10mo ago

Tim Walz gets bigger polling boost than JD Vance after VP debate

www.newsweek.com /tim-walz-jd-vance-debate-polling-boost-1962380

Minnesota Governor Tim Walz saw a significant bump in polling after Tuesday night's vice presidential debate in New York, surpassing Ohio Senator JD Vance in postdebate momentum.

The showdown saw the two candidates largely focus on differences, with Vance repeatedly hitting Vice President Kamala Harris on border security, while Walz lambasted former President Donald Trump on abortion rights. Newsweek has contacted the Vance and Walz campaigns for comment via email.

...

According to the poll, the Minnesota governor saw a 23-point boost in his favorability ratings, going up from +14 to +37. Meanwhile, Vance saw a 19-point boost in his favorability ratings, going up from -22 to -3.

🗳️ Register to vote: https://vote.gov/

40 comments

According to the poll, the Minnesota governor saw a 23-point boost in his favorability ratings, going up from +14 to +37. Meanwhile, Vance saw a 19-point boost in his favorability ratings, going up from -22 to -3.
19 point boost and it's still negative is WILD
- He didn't do himself any favors when he refused to admit the 2020 election wasn't stolen and acted like the slippery weasel he is when questioned on abortion.
  
  But obviously he did, enough people saw that and said "Yeah, That's my guy" that his net favorability rating is up 19 points. It's still negative, but the fact it went up at all is troubling.
- He's gone from hated to disliked.
  
  And that's honestly too nice to the guy
- No one likes JD. Let him talk to real people again and it will be back down.
- The fact that they even need +/-
First off, almost no meaningful data on the polling impact of something that happened last night is available literally hours later.
Second, both sets of numbers are ridiculously large enough to give whatever the source is added scrutiny.
A 23 point bump is, like those don't happen. If Biden instantly got a lasting peace in the Middle East he wouldn't get an overnight 23 point bump.
- They're fairly small polls conducted of people who specifically watched the debate. Definitely not representative of the overall electorate.
- 574 registered voters were polled. So while it's not necessarily meaningful for the election, it is significant and could help drive strategy.
- Absolutely this
  I've seen stuff on both sides saying their canadite did better in the polls, but we cannot know for certain so soon after the debate. anyone who does so is just going for a sensational story, rather then a factual story
going up from -22 to -3.
Honestly Walz getting a bigger poll boost isn't as much of a story when Vance got a slightly smaller boost and is still in the negative.
To paraphrase what Anthony Scaramucci said on the "The Rest is Politics" podcast: Most people probably come out of this debate thinking that Vance is the better debater, but if it's about who you'd trust with a job in the White House, most people would say Walz.
Seems hard to believe that this debate moved the needle much on either side. They both performed well, there were no big gotcha moments, and each said the stuff that their base would want them to say. Neither seemed unhinged, both were well spoken.
Vance said some stuff that was total crap, but that's not a problem for anyone considering voting for Trump. I just don't see that there's any way anyone's mind was changed.
- It’s not moving the race, at all. It may affect the VP candidates’ approval rating.
  
  I'm concerned Vance will bring people like my dad back in after he finally felt disenfranchised enough to say he won't vote.
That's honestly a very huge jump in polling. Especially given it was from a VP debate.
Women should "just trust" the patriarchy to make good decisions for them. Vance said he needed to win back their trust way too many times.
I think a lot of people hadn't got a chance to see how weird Vance is before last night.
- I'm convinced trump never thought past optics and didn't look at anything besides headshots.
  It's 100% the guyliner
  
  When Trump picked Vance he was still running against Biden and was assumed to win easily. Campaign optics weren't part of the equation.
  
  Am I the only person who noticed that JD didn't have overdone eyeliner during last night's debate? Like the campaign maybe sprung for a competent makeup artist this time?
  
  This reminds me of what happened when he was picking his chief of staff - https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/donald-trump-is-holding-a-government-casting-call-hes-seeking-the-look/2016/12/21/703ae8a4-c795-11e6-bf4b-2c064d32a4bfstory.html
  Basically nothing new to see here.
Can't wait for the new Kamala ad to drop and point out Jimmy's lies
Honestly, this kind of makes sense. Walz's aw-shucks mannerisms could get people to a "oh, he tried real hard" reaction a lot easier than Trump's rage-fueled, impassioned, principled defense of his own rallies.
- That's what I was thinking. Walz apologized to the moderators when they told him he went over the time. Like "oops sorry."
  I never heard anyone apologize to the moderators for that before. I hope most normal people will see that and think he's nice.
I haven't seen the debate yet (cause time difference). I expect one guy spewing mostly hate and some made up stuff and one guy trying to make any sense of what his opponent says and try to fact check at least some of that. No substantial debate about anything actually important but an all American show as usual. I'm looking forward to that.
- You know, it was very different than I expected. There were quite a number of times when one of them said "Well I agree with most of that he just said." Vance is pretty smooth, too. Much of what he said was total crap, but it wasn't the Trump-style hateful vomit. It was the most cordial debate I've seen in a while, though there were some strong disagreements.
  
  I just watched the debate. It's true that Vance is better than Trump when it comes to rhetoric, but that's not difficult. The sad thing is that many people seem to only care about how someone says something and not at all about what someone says.
The Trump campaign saw a 1.5 point boost at Polymarket after the debate, now showing Trump 50% Harris 49%.
Media Bias Fact Check | bot support
BS

40 comments