Walz said he isn't a strong debater. Vance lies so easily. CBS are cowards. I'm so angry that they've been essentially bullied into not making basic fact-checks. It's not like we're talking about them fact-checking nuances of economic policy. Just simple things like they're not eating cats and dogs.
The biggest contrast between the two is that Walz tends to be natural and likable while Vance tends to be awkward and unlikable.
If Vance can tamper down his detestable quotient, then the debate might help him. If he can't and Walz can convince people that this might be your president if something were to happen to Donald, then maybe he can do a little to boost the ticket.
Overall, it's probably going to be a wash.
