Wall Street Journal: Vance makes better case for Trump than former president

The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board on Wednesday argued Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio) did a better job of making the case for former President Trump than Trump did himself in his own debate last month against Vice President Harris.

The wrote in an editorial that Vance had helped himself and his ticket in the close presidential race.

“The sarcastic candidate of ‘childless cat ladies’ fame was nowhere in sight. The Ohio Senator was respectful, well prepared, articulate, and relentless in reminding voters about the flaws of what he called ‘the Kamala Harris Administration,’” the editorial board wrote.

“This is a case Donald Trump was unable to make in his debate, or for that matter anywhere in the weeks since President Biden left the race,” they continued.

Tuesday’s vice presidential debate between Vance and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D) was one of the most civil national-level debates in recent history. There was no name-calling or personal attacks and the two candidates often agreed with one another and shared emotion about their children.

Vance, a Yale-trained lawyer, was viewed by many in a set of overnight polls to have won the debate, though Walz was closely behind. Some say they were surprised by Vance’s performance and rated his performance better than they would have expected. Still, Walz emerged with more favorable views among voters, a CNN poll found.

The Ohio senator sought to appeal to the political middle when it came to abortion and reproductive rights. He argued that the Republican Party needs to “do so much better of a job at earning the American people’s trust back.” The Journal’s editorial board said Vance was effective in “sanding down the sharper edges of GOP policies” that Democrats look to attack on.

“He addressed abortion policy be conceding that the voters of Ohio had chosen to pass a policy he opposed, but in a democracy that is what you have to accept,” they wrote. “He also conceded that Republicans had to do more to win back the trust of Americans on the issue.”

The board noted Vance’s refusal to admit that Trump lost the 2020 presidential election and said “we wish he had” admitted President Biden won.

The Journal criticized CBS, which hosted the debate, for only asking one question about foreign policy. The board argued that since both candidates could become Commander-in-Chief, they should have been asked questions about China, the Russia-Ukraine war and “the decline of America’s military deterrent.”

The candidates were asked if they would support a preemptive strike by Israel on Iran. Earlier Tuesday, Iran fired missiles at Israel after Israel killed the leader of the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah.

The outlet argued Vance defended Trump by saying “no matter his tweets and temperament,” Trump knows effective military deterrence. He said Israel will make its own choice how to respond to Iran but the U.S. should support its ally with whatever it chooses.

“Since we’re not hearing this from either of the presidential candidates, we’re glad Mr. Vance sent that message. Coping with word disorder may be the most importance challenge the next President faces,” the Journal concluded.