUSSION have been lacking this political season. Luckily, these significant qualities were reintroduced into the arena during the vice-presidential debate. Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia and Governor Mike Pence of Indiana faced off at Longwood University on Tuesday night and engaged in a robust debate filled with content, enthusiasm and yes, civility.
Donald Trump has altered the course of politics in the last few months. He prides himself in being the truth-teller; the one who doesn’t mince his words, the one who doesn’t give a damn about what people think. He has been living in his own reality and has relegated politics to a different level of mundanity and profanity. He had revealed it all in his first debate against Hillary Clinton.
The Republican Party desperately needed to balance out this disaster. Mike Pence stepped up to that responsibility on Monday. He seemed to have semi-successfully appealed to the sensitive side of the undecided voters. He was quiet and reserved and his delivery was not as rambunctious as that of the main face of the ticket. I would go to the extent that Mike Pence humanized Trump’s agenda, and his delivery and demeanor conveyed sincerity. Mike Pence was able to emotionally connect with potential voters. He presented Trump’s ideas in a less preposterous manner. To a great extent, he was able to neutralize the effects of Donald Trump’s personality. But when it came to policy issues, he did reflect the conservatism of Republican Party. He meandered through the allegations of Trump’s racism and bigotry and misogyny like an eel, often making one wonder whether he was carefully using the platform to lay the seeds for his own bid in 2020 as a Republican candidate. The attempt at distancing himself from Trump was too painfully clear at times.
Tim Kaine had some witty lines in the debate. By far, his best line was when he mentioned: “Donald Trump has a personal Mount Rushmore of dictators.” In a succinct yet humorous manner, Kaine was able to deliver the message that Trump idolizes dictators and that he would be detrimental to America’s democracy and the liberty of the people. He skillfully drew the distinction between leadership and dictatorship.
“While playing the role of the ‘attack dogs’ for their running mates, they also skillfully defused their weaknesses. Kaine did so by refusing to wait his turn and speaking over the other and Pence did so by exhibiting calmness, civility and policy gravitas.”
Both these gentlemen had specific purposes for this debate. They had to balance out the weaknesses of the top names in their tickets. While playing the role of the “attack dogs” for their running mates, they also skillfully defused their weaknesses. Kaine did so by refusing to wait his turn and speaking over the other and Pence did so by exhibiting calmness, civility and policy gravitas.
Both Kaine and Pence have distinguished political careers. They are policy hawks and well-regarded by the political community for their own merit. The vice-presidential debate allowed them an opportunity to showcase their positions while defending their presidential candidate. This debate had a narrow winner in Pence, but I sincerely doubt he managed to move the undecided needle much to the right. His albatross is Donald Trump and he is not in an enviable position. Tim Kaine, through his overexuberant demeanor, successfully defended Hillary Clinton and showed his unerring agreement with her on policy issues and her overall candidacy. His was an easier job.
