Republican vice presidential candidate Senator JD Vance (R-OH) participates in a debate at the CBS Broadcast Center on October 1, 2024, in New York City. This is expected to be the only vice presidential debate of the 2024 general election.
(Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images)
If you want a good example of a mainstream news organization rooting for Donald Trump to at least keep the polls even, here’s the best: Politico claiming that “Trump and Vance’s efforts on the debate stage and on social media Tuesday night were the latest examples of the GOP ticket’s months-long effort to neutralize one of Democrats’ most effective lines of attack and rebrand as moderate on abortion, and there are signs it might be working.”
That’s ridiculous. The entire world has ruled that Walz beat Vance when it came to abortion at the Tuesday night debate. On that and on the significance of January 6.
Related Articles
Otherwise, Walz maybe didn’t do so great. I don’t know—I didn’t watch, and I still haven’t watched, because the day before, as many of you know, I lost my 15-year-old dog. My Nation colleagues stepped in for me entirely. I love them.
But I did notice the exchanges on abortion. Walz noted that Trump “brags about how great it was that he put the judges in and overturned Roe v. Wade.” He acknowledged the tragedy of Amber Thurman, who died after traveling out of restrictive Georgia to access care in North Carolina. He talked about Amanda Zurawski, who was denied an abortion even after almost dying of pregnancy complications. “If you don’t know [women like this], you soon will. Their Project 2025 is going to have a registry of pregnancies,” Walz said, which Vance contested.
But the Politico Playbook decided it was a draw… which actually means Vance won.
“I’m sure JD Vance put the fear in Democratic consultants last night because their magic message of ‘Republicans are bad on abortion’ seemed, to me, to be mitigated,” Stan Barnes, an Arizona strategist and former GOP lawmaker, told Politico. “For a lot of voters, I think the threat of a national ban rings hollow.”
Excuse me? So Vance promised that Trump would never sign a nationwide abortion ban. Trump promised this too. Meanwhile, Trump is voting for the six-week abortion ban on the ballot in Florida. That’s what he means by leaving it to the states.
Poor JD Vance should also talk to Marla Maples and Melania Trump to see if Trump keeps his word. He cheated on all three of his wives. I don’t think Trump will ever get the votes to sign an abortion ban, but if he did? He would sign one so fast, it would make Ivana Trump turn in her grave at his golf course. (I’m so sad JD can’t talk to Ivana.)
JD Vance clearly got some coaching to get him not only to talk (comparatively) sensibly about abortion, but about everything. It was not the shitshow I expected (or let’s be honest, hoped for. The Harris/Trump showdown was one of the best nights of my recent political life).
This was not. But I think Planned Parenthood summed it up perfectly: “JD Vance said he supports a ‘minimum national standard’ and he’s even said he ‘certainly would like abortion to be illegal nationally.’ Let’s be clear: A national minimum standard is the same thing as a national ban.”
Why do we have to keep acting like this is up for debate? Republicans will impose an abortion ban if they get the chance. If Democrats keep the Senate, and elect Kamala Harris, they won’t have that chance. It’s that simple, and also that complicated, since our media won’t make it simple.
Can we count on you?
In the coming election, the fate of our democracy and fundamental civil rights are on the ballot. The conservative architects of Project 2025 are scheming to institutionalize Donald Trump’s authoritarian vision across all levels of government if he should win.
We’ve already seen events that fill us with both dread and cautious optimism—throughout it all, The Nation has been a bulwark against misinformation and an advocate for bold, principled perspectives. Our dedicated writers have sat down with Kamala Harris and Bernie Sanders for interviews, unpacked the shallow right-wing populist appeals of J.D. Vance, and debated the pathway for a Democratic victory in November.
Stories like these and the one you just read are vital at this critical juncture in our country’s history. Now more than ever, we need clear-eyed and deeply reported independent journalism to make sense of the headlines and sort fact from fiction. Donate today and join our 160-year legacy of speaking truth to power and uplifting the voices of grassroots advocates.
Throughout 2024 and what is likely the defining election of our lifetimes, we need your support to continue publishing the insightful journalism you rely on.
Thank you,
The Editors of The Nation
