I believe the debate was the best major political debate I’ve seen. It was substantive and both candidates argued policy and, for the most part, avoided making personal attacks. It was refreshing to finally see candidates exercise some civility on the debate stage.

Vance and Walz sparred on a variety of topics that are important to voters including foreign policy, the environment, the economy, abortion and gun control. Both candidates provided actual policy proposals which, disappointingly, we aren’t used to in this country. Amazingly, both candidates showed up with more than “concepts of a plan.” This debate was a look into what political discourse in the United States should look like, and for that, I applaud both men. 

While both candidates performed well in this debate, Vance won decisively. Vance’s performance on Tuesday was the best debate performance I have seen. He seemed to have an answer for any question thrown at him.

He began the debate with a monologue about himself, telling voters he was raised in a middle-class family and was raised by a mother who struggled with addiction. His introduction made him much more relatable and helped him to resonate with viewers. Vance is often criticized as coming off as over-rehearsed or robotic, but throughout the debate, he seemed human in a way voters hadn’t yet seen. 

Before this debate, Vance was viewed favorably by only about a third of Americans. However, I believe his performance will largely change his public perception. 

One of Vance’s best moments came when he was fact-checked by one of the moderators. When challenged, he was assertive, rebutted the point and seemed in control of the room. A point I imagined would be difficult for him to overcome was his previous criticisms of President Trump. However, when questioned about it, Vance brushed off the statements by merely saying he was wrong about Trump. While this seems like an obvious response, admitting previous errors seemed to give him an extra sense of honesty and credibility.

Before the debate, I wasn’t sure Trump had made the right pick for his running mate, and I definitely wasn’t sure about JD Vance as the future of the Republican Party. However, my concerns have been put to rest. On Tuesday, Vance proved he deserves to be at the top of the GOP’s depth chart now and for elections to come.

I now feel that  I will see a Vance Presidency during my lifetime. I’m not the only person who recognizes Vance’s success in the debate. In a poll conducted by USA Today, a majority of voters said Vance won the debate. Interestingly, they also found that over a third of voter’s opinions of the candidates were swayed by the debate.

While I believe this debate was a huge success for Vance, I want to reiterate both candidates performed well. The nation would be much better if every debate looked something like this. While Walz’s performance should be applauded, Vance proved he is the young, rising star the Republican party believed him to be.

If you are a Kentucky resident, you can register to vote here until October 7.

Commentary writer Caleb Neitzel can be reached at caleb.neitzel426@topper.wku.edu. Follow him on X at @caleb_neitzel.

If you would like to submit a reaction to a piece, Letter to the Editor or other submission, please send it to Editor-in-Chief Price Wilborn at herald.opinion@wku.edu or edwin.wilborn835@topper.wku.edu.

The debate was held in the National Constitution Center in downtown Philadelphia. Because the campaigns had agreed that the debate would have no live audience, no one was allowed in the Constitution Center except campaign officials and ABC News staff members.

A few blocks away from the Constitution Center is the Pennsylvania Convention Center, which is where all media were stationed. At 5 a.m., the morning of the debate, media was allowed inside the building. To enter the convention center, reporters were required to pass through a Secret Service security checkpoint. Here, Secret Service agents looked through everyone’s bags, and reporters had to walk through a medical detector and past bomb sniffing dogs. 

Once inside the building, media members had access to two rooms: the media filing center, and the spin room. The media filing center contained hundreds of desks, one for each approved member of the media, where reporters could sit and work on their coverage of the event. Inside the filing center were large projector screens, where journalists watched the debate.

In the room directly adjacent to the filing center was the spin room. The spin room is where each campaign sends representatives, called surrogates, to “spin” (hence the name) the media coverage in favor of their side. While it does occasionally happen, candidates typically do not come into the spin room, instead relying entirely on their surrogates to create a narrative. 

At about 3 p.m., six hours before the debate began, I got a text from a reporter with sources close to the Harris campaign saying that the campaign would be bringing in Anthony Scaramucci as their first surrogate shortly. Scaramucci was, for a short time, the director of communications for the Trump White House. However, he has in recent years advocated against Trump. Upon reading the text, I rushed to the spin room, finding a small crowd of reporters waiting for his arrival. Fifteen minutes later, Scaramucci arrived. He was immediately swarmed by reporters and gave his testimony of why he believed that Trump shouldn’t be president.

Shortly after Scaramucci’s appearance, the Trump campaign released the first few of its surrogates to the spin room. First was Congressman Byron Donalds of Florida who sat down for an interview with ABC before stepping onto the spin room floor to answer questions.

