MB: Thank you, Governor. And just to clarify for our viewers, Springfield, Ohio does have a large number of Haitian migrants who have legal status. Temporary protected status. Norah.
JDV: Well, Margaret, Margaret, I think it's important because…
MB: Thank you, senator. We have so much to get to.
NO: We're going to turn out of the economy. Thank you.
In a debate-night surprise, climate science got near-top billing during the vice presidential face-off between Gov. Tim Walz and Sen. JD Vance in New York on Tuesday, as the sprawling impacts of Hurricane Helene, which killed at least 160 people, were still being felt across the Southeast.
Just after an opening that addressed the escalating crisis in the Middle East, CBS moderator Norah O’Donnell noted that climate change is only making storms like Helene worse and asked Vance if he agreed with Donald Trump’s assertion that climate change is a “hoax.” Vance, in a pattern that repeated across the night, couldn’t bring himself to contradict the former president.
Instead, he pointed a finger at his opponents. If Democrats “really believe that climate change is serious,” he argued, “what they would be doing is more manufacturing and more energy production in the United States of America.” That’s because, he said, America is the “cleanest economy in the entire world” in terms of “carbon emissions” per “unit of economic output.” He also pushed for investing in nuclear and natural gas.
It’s unclear what Vance meant by “unit of economic output.” But by most metrics, the US is not a clean economy. The US has among the highest carbon emissions per capita, one of the highest total annual emissions, a mediocre record on carbon emissions per dollar of GDP, and was most recently ranked 34th in the world in its Environmental Performance Index, a measure of a country’s environmental stewardship, including climate change mitigation.
Walz countered that the Biden-Harris administration has made “massive investments” in green technology—the “biggest in global history“—with the Inflation Reduction Act. The law, Walz said, has created 200,000 jobs across the country. (As CNN noted in its fact-check of the debate, some of those jobs may be promised, but not yet created; it’s difficult to come up with an exact figure of jobs sparked by the IRA.)
Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz used the climate portion of Tuesday night's vice presidential debate with Republican Sen. JD Vance to lambast GOP nominee Donald Trump's pledge to give the oil and gas industry free rein in exchange for a billion dollars in campaign donations—an offer that's the subject of an ongoing Senate investigation.
" Donald Trump called it a hoax and then joked that these things would make more beachfront property to be able to invest in," Walz, Democratic nominee Kamala Harris' running mate, said of the climate emergency. "To call it a hoax and to take the oil company executives to Mar-a-Lago, say, 'Give me money for my campaign and I'll let you do whatever you want'—we can be smarter about that."
Walz's remarks came in response to a question from CBS moderator Norah O'Donnell, who asked what the youth-led Sunrise Movement called perhaps "the best climate questions ever in a presidential or vice presidential debate."
Connecting the climate crisis to Hurricane Helene, which left a trail of destruction
across six states and killed more than 160 people, O'Donnell noted that
"scientists say climate change makes these hurricanes larger, stronger,
and more deadly because of the historic rainfall."
"Senator Vance, according to CBS News polling, seven in ten Americans and more than 60% of Republicans under the age of 45 favor the U.S. taking steps to try and reduce climate change," O'Donnell said. "Senator, what responsibility would the Trump administration have to try and reduce the impact of climate change?"
In response, Vance called Hurricane Helene an "unspeakable human tragedy" but went on to suggest he doubts "this idea that carbon emissions drives [sic] all the climate change."
NO: Governor.
TW: January 6th was not Facebook ads. And I think a revisionist history on this. Look, I don't understand how we got to this point, but the issue was that happened. Donald Trump can even do it. And all of us say there's no place for this. It has massive repercussions. This idea that there's censorship to stop people from doing, threatening to kill someone, threatening to do something, that's not censorship. Censorship is book banning. We've seen that. We've seen that brought up. I just think for everyone tonight, and I'm going to thank Senator Vance. I think this is the conversation they want to hear, and I think there's a lot of agreement. But this is one that we are miles apart on. This was a threat to our democracy in a way that we had not seen. And it manifested itself because of Donald Trump's inability to say, he is still saying he didn't lose the election. I would just ask that. Did he lose the 2020 election?
JDV: Tim, I'm focused on the future. Did Kamala Harris censor Americans from speaking their mind in the wake of the 2020 COVID situation?
TW: That is a damning. That is a damning non answer.
TW: That's not what the bill says. But look, this issue is what's on everyone's mind. Donald Trump put this all into motion. He brags about how great it was that he put the judges in and overturned Roe versus Wade, 52 years of personal autonomy. And then he tells us, oh, we send it to the states. It's a beautiful thing. Amanda Zaworski would disagree with you on it's a beautiful thing. A young bride in Texas waiting for their child at 18 weeks. She has a complication, a tear in the membrane. She needs to go in. The medical care at that point needs to be decided by the doctor. And that would have been an abortion. But in Texas, that would have put them in legal jeopardy. She went home, got sepsis, nearly dies, and now she may have difficulty having children. Or in Kentucky, Hadley Duvall, a twelve year old child raped and impregnated by her stepfather. Those are horrific. Now, when got asked about that, Senator Vance said, two wrongs don't make a right. There is no right in this. So in Minnesota, what we did was restore Roe v. Wade. We made sure that we put women in charge of their health care. But look, this is not what, if you don't know Amanda or a Hadley, you soon will. Their Project 2025 is going to have a registry of pregnancies. It's going to make it more difficult, if not impossible to get contraception and limit access, if not eliminate access to infertility treatments. For so many of you out there listening, me included, infertility treatments are why I have a child. That's nobody else's business. But those things are being proposed, and the catchall on this is, is, well, the states will decide what's right for Texas might not be right for Washington. That's not how this works. This is basic human right. We have seen maternal mortality skyrocket in Texas, outpacing many other countries in the world. This is about health care. In Minnesota, we are ranked first in health care for a reason. We trust women. We trust doctors.
