No, JD Vance Did Not Win the Debate on Abortion
Mainstream journalists are making something very simple too complicated: Republicans want a national abortion ban.
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.
We cannot back down
We now confront a second Trump presidency.
There’s not a moment to lose. We must harness our fears, our grief, and yes, our anger, to resist the dangerous policies Donald Trump will unleash on our country. We rededicate ourselves to our role as journalists and writers of principle and conscience.
Today, we also steel ourselves for the fight ahead. It will demand a fearless spirit, an informed mind, wise analysis, and humane resistance. We face the enactment of Project 2025, a far-right supreme court, political authoritarianism, increasing inequality and record homelessness, a looming climate crisis, and conflicts abroad. The Nation will expose and propose, nurture investigative reporting, and stand together as a community to keep hope and possibility alive. The Nation’s work will continue—as it has in good and not-so-good times—to develop alternative ideas and visions, to deepen our mission of truth-telling and deep reporting, and to further solidarity in a nation divided.
Armed with a remarkable 160 years of bold, independent journalism, our mandate today remains the same as when abolitionists first founded The Nation—to uphold the principles of democracy and freedom, serve as a beacon through the darkest days of resistance, and to envision and struggle for a brighter future.
The day is dark, the forces arrayed are tenacious, but as the late Nation editorial board member Toni Morrison wrote “No! This is precisely the time when artists go to work. There is no time for despair, no place for self-pity, no need for silence, no room for fear. We speak, we write, we do language. That is how civilizations heal.”
I urge you to stand with The Nation and donate today.
Onwards,
Katrina vanden Heuvel
Editorial Director and Publisher, The Nation
