VP debate: How did it go?





Last Tuesday the VP debate was held by NBC between Tim Walz and JD Vance. The debate was a breath of fresh air for some because it was not as hostile as the presidential debate. NBC incorporated the same rules, like the muted mics and allotted time for each candidate. There was a winner in this debate, but it wasn't because of policy. Everyone knows the republican candidate is going to bring up immigration, while the democrat is going to focus on abortion. The winner was the American people. We saw how a debate could be and what can happen when we hear the other side. Throughout the evening, although we had some confrontation, the candidates did agree with each other on some things. They sounded like they heard each other, even if they didn't agree with the other's stance. However, Politico, once again, decided to try and spin a victory for Tim Walz based on facial expressions. "Our appearance is fundamental to our body language, and research indicates that voters see beards as (surprise, surprise) more masculine. That can be positive to some, reading as strength and competence. But to others, especially women, it can be negative, conveying aggression and opposition to feminist ideals." (Navarro, 2024). Yes, Vance's beard is a sign of toxic masculinity. It is now a negative to have a beard in politics. Facial hair now takes precedent over policy? Lincoln was one of the best presidents in our history, best known for his repeal of slavery, but since he had a beard, he falls down a few pegs according to Politico's analysis. However, Tim Walz's wide eyes, don't show nervousness, but instead passion. Eye-popping can sometimes be a sign of surprise, but for Walz, it simply revealed his emotional intensity — like this moment during an exchange about abortion. The orbicularis oculi muscle, working in concert with the corrugator and frontalis muscles, contract to raise the eyebrows — a dynamic and emphatic facial motion that grabbed the viewer’s attention. Early humans would have made such facial gestures to communicate strong emotions, like “danger is close.” For Walz, it gave extra weight to his feelings and held our gaze." (Navarro, 2024). Walz's eyes grab the viewers attention all right. It didn't show what Politico thinks it did, it showed surprise and anxiety. Both candidates were caught in a trap, Walz with his lies about China and Vance with his non answer to the 2020 election. I do wish Walz would have been asked about his military service lies, since they did press Vance on his past comments about Trump. Overall, it was a pleasant debate between two candidates who seemed to care about the topics. 


https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/10/02/walz-vance-vp-debate-body-language-analysis-00182127

Comments

  1. Keanu GarrettOctober 9, 2024 at 1:58 PM

    Hi Will! It’s always nice to see a civil debate between two candidates because sadly that is not as common nowadays. I think that the whole beard thing is weird and totally unnecessary to focus on. For people to take a beard and to allow that to communicate all of these assumptions about someone is insane. I think we get ourselves in a lot of trouble when we focus on someone’s appearance over the content of their character, or in this case their campaign/ policies. Overall, the debate was pleasant like you said but I think we always could do better on focusing on the campaign rather than body language or the appearance of the candidates.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Sarah Grace DeBateOctober 10, 2024 at 12:34 PM

    This was such a fascinating blog to read about and really eye opening to just how much the media can at times try to make something out of nothing. I agree with you that this debate was much better in terms of them trying to listen and understand one another and not simply argue the entire time. I think it is an absolute stretch to comment on Vance's beard as well as Walz's eyes when there is so many other more important topics and moments to comment on from the debate. It appears to me that Politico was simply stretching to be able to find something controversial in order to keep viewers engaged and against one another. This was an important debate and hopefully will allow for people to open their eyes and be more open to listening to different people with different views and not be so stuck in their own opinions and thoughts. I really enjoyed getting to read this and look forward to reading more of your blogs!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Did the media hide Biden's mental decline?

Image
As we all all know now in September 2024, President Biden has dropped out of the race. However, was it a shock or was it expected? Some would say it was a shock because of what the media outlets, (Joe Scarborough) were saying about Biden.  "No, I just always told people that he's — the president is very sharp. If you say something or write something, there have been times he’s called and he’s refuted it very sharply. I’ve talked to foreign leaders that have had conversations with him that said that he was on top of every issue," ( Scarborough Says Biden ‘Is So Sharp’). If one would have listened to Joe Scarborough's analysis on President Biden, maybe it was a shock to see the president in such decline on the debate stage. However, it wasn't just Scarborough pushing Biden's excelling mental fitness, it was also Kamala Harris. Harris had this to say when Special Counsel Robert Hur's reporting broke about Biden's mental fitness " gratuitous, inaccur...
Read more

Supreme Court Chaos

Image
  With the election lose looming over the democrats heads, they have decided to pursue one more piece of progress before Biden leaves The White House. There have been grumblings of 70 year old Sonya Sotomayor leaving her position on the Supreme Court bench, so they can replace her with a younger democrat. Justice Sotomayor says she is not willing to step down, however, leaving panic within the democratic coalition. Technically it is not right to bully a Scotus judge off the bench for partisan politics, but it is being tried. They are comparing the potential seat swap to Trump's appointment of Amy Coney Barret, but she was replaced because of an actual vacancy. It can be argued that the process was rushed and possibly not right, but not comparable to the current scenario with no vacancy.  Forcing out Sotomayor, assuming she would agree to go, could be politically risky, and a successful confirmation before Trump's inauguration on Jan. 20, 2025, logistically impossible. Those re...
Read more

Debate week: How has the coverage been for each candidate?

Image
 It is the first debate between Harris and Trump for the 2024 election. Harris has been the candidate for about a month and some change, while Trump has been the expected nominee since before the primary. ABC will be hosting this debate and some interesting research has been conducted on how they treat Harris V Trump. " A new study by the Media Research Center finds that, of the Big Three evening newscasts, ABC’s  World News Tonight  — run by debate moderator David Muir — has been the most positive towards Harris and the most hostile to Trump" (Noyes).   This research comes out 2 days before the debate. David Muir, who hosts the nightly news on ABC will host this debate. His coverage included 25 clearly positive statements for Harris and her campaign, while Trump received 5 clearly positive comments and 66 negative. That is a 100% positivity rate for Harris and a 7% positivity rate for Trump. This does not include no negativity, however, just not from the media mouth...
Read more