NO: Senator, do you want to respond to the governor's claim? Will you create a federal pregnancy monitoring agency?
JDV: No, Norah, certainly we won't. And I want to talk about this issue because I know a lot of Americans care about it, and I know a lot of Americans don't agree with everything that I've ever said on this topic. And, you know, I grew up in a working class family in a neighborhood where I knew a lot of young women who had unplanned pregnancies and decided to terminate those pregnancies because they feel like they didn't have any other options. And, you know, one of them is actually very dear to me. And I know she's watching tonight, and I love you. And she told me something a couple years ago that she felt like if she hadn't had that abortion, that it would have destroyed her life because she was in an abusive relationship. And I think that what I take from that, as a Republican who proudly wants to protect innocent life in this country, who proudly wants to protect the vulnerable is that my party, we've got to do so much better of a job at earning the American People's trust back on this issue where they frankly just don't trust us. And I think that's one of the things that Donald Trump and I are endeavoring to do. I want us, as a Republican Party, to be pro-family in the fullest sense of the word. I want us to support fertility treatments. I want us to make it easier for moms to afford to have babies. I want it to make it easier for young families to afford a home so they can afford a place to raise that family. And I think there's so much that we can do on the public policy front just to give women more options. Now, of course, Donald Trump has been very clear that on the abortion policy specifically, that we have a big country and it's diverse. And California has a different viewpoint on this than Georgia. Georgia has a different viewpoint from Arizona. And the proper way to handle this, as messy as democracy sometimes is, is to let voters make these decisions, let the individual states make their abortion policy. And I think that's what makes the most sense in a very big, a very diverse, and let's be honest, sometimes a very, very messy and divided country.
NO: Governor, would you like to respond and also answer the question about restrictions?
TW: Yeah. Well, the question got asked, and Donald Trump made the accusation that wasn't true about Minnesota. Well, let me tell you about this idea that there's diverse states. There's a young woman named Amber Thurmond. She happened to be in Georgia, a restrictive state. Because of that, she had to travel a long distance to North Carolina to try and get her care. Amber Thurman died in that journey back and forth. The fact of the matter is, how can we as a nation say that your life and your rights as basic as the right to control your own body is determined on geography? There's a very real chance, had Amber Thurman lived in Minnesota, she would be alive today. That's why the restoration of Roe v. Wade. When you listen to Vice President Harris talk about this subject, and you hear me talk about it, you hear us talking exactly the same. Donald Trump is trying to figure out how to get the political right of this. I agree with a lot of what Senator Vance said about what's happening. His running mate, though, does not. And that's the problem.
NO: Governor, your time is up. Senator, let me ask you about that. He mentioned it was, I think, referring to a national ban. In the past, you have supported a Federal ban on abortion after 15 weeks. In fact, you said if someone can't support legislation like that, quote, you are making the United States the most barbaric pro-abortion regime anywhere in the entire world. My question is, why have you changed your position?
JDV: Well, Norah, first of all, I never supported a national ban. I did during, when I was running for Senate in 2022, talk about setting some minimum national standard. For example, we have a partial birth abortion ban in this, in place in this country at the federal level. I don't think anybody's trying to get rid of that, or at least I hope not, though I know that Democrats have taken a very radical pro-abortion stance. But, Norah, you know, one of the things that changed is in the state of Ohio, we had a referendum in 2023, and the people of Ohio voted overwhelmingly, by the way, against my position. And I think that what I learned from that, Norah, is that we've got to do a better job at winning back people's trust. So many young women would love to have families. So many young women also see an unplanned pregnancy as something that's going to destroy their livelihood, destroy their education, destroy their relationships. And we have got to earn people's trust back. And that's why Donald Trump and I are committed to pursuing pro-family policies. Making childcare more accessible, making fertility treatments more accessible, because we've got to do a better job at that. And that's what real leadership is.
NO: Governor, your response?
TW: I'm going to respond on the pro-abortion piece of that. No, we're not. We're pro-women. We're pro-freedom to make your own choice. We know what the implications are to not be that women having miscarriages, women not getting the care, physicians feeling like they may be prosecuted for providing that care. And as far as making sure that we're educating our children and giving them options. Minnesota's a state with one of the lowest teen pregnancy rates. We understand that, too. We know that the options need to be available, and we make that true. We also make it, we're a top three state for the best place to raise children. But these two things to try and say that we're pro-children but we don't like this or, or you guys are pro-abortion, that's not the case at all. We are pro-freedoms for women to make their choices. And we're going, and Kamala Harris is making the case to make options for children more affordable. A $6,000 child tax credit. But we're not going to base out on the backs of making someone like Amber Thurmond drive 600 miles to try and get health care.