Entering the room soon after Donalds was a relatively new Trump ally, former presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who did multiple interviews with news stations and spent a significant portion of the night campaigning on behalf of Trump. Kennedy ran for president during this election cycle as an Independent, campaigning largely on the popularity of his uncle, President John F. Kennedy. Last month, amid declining support, Kennedy suspended his campaign for president and endorsed former President Trump. He has since been named to Trump’s presidential transition team.

After these appearances, it was almost time for the debate. Media members packed into the filing center to watch and campaign surrogates exited the room to attend their respective campaigns’ watch parties. When Trump and Harris took the stage, the crowd of reporters went silent. For the next 90 minutes, the candidates debated policy and took personal jabs at each other. Some moments brought laughter throughout the room while others brought gasps. When the debate was over, the general consensus among the media was that Harris had won the debate. I was told, this would mean her campaigns surrogates would not stick around as long in the spin room. With the debate now over, it was time for the action. 

Shortly after the debate, security set up a taped off perimeter. We were told that Senator JD Vance, Trump’s running mate, would be addressing the media after the debate, so we all assumed this perimeter was for him. About 15 minutes later, Vance and his Secret Service detail entered the room. He then gave his brief remarks before answering questions from the media.

As Vance was speaking, surrogates from both campaigns entered the room. One of the first to enter was Vivek Ramaswamy, a former Republican candidate for President, who many see as a rising star in the republican party. It seemed that Ramaswamy largely hit Trump campaign talking points in an effort to spin the media’s perception of the debate.

Additionally, both campaigns sent prominent governors to speak on their behalf. For the Republicans, this meant Kristi Noem, Gov. R-SD, and Doug Burgum, Gov. R-ND. For Democrats, this meant Gavin Newsom, Gov. D-CA.

Noem is the young governor from South Dakota. She was reportedly one of the candidates on Trump’s shortlist for Vice President before he ultimately selected Vance.

Doug Burgum is the Governor of North Dakota and a former Republican candidate for President. He recently opposed Trump in the Republican primary election, but has endorsed him in the general election. It is worth noting that when I had a chance to speak to Burgum, his last words in our conversation were “Go Tops.” 

Before the debate, I had heard rumors that President Trump would make an appearance in the spin room later into the night. However, I wasn’t sure of the validity of these rumors. At about 11:15 p.m., I noticed that another speaking area had been taped off but we were not informed who it was for. Shortly after I received a text saying Trump was en route to the spin room. As the news spread through the room that the former President would be addressing the media, a crowd began to form around the taped off area. At 11:30, about an hour after the end of the debate, Trump entered the room. He spoke to the media saying that he believed it was his best debate performance yet and claimed victory. He then took a few questions from reporters before sitting down for a TV interview and leaving the room. There was a surge of energy when Trump entered the room as everyone rushed to take pictures and ask questions of him.

Trump spoke to the media for about seven minutes before leaving for his interview. By the time he had left, so too had most of the Democratic surrogates. As previously mentioned, I was told that the Democratic surrogates would leave earlier because of Harris’s strong performance in the debate. Many Republican surrogates stayed until the room closed at 1:00 a.m. This, along with President Trump’s appearance, indicates that they likely believe their candidate lost the debate, or at least that it was close. 

As the night began to come to a close, it was interesting to see the cross-partisan interactions increase. Many mainstream Republicans and Democrats began to speak and seemed to have a friendly relationship with each other. It’s an excellent reminder that public figures who appear to be enemies may be good friends in private. 

This can serve as a reminder for the need to reach across the aisle. It seems as though oftentimes, voters are left hating each other, even when the figureheads they support don’t. 

This historic night will certainly have a huge impact on the future of the country. Discourse such as in what occurred in the debate is what makes our democracy unique and strong.

Commentary Writer Caleb Neitzel can be reached at caleb.netizel426@topper.wku.edu.

One issue that is always a major factor in election cycles, but has reached a new level of significance this year, is abortion. Two years ago, the United States Supreme Court voted to overturn Roe v. Wade, returning the decision to each state. Three of the six total votes to overturn were from Trump-appointed justices. Early in the debate, Trump boasted he helped to end Roe v. Wade. He said he believed the issue should be left up to states to decide for themselves. Trump later attacked Harris and the Democratic party and said its policy on abortion is radical, and even went so far as to say that Democrats support “abortion” after birth. However, the former President did say that if given the option, he would not support a total abortion ban. Recently, Trump told the media he believed the proposed ban after six weeks is not enough time.

In the spin room, Republican Governor Kristi Noem told the Herald that Trump’s position has not changed and that he has always viewed abortion as a state rights issue.

“President Trump was clear the whole time when Roe v. Wade was overturned, that he wanted the people to decide,” Noem said.

