The voters: Vance won – but by a narrow margin
Donald Trump's vice-presidential candidate JD Vance was the one who emerged victorious from the night's debate - but by the smallest possible margin. This is evident from measurements from both CNN and CBS News.
In the CNN voter poll, 51 percent of respondents said they thought Vance did better than Walz.
In the survey from CBS and Yougov, 42 percent gave Vance the victory, against Walz's 41 percent.
88 percent of the respondents in the CBS survey stated that they considered the debate to have a "generally positive" tone.
The two vice-presidential candidates also seem to have succeeded in reaching their voters. According to the same poll, 52 percent of Walz's electorate had a positive view of him before he took the stage, compared to 60 percent after.
Vance's numbers also improved, from 40 percent to 49 percent.
Donald Trump's vice-presidential candidate JD Vance was the one who emerged victorious from the night's debate - but by the smallest possible margin. This is evident from measurements from both CNN and CBS News.
In the CNN voter poll, 51 percent of respondents said they thought Vance did better than Walz.
In the survey from CBS and Yougov, 42 percent gave Vance the victory, against Walz's 41 percent.
88 percent of the respondents in the CBS survey stated that they considered the debate to have a "generally positive" tone.
The two vice-presidential candidates also seem to have succeeded in reaching their voters. According to the same poll, 52 percent of Walz's electorate had a positive view of him before he took the stage, compared to 60 percent after.
Vance's numbers also improved, from 40 percent to 49 percent.
....................................
Analysis: "One thing is clear - a new presidential debate is required"
Nothing new really emerged in tonight's debate between vice presidential candidates JD Vance and Tim Walz. They stuck to their previous positions on all issues – and maintained a civil and polite tone throughout basically the entire spectacle. That's what Fox News' Doug Schoen writes in an analysis.
But one thing is clear in any case, he believes: A new presidential debate between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris is needed.
"It is basically certain that no voters switched sides on Tuesday night," he writes.
The BBC's Anthony Zurcher notes that Walz and Vance stepped onto the stage with two completely different debating styles. Vance himself has said he loves debates and expressed disappointment at not getting to face Kamala Harris as an opponent when Biden announced his exit from the candidacy earlier this fall.
"If Vance was elected because he provides ideological meat on the bones of Trump's conservative populism, on Tuesday night he put a polite, humble face on it all."
Walz may have appeared more insecure and less polished, but he, on the other hand, hardly hurt the Democrats, he writes.
Edward Luce is a bit harsher in his tone. In an analysis in the Financial Times, he describes Walz's performance as "lacklustre" and does not think the debate has much significance. The interview in CBS "60 minutes" that Kamala Harris agreed to - and Trump withdrew - is likely to have a greater impact on undecided voters than the vice-presidential debate, he writes.
Nothing new really emerged in tonight's debate between vice presidential candidates JD Vance and Tim Walz. They stuck to their previous positions on all issues – and maintained a civil and polite tone throughout basically the entire spectacle. That's what Fox News' Doug Schoen writes in an analysis.
But one thing is clear in any case, he believes: A new presidential debate between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris is needed.
"It is basically certain that no voters switched sides on Tuesday night," he writes.
The BBC's Anthony Zurcher notes that Walz and Vance stepped onto the stage with two completely different debating styles. Vance himself has said he loves debates and expressed disappointment at not getting to face Kamala Harris as an opponent when Biden announced his exit from the candidacy earlier this fall.
"If Vance was elected because he provides ideological meat on the bones of Trump's conservative populism, on Tuesday night he put a polite, humble face on it all."
Walz may have appeared more insecure and less polished, but he, on the other hand, hardly hurt the Democrats, he writes.
Edward Luce is a bit harsher in his tone. In an analysis in the Financial Times, he describes Walz's performance as "lacklustre" and does not think the debate has much significance. The interview in CBS "60 minutes" that Kamala Harris agreed to - and Trump withdrew - is likely to have a greater impact on undecided voters than the vice-presidential debate, he writes.
Inga kommentarer:
Skicka en kommentar