Walz on Substance. Vance on Style.

WATCH: VP debate Tuesday between J.D. Vance, Tim Walz

It’d be a much different world if style and appeal didn’t count for so much in human affairs. If unadorned virtues of knowledgeability, honesty and competency were all that mattered … well, I’d take my chances with that world.

Sadly we’ve only got this world and cosmetics matter … a lot. Which is why last night’s VP debate between JD Vance, as slick a practitioner of the cunning media arts as we have at the moment, and our guy Tim Walz, a mostly ingenuous political bus driver, ended in a tie in so many people’s eyes.

On substance it was Walz in a walk. You can’t outright lie and bullshit as much as Vance did and score any points for veracity. But Vance understood the game he was playing last night better than Walz did. Which largely explains the uneasiness that settled over me a few minutes in as he began referring to “Tim” and proffering how much they actually had in common. That “bro” vibe seduced Walz into playing along, as a fundamentally cordial, non-confrontational Minnesota guy is wont to do.

The tones and verbiage of camaraderie Vance used sucked Walz into competing with Vance as though he were a guy who hasn’t been saying all the noxious, racist, unabashedly assholish things he’s been saying during the campaign. It may also explain why instead of dropping the guillotine on Vance when he pirouetted around his frequent, unequivocal support for a national abortion ban, he instead made his and Harris’ impassioned support for women’s basic freedoms.

It was heartfelt, sincere and a politically viable response … but it failed to leave viewers with the fair and accurate impression that Vance is both a liar and a deeply cynical huckster.

I don’t know, but I hope that the primary takeaway from the night was the closing exchange over January 6 and Vance’s refusal to say that Trump lost in 2020 and that he’ll accept a loss if it happens next month. Walz, who most pundits agree sounded steadier in the second half, prosecuted that piece of fundamental MAGA claptrap quite well, although, were it me, I would have given the whole “dangerous and delusional” thing a few more whacks of the verbal hammer.

As for Walz’ truly cringy response to saying he was in Beijing for the Tiananmen Square massacre, his debate prep clearly didn’t arm him for that one. (True, it only popped up in the news a day before … but still.)

Again, were it me, I would have gone with what it sounded like he wanted to go with when he described himself as capable of “being a knucklehead” sometimes.

What ordinary guy you might run into at the hardware store isn’t, or hasn’t been a knucklehead at some point?

“Yeah, I got out ahead of my skis on that one. I don’t know what I was trying to say other than I was in China that summer. A knucklehead moment to be sure. But it happens. If you don’t believe me ask my wife.

“So yes. My apologies for that. But get back to me if you ever hearing me lying about an election I lost and inciting a riot to attack the Capitol.”

Trump, Vance and Deep Thinking on the Cost of Child Care.

Former US President and Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump speaks at the Economic Club of New York on September 5, 2024. Trump announced during his speech that if elected president he would appoint Tesla CEO Elon Musk to lead an audit of government spending and implement "drastic" reform. Trump said at Musk's suggestion, he would "create a government efficiency commission tasked with conducting a complete financial and performance audit of the entire federal government," with musk as its chief. (Photo by David Dee Delgado / AFP) (Photo by DAVID DEE DELGADO/AFP via Getty Images)

Among the tens of thousands of things that infuriate the living bejeezus out of me is the line you hear from MAGA’s wannabe deep thinkers. It goes more or less like this: “Well yeah, Trump may say some strange things, but I’ll vote for him because I like his policies.”

Upon hearing that several things immediately run through my mind, beginning with, “Policies? Trump? What the f**k are you talking about? The guy wouldn’t know a ‘policy’ from a bucket of fried poultry.” The next thing is a variation on the old line about Newt Gingrich. “Gingrich is the kind of guy dumb people think smart people sound like.” Only in this case its, “By dropping in the word ‘policy’ you’re trying to make me think you’re not as clueless as you otherwise appear.”

With both Trump and Vance talking about the cost of child care yesterday and being asked about their specific policies to drive it down, this is as good a time as any to remind voters than neither of these con artists has given two seconds thought to a serious policy to deal with anything, much less the cost of child care in the USA.

Vance’s inspired notion was to encourage people to drag their aging parents and relatives into the cycle of regular child care. You know, cuz granny and gramps didn’t get enough of daily child care back when they were raising you. But more importantly, MAGA nation, let’s see some bootstrapping out there instead of expecting the government to solve all your problems.

Trump was hit with the same question at an event with the Economic Club of New York. His response is today’s (or at least this morning’s) talker.

Allow me to provide a video link and a transcript of the question and his entirely typical blithering response.

Reshma Saujani, founder of the nonprofit organization Girls Who Code, prefaced her question by noting that childcare outpaces inflation and costs the economy more than $122 billion annually.

“If you win in November,” she wondered, “can you commit to prioritizing legislation to make childcare affordable, and, if so, what specific piece of legislation will you advance?”

(Do note the word “specific.” And feel free to assess “mental acuity.”)

Trump: “Well, I would do that, and we’re sitting down—you know, I was, somebody, we had Senator Marco Rubio, and my daughter Ivanka was so impactful on that issue. It’s a very important issue. But I think when you talk about the kind of numbers that I’m talking about, that—because look, child care is childcare, it’s—couldn’t, you know, it’s something, you have to have it, in this country you have to have it.

But when you talk about those numbers compared to the kind of numbers that I’m talking about by taxing foreign nations at levels that they’re not used to—but they’ll get used to it very quickly—and it’s not gonna stop them from doing business with us, but they’ll have a very substantial tax when they send product into our country. Those numbers are so much bigger than any numbers that we’re talking about, including childcare, that it’s going to take care.

We’re gonna have—I look forward to having no deficits within a fairly short period of time, coupled with the reductions that I told you about on waste and fraud and all of the other things that are going on in our country, because I have to stay with childcare. I want to stay with childcare, but those numbers are small relative to the kind of economic numbers that I’m talking about, including growth, but growth also headed up by what the plan is that I just—that I just told you about.

We’re gonna be taking in trillions of dollars, and as much as childcare is talked about as being expensive, it’s relatively speaking not very expensive compared to the kind of numbers we’ll be taking in. We’re gonna make this into an incredible country that can afford to take care of its people, and then we’ll worry about the rest of the world.

Let’s help other people, but we’re going to take care of our country first. This is about America first. It’s about ‘Make America Great Again.’

We have to do it because right now we’re a failing nation, so we’ll take care of it. Thank you. Very good question. Thank you.”

And at this, as you can see in the video, most of the assembled panelists … APPLAUDED!

So I ask again, “WTF?”

How can a culture as advanced in so many ways as the Unites States in 2024 listen to anything Trump and his minions say and ask anything other than WT Actual F?