The Significance of Vice Presidential Debates: Historical Perspectives and Contemporary Relevance

Nov 7

Senator JD Vance and Governor Tim Walz engaged in a notably cordial and substantive debate, demonstrating a level of policy discussion that many observers, including myself, did not anticipate. Given the heightened tensions observed in their respective campaign events and previous remarks about each other, the general expectation was for a more contentious and combative exchange. The nature of the debate, however, surprised media outlets, sparking considerable interest in whether it will influence polling trends in favor of either candidate.

This debate also highlights a broader issue: the need to reassess the importance of vice presidential debates. Historically, the vice presidency has played a crucial role in the continuity of American leadership. Of the 46 presidents (or 45 if counting Grover Cleveland once), eight have died while in office, and one, Richard Nixon, resigned. This means that approximately 20 percent of presidents did not complete their terms because of death or resignation, underscoring the significance of the vice presidency as a position of potential presidential succession. Consequently, the role of vice presidential candidates in debates and their qualifications warrant greater attention than they have traditionally received.

Historical Impact of Vice Presidential Debates

The first official vice presidential debate in 1976 involved Republican Bob Dole and Democrat Walter Mondale, both of whom would go on to be a major party candidate for president and debate a sitting president—Mondale running against President Ronald Reagan in 1984 and Dole running against President Bill Clinton in 1996. In 1976, Mondale’s calm and composed demeanor went a long way with voters in the face of Dole’s more aggressive nature during the debate. In an election year that directly followed Watergate and the first time a president (Nixon) had resigned in disgrace, both Governor Jimmy Carter’s and President Gerald Ford’s campaigns were running on a spirit of bringing dignity back to the White House. During the debate, Dole blamed Democrats for starting World War II; in 1990, Mondale stated, “I think they blew the election right there.”[1]

One of the most memorable moments in the history of vice presidential debates happened during the 1988 debate between Democratic Senator Lloyd Bentsen, who was 61 years old, and Republican Senator Dan Quayle, who was 41 years old. Answering a question about his qualifications to be president, Quayle stated, “I have as much experience in the Congress as Jack Kennedy did when he sought the presidency.” Bentsen famously retorted, “Senator, I served with Jack Kennedy. I knew Jack Kennedy. Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine. Senator, you’re no Jack Kennedy.” Quayle replied, “That was really uncalled for, Senator.”[2] The Dukakis–Bentsen campaign used his response as an attack against the Bush–Quayle ticket and resulted in Saturday Night Live using child actor Jeff Renaudo to portray him during the election cycle. However, this election cycle did see troubles for the Dukakis–Bentsen ticket when, in the first presidential debate between Dukakis and Bush, Dukakis was asked in the first question of the debate if he would support the death penalty if someone raped and murdered his wife, to which he replied, “No, I don’t, Bernard, and I think you know that I’ve opposed the death penalty during all of my life. I don’t see any evidence that it’s a deterrent, and I think there are better and more effective ways to deal with violent crime.”[3] This response came across to viewers as dispassionate and dismissive.

In the wake of COVID-19, election season for then President Donald Trump and Vice President Joe Biden saw a much more cordial debate between the two vice presidential candidates than between the two presidential candidates. Vice President Mike Pence and Senator Kamala Harris’s debate was seen as a substantive conversation about policy issues. Both candidates were able to give voters detailed insights into their campaign platforms. This was in a stark contrast to the debate between Trump and Biden, which was full of name-calling and interruptions by both candidates. However, there was a moment in the vice presidential debate where Harris was able to show her assertiveness. When Pence started to interrupt her, she responded by stating, “Mr. Vice President, I’m speaking.” Many in the media praised this response, including CNN, which stated, “She was firm without falling into any of the traps that could associate her with labels—emotional, angry, nasty—reserved for women, especially Black women.”[4] This show of strength was seen in a positive light and helped bolster her image as a strong and capable leader. In 2020, it was essential that she accomplish this because of Biden’s age at the time.

Whether the debate between Walz and Vance will have a place in the list of previous vice presidential debates and whether it will have an impact on the race between Trump and Harris remain to be seen. However, vice presidential debates serve as more than just supplementary events to presidential campaigns; they provide valuable insight into the readiness and capabilities of individuals who may one day lead the nation. The historical examples of vice presidential debates reveal moments of significant influence on public perception and campaign momentum.

The 2020 and 2024 vice presidential debates between Pence and Harris and between Walz and Vance, respectively, demonstrated the potential for substantive discussion, even in a highly polarized political climate. They served as a reminder how important these debates are in showcasing the preparedness and temperament of candidates who are just one step away from the presidency.

It is time that we reconsider the significance of these debates in today’s political landscape. It’s clear that they are an essential part of informing the electorate about the leaders who stand just a heartbeat away from the presidency. The recent debate between Vance and Walz is a reminder that vice presidential candidates can engage in meaningful dialogue. These exchanges deserve attention comparable to that given to presidential debates and should be analyzed accordingly.

[1]PBS, “Interview with Walter Mondale,” Debating Our Destiny (October 4, 2000): https://www.pbs.org/newshour/spc/debatingourdestiny/interviews/mondale.html.

[2] Commission on Presidential Debates, “October 5, 1988 Debate Transcript,” Voter Education: https://www.debates.org/voter-education/debate-transcripts/october-5-1988-debate-transcripts/.

[3] Commission on Presidential Debates, “October 13, 1988 Debate Transcript,” Voter Education: https://www.debates.org/voter-education/debate-transcripts/october-13-1988-debate-transcript/.

[4] Chandelis Duster, “Kamala Harris Seizes Historic Moment in Debate, While Pence Defends Trump Record,” CNN (October 8, 2020): https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/08/politics/kamala-harris-pence-debate/index.html.