))
The Walz-Vance debate unpacked: consensus and conflict in middle America
Manage episode 443893141 series 3595299
Content provided by Vito Laterza & Louis Römer, Vito Laterza, and Louis Römer. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Vito Laterza & Louis Römer, Vito Laterza, and Louis Römer or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://player.fm/legal.
Behind the veneer of civility that cloaked the 2 October US vice presidential debate, there are radical differences that can't be reconciled.
Key topics:
- Fact-checking and post-truth: the CBS News debate moderators couldn't fact-check the vice presidential candidates, but, weirdly enough, candidates were encouraged to fact-check each other.
- JD Vance, like Trump, blames all American problems on immigration. Tim Walz reiterates Harris' "tough" stance on borders (a move to the right), while rightly denouncing the dehumanisation of Republican anti-immigrant propaganda.
- In a different dynamic from the Harris-Trump debate, Vance and Walz try to be nice to each other, while they both talk to rural and working class voters in middle America. Regional identity politics requires that they acknowledge their common roots, even as they disagree on pretty much everything else.
- Mainstreaming far right ideas through "civil" debate won't make them any less dangerous. Vance's polished salesman's style is a thin veil for his extreme views.
- Advocating for a transversal alliance of free speech warriors, Vance accuses Harris of "censorship", while Walz refocuses the attention on Trump's undemocratic attitude and the dangers of a repeat of the January 6 Capitol Hill riots.
Sign up to our newsletter at www.weirdpodcast.com
Chapters
1. Fact-checking and post-truth (00:00:00)
2. Vance and Walz on immigration (00:03:18)
3. Comparing the Harris-Trump debate with the Walz-Vance one: a different dynamic (00:06:52)
4. Walz and Vance engage in "civil" debate (00:08:58)
5. Vance's deceptive "reasonable" tone doesn't change his extreme views (00:13:15)
6. For Walz and Vance to claim their middle America credentials, they need to recognise each other as sharing some common ground. (00:15:24)
7. Mainstreaming the far right is a bad idea: some comparison with Italy's PM Giorgia Meloni (00:22:14)
8. Vance advocates for a "beyond left and right" free speech alliance against Harris and the Democrats (00:27:26)
9. Walz warns of the danger of a repeat of the January 6 Capitol Hill riots (00:33:53)
10. Wrap-up comments on the performance of Walz and Vance (00:37:35)
4 episodes
Share