In her response during the debate, Harris claimed that Trump had flip-flopped on abortion, and urged women that Trump cannot be trusted to preserve reproductive rights for women. Harris also said that as President, if a bill codifying Roe v. Wade made it to her desk, she would sign it. Such a bill would restore the nationwide abortion access once provided. 

Another topic young people find important is the regulation of firearms. Unfortunately, mass shootings have become a seemingly inescapable part of life in the United States. Our generation has seen gun violence on display throughout our lives. For this reason, many young voters have decided they will support laws regulating firearms.

During the debate, Trump said that if Harris was elected, she would take Americans’ guns away. However, Harris pushed back on this claim by saying that she is a gun owner herself, and that such an action would not take place. During her 2020 Presidential campaign, Harris said that she supported the implementation of a mandatory buyback program for “assault weapons.” It is unclear whether her policies have shifted on the issue.

Lastly, the issue that is possibly the most important to young voters is the economy. For Americans who are not yet fiscally established, a strong economy could make life much easier. Trump said that, if elected, he would implement tariffs on countries such as China and Russia in an attempt to increase domestic production. Harris rebutted and said that such tariffs would only make products more expensive for Americans. She later said that having Trump in office would impart a “sales tax” on Americans, making their goods more expensive. Trump then criticized the Biden-Harris administration for the high rates of inflation lately present in the economy.

Overall, there is a lot for young voters to take from this debate. This election will be one of the most consequential in history and there’s a lot at stake for all voters, but especially young Americans. 

If you are a Kentucky resident, you can register to vote here.

Commentary writer Caleb Neitzel can be reached at caleb.neitzel426@topper.wku.edu. Follow him on X at @caleb_neitzel.

After Biden’s withdrawal, the Democratic Party was quick to rally behind Harris and she has begun to outpoll her opponent, former President Donald Trump. It appears in an attempt to hold on to this sugar high, the Harris campaign has avoided intense questioning at all costs. Democrats likely fear that Harris’s early success has been somewhat of a honeymoon phase which will fade with time; after all, she had the lowest approval rating of any modern vice president.

Facing pressure, Harris agreed to an interview on CNN with Dana Bash. It appears this may have been a mistake. The interview was set up to be as advantageous for Harris as possible. It was on a friendly network, was pre-recorded, and Harris was flanked by her running mate, Tim Walz. On paper, this interview should have been easy. 

Early in the interview, Harris was asked if she supported a ban on fracking. She responded by saying that in her 2020 presidential campaign, she opposed a fracking ban. When Bash then recalled Harris’ promise to ban fracking during her 2020 campaign, Harris doubled down on her mistruth, claiming that she did not support such a ban in 2020. This is another effort by Harris to distance herself from the far-left policies she supported in the past in an attempt to gain the votes of moderates.

Later in the interview, Walz, who is the current Governor of Minnesota, was questioned about his claims that he had carried weapons in a war zone. When confronted with the information that he had never been deployed during his time in the military, Walz first avoided the question, saying he was proud of his time in the military. When Bash asked the question again, Walz blamed the claim on his grammar not being correct. Maybe Walz just misspoke when making this claim, but it certainly is not a good look.

When she was asked her thoughts on President Trump’s claims about her racial identity, Harris seemed rattled. After dismissing the question, Harris began to laugh awkwardly. If she can’t handle these jabs from Trump any better, she will struggle on the campaign trail.

Eventually, Harris was asked about the elephant in the room. She and many others had spent months telling the American people that Joe Biden was healthy and fit to run the country. After his debate with Trump showed that this was clearly not true, Biden was replaced. When asked if she regretted telling Americans this falsehood, Harris said she was not. This will likely become a larger talking point as the election goes on as many Americans feel that they were lied to by Harris and the rest of the Biden campaign.

Overall, republicans must feel good about what happened Thursday night. Harris, who had been the mysterious, new candidate was finally thrust into the spotlight. Throughout the interview, Harris struggled to answer difficult questions. She and her running mate’s seemingly likable characters were called into question when confronted about various mistruths. Harris had the lowest approval rating of any vice president in modern history for a reason: when she speaks, Americans don’t like what they hear. The goal of Republicans for the short time left in this presidential election cycle should be to force Harris into the spotlight while keeping Trump out of it. In other words, make the election a referendum on Harris, not Trump, because quite frankly, their approval ratings show that Americans don’t like either of them.

While I don’t think this interview will have a huge effect on the polls, it does give a glimpse of what the presidential debate may look like. On Sept. 10, Harris and Trump will face off in their first presidential debate. This is Trump’s chance to turn the tide of the election, and if Harris can fend off his attacks, she will probably win. 

Commentary Writer Caleb Neitzel can be reached at caleb.neitzel426@topper.wku.edu. Follow him on X @caleb_neitzel