Sen. Tim Kaine, a notorious Democrat from Virginia, has strenuously promoted one immutable direction for Gov. Tim Walz, a fellow Democrat from Minnesota, during his impending vice presidential debate against Sen. J.D. Vance, a Republican from Ohio. The mandate he fiercely advocates is ‘defend the top of the ticket.’ Kaine, who is markedly remembered as the ill-fated running mate of Hillary Clinton, remained obedient to this advocacy relentlessly, leading to an unfavorable post-debate analysis in 2016.
Much to his chagrin, he repeatedly interrupted Mike Pence, then Trump’s running mate, creating an atmosphere of disparateness where Pence seemed commandeering and Kaine appeared jittery. The political game was further muddled as Kaine unfailingly drew attention away from Clinton and towards then-presidential nominee Trump, slathering his responses with explicit reminders of Trump’s allegedly disputable previous assertions.
Kaine went to the lengths of urging, ‘you can’t allow your opponent to aim at your top of the ticket. Posing as a competent goaltender is crucial; you need to deflect all negative commentary while simultaneously pressuring your counterpart.’ These words originated from a conversation with the Washington Examiner.
Despite Kaine’s own experience of falling flat with Pence and Trump in a startling defeat, he harbors skepticism that the debate will have any lasting impact, considering the comparatively insignificant role VP candidates play during elections. Blame was majorly piled onto Clinton, as her miscalculations of Trump’s appeal in blue wall states such as Wisconsin were notably disregarded.
However, Kaine recognized a potential pitfall in Walz becoming excessively wrapped up in safeguarding his personal reputation. He singled out the passivity of the late Senator Joe Lieberman during his 2000 debate against Republican VP nominee, Dick Cheney. Predictably, Lieberman’s boss, Al Gore, was defeated by none other than President George W. Bush that November.
Kaine was quoted saying, ‘I considered Joe a comrade, but his strategy was more focused on seeking personal approval and less on defending Gore. Thus, Cheney had ample opportunity to discredit Gore throughout that debate and Lieberman did very little to shield him.’
Kaine’s advice, stripped down to its rudiments, implies an insistence on becoming an aggressive protector, a role reluctantly undertaken by apparently congenial characters. Vice President Kamala Harris, in what many see as a questionable decision, selected Walz primarily for his amiable Midwestern temperament.
A widely accepted belief is reflected here, suggesting that vice-presidential debates will typically not enhance, but potentially damage, the electoral campaign. ‘The debate fails to influence matters unless you neglect to guard your top ticket,’ stated Kaine, critically unwrapping the political landscape.
Facing a dicey juncture in the election race, Walz is set to confront Vance on the debate stage this Tuesday. The Democrats eagerly reshuffled the electoral board when President Joe Biden, to the surprise of many, stepped down, leaving the younger, and less experienced, Harris as his replacement. Yet, against all odds, Trump continues to hold his own against her in most swing states, a fact that should concern the Democrats.
Kaine anticipates Vance adopting an aggressive stance during the debate, making several attempts to get under Walz’s skin. Vance has been known to publicly question Walz over his misrepresentations regarding his military service.
In retaliation, Walz tried to label Vance as an aloof coastal elite, primarily due to his involvement in venture capital over the weekend. Despite this, Vance remains fixated on Harris, and Kaine pragmatically foresees this continuing to be his strategy during Tuesday’s debate.
Examining the political arena further, it appears Kaine is also facing reelection later this year. He is expected to participate in his own Senate debate held in Virginia, which is incidentally timed a day after Walz’s vice-presidential debate. Kaine’s tumultuous past and present exemplifies the struggles of an incessantly defensive strategic approach.