Do Vice Presidential Debates Really Matter?

Political experts offer their opinions on whether the debates affect election outcomes, and if so, how.

(Left) Republican vice presidential nominee Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio) speaks in Mesa, Ariz., on Sept. 4, 2024. (Right) Democratic vice presidential nominee and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz in Washington on Sept. 7, 2024. Rebecca Noble, Allison Bailey/AFP via Getty Images

Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio) and Democrat Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, the two vice presidential nominees, are set to debate on CBS News on Oct. 1.

With fewer than 40 days to go before Election Day, voters may wonder if vice presidential debates really matter in moving the needle when it comes to the election—and if so, how.

The debate will be the only showdown between the two candidates this year, as is typical for vice presidential nominees.

Each candidate presents a contrasting vision for the country—with Vance representing former President Donald Trump’s “America first” agenda and Walz touting the Biden–Harris administration’s record and his progressive policies as governor.

David Schultz, a political science professor from Hamline University in St. Paul, Minnesota—and a scholar of the vice presidency—said it seemed like both Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris were “playing base politics” by selecting Vance and Walz, respectively, as running mates.

Neither are from critical swing states, and each has a strong appeal to his party’s base. Vance has strong approval among Trump supporters, and Walz was championed by many progressive leaders in the Democratic Party ahead of his selection to join the ticket.

“At this point, neither of the campaigns are pitching for moderates,” he told The Epoch Times.

Even so, a matchup between the two candidates gives each a chance to make their strongest appeal to undecided voters in what has already been one of the most unique elections in modern history, particularly with the massive shakeup at the top of the Democratic Party’s ticket following President Joe Biden’s scrutinized June debate performance against Trump.

Dustin Carnahan, a communications professor at Michigan State University, wrote that research suggests presidential debates, in general, have had little impact on vote choice.

“Debate viewers tend to be among the most politically engaged and [are] thereby likely to have their minds made up well before the debate,” he said.

Aaron Dusso, a political science professor from Indiana University-Indianapolis, told The Epoch Times that vice presidential debates have had little impact on polling in the past, due to fewer voters watching those matchups than the presidential debates.

Pew Research Center released data in June that showed that while 84 million tuned in for the first debate between Trump and Hillary Clinton in 2016, only 37.2 million watched the matchup between their running mates, then-Indiana Gov. Mike Pence and Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.).

Four years later, 57.9 million tuned in to see Harris debate Pence, down from the 73.1 million who watched the first showdown that year between Biden and Trump.

With debates in general, Carnahan noted that other research, including a study on presidential primary debates, has shown that a candidate’s performance can affect how voters—especially those who remain undecided—perceive them.

This was particularly evident in June when Biden’s performance caused a tsunami of top Democrats to call for his exit from the race.

Carnahan said debates can also give a candidate opportunities to express ideas and policies and get them in front of audiences that may not know them well yet, which is often the case with vice presidential nominees.

Schultz said that “with the exception of Sarah Palin, there’s no evidence that any vice president in recent history has really impacted the presidential race.”

In the case of then-Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, research has shown that her place on the ticket likely cost John McCain several points in the polls, with her debate against Biden drawing voters’ attention to her on primetime television.

However, Schultz argued that McCain “was going to lose anyhow [so] perhaps it really didn’t matter in the end.”

Dusso agreed, adding that he believes McCain chose Palin “because he needed a game-changer.”

“He was already behind and stuck with a terrible economy that voters were going to punish the Republican candidate for because Bush was the president,” Dusso told The Epoch Times.

“Even though Palin received a lot of press and was not viewed as a good pick, her performance wasn’t going to change the already downward trajectory of that campaign.”

Dusso, however, noted that Palin was hammered with “unrelenting jokes about her intelligence” after her debate with Biden, “so perhaps, indirectly, [the debate] did matter to some extent.”

Schultz pointed out that in 1988, Democratic nominee Michael Dukakis’s running mate, then-Sen. Lloyd Bentsen (D-Texas), landed a famous jab at former Vice President Dan Quayle.

After Quayle compared his congressional experience to that of President John F. Kennedy, Bentsen replied: “Senator, I served with Jack Kennedy. I knew Jack Kennedy. Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine. Senator, you’re no Jack Kennedy.”

While it was a notable moment among vice presidential debates, it did little to prevent President George H.W. Bush’s landslide Electoral College victory that year.

On the other hand, Camille Busette, interim vice president and director of governance studies at the Brookings Institute, believes that the 2020 matchup between Pence and Harris affected that particular election.

She suggested that Harris’s criticisms of the Trump administration’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic resonated with some viewers.

“So while the debate did not have a lot of fireworks, and likely, many viewers were relieved that it did not, the overall impression that it left for viewers who are not in the D.C. area, is that there are real contrasts between the Trump–Pence and Biden–Harris tickets in the approaches to COVID-19, to the economy, and to the changing demographics of the country,” she wrote.

Debate Strategy

Regardless of the upcoming debate’s eventual impact, both vice presidential candidates have been working behind the scenes on their preparations.

Vance recruited Rep. Tom Emmer (R-Minn.) as a stand-in for Walz, and the congressman—who was in Minnesota’s congressional caucus with Walz for a number of years—has been actively studying the governor’s past debates and policy positions.

Walz enlisted the help of Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, who served as a stand-in for Pence during Harris’s pre-debate preparations in 2020.

Buttigieg has also been an active surrogate for the Biden–Harris administration, making frequent appearances on Fox News to defend its record.

Schultz offered his advice to both candidates: “Do no harm and make no mistakes. They both need simply to make the case for their presidential candidate without making mistakes or making people not like them.”

Dusso said it’s important for both candidates to seem competent enough on topics outside of their campaigns’ respective strengths before quickly moving on to talking about the issues in which voters trust them the most.

For Walz, this means emphasizing access to abortion, health care, education, and “hammer[ing] Project 2025,” Dusso said.

Dusso suggested that Vance should stick to policy—particularly the border, the economy, and crime.

“Even though crime is down and the economy is doing pretty well, it’s still best for Republicans to focus on those issues because the average voter sees those issues as their strengths,” he said.