NO: Senator.
JDV: May I respond to that? First of all, Governor, I agree with you. Amber Thurmond should still be alive. And there are a lot of people who should still be alive, and I certainly wish that she was. And maybe, you're free to disagree with me on this and explain this to me, but as I read the Minnesota law that you signed into law, the statute that you signed into law, it says that a doctor who presides over an abortion, where the baby survives, the doctor is under no obligation to provide lifesaving care to a baby who survives a botched late term abortion. That is, I think, whether it's not pro-choice or pro-abortion, that is fundamentally barbaric. And that's why I use that word, Norah, is because some of what we've seen, do you want to force catholic hospitals to perform abortions against their will? Because Kamala Harris has supported suing catholic nuns to violate their freedom of conscience? We can be a big and diverse country where we respect people's freedom of conscience. And make the country more pro-baby and pro-family. But please.
NO: Yes, Governor, please respond.
TW: Look, this is one where there's always something there. This is a very simple proposition. These are women's decisions to make about their healthcare decisions and the physicians who know best when they need to do this, trying to distort the way a law is written, to try and make a point. That's not it at all.
JDV: What was I wrong about? Governor, please tell me. What was I wrong about?
TW: That is not the way the law is written. Look, I've given.
JDV: But how.
TW: I've given this advice on a lot of things that getting involved, getting, that's been misread. And it was fact checked at the last debate. But the point on this is, is there's a continuation of these guys to try and tell women or to get involved. I use this line on this. Just mind your own business on this. Things worked best when Roe v. Wade was in place. When we do a restoration of Roe, that works best. That doesn't preclude us from increasing funding for children. It doesn't increase us from making sure that once that child's born, like in Minnesota, they get meals, they get early childhood education, they get healthcare. So the hiding behind we're going to do all these other things when you're not proposing them in your budget? Kamala Harris is proposing them. She's proposing all those things to make life easier for families.
Sen. JD Vance said at Tuesday’s debate that he never supported a national abortion ban. “I never supported a national ban. I did, during when I was running for Senate in 2022, talk about setting some minimum national standard. For example, we have a partial-birth abortion ban … in place in this country at the federal level. I don’t think anybody is trying to get rid of that, or at least, I hope not, though I know the Democrats have taken a very radical pro-abortion stance,” Vance said.
Facts First: This is false. Vance previously said he “certainly would like abortion to be illegal nationally” in 2022 while running for his Senate seat in Ohio. He did say that he supported a “minimum national standard” to ban abortion in 2023. During the current campaign, however, Vance has deferred to former President Donald Trump’s stated view that each state should set its own abortion policy.
In 2022, while running for his Senate seat in Ohio, Vance said, “I certainly would like abortion to be illegal nationally” and that he was “sympathetic” to the view that a national ban was necessary to stop women from traveling across states to obtain an abortion. He also said on his website during that Senate campaign that he was “100 percent pro-life” and that he favored “eliminating abortion”; these words remained on his website until Trump selected him as his running mate in July. And Vance said in an interview during the 2022 campaign that he wanted abortion to be “primarily a state issue,” but also said, “I think it’s fine to sort of set some minimum national standard.”
In November 2023, Vance told CNN’s Manu Raju and Ted Barrett in the Capitol: “It seems to suggest there needs to be some more interest in this building among Republicans in setting some sort of minimum national standard, whether that it’s 15 weeks or 20 weeks or the different ranges that are thrown out there.” He said, “We keep giving in to the idea that the federal Congress has no role in this matter. Because if it doesn’t … then the pro-life movement is basically not gonna exist, I think, for the next couple of years.”
Vance, emphasizing his support for certain exceptions to abortion bans, said on CNN in December 2023, “We have to accept that people do not want blanket abortion bans. They just don’t. And I say that as a person who wants to protect as many unborn babies as possible. We have to provide exceptions for life of the mother, for rape, and so forth.”
During his vice presidential campaign this year, Vance has aligned himself with Trump’s professed desire for a state-by-state approach to abortion policy rather than federal legislation. Vance said on Fox News in July, “Alabama’s going to make a different decision from California. That is a reasonable thing. And that’s how I think we build some bridges and have some respect for one another.”
From CNN’s Daniel Dale, Andrew Kaczynski and Em Steck
I did not care for the format. I did not like that JD lied repeatedly. I did not like his patronizing attitude or his remarks -- judgmental about the women who died that Tim raised. I do not like that the media seems to have completely missed that reality.
-
-
Rita PayƩs: Tiny Desk Concert3 hours ago
-
John Amos11 hours ago
-
-
-
Disgusting Marjorie Taylor Greene11 hours ago
-
-
Pesto White Bean Soup in the Kitchen11 hours ago
-
Trump cannot stop lying11 hours ago
-
Jimmy Carter11 hours ago
-
-
