No sooner had J.D. Vance and Tim Walz shaken hands after concluding the lone vice presidential debate of the year Tuesday night than the verdict from Newsmax's panel of political scientists came in and was unanimous: the night belonged to Ohio's Republican Sen. Vance.
Given that vice presidential debates rarely have a major impact on the presidential contest, it is unclear whether Vance's performance will boost the polling performance of the Republican ticket led by running mate Donald Trump.
But clearly the debate enhanced Vance's standing as a political figure.
"Vance exceeded expectations," Chapman University (California) Prof. Luke Nichter, author of the critically-acclaimed "1968: The Year That Broke Politics," told Newsmax, "He was quick on his feet and knew the points he wanted to make."
But Nichter also concluded that Walz did not have a bad debate night. The Minnesota governor, he said, "came across as genuine — a less fiery version of his campaign-trail self — but also less eloquent [than Vance], especially on national and international issues."
Nichter made the observation that, "since most people are voting based on the name at the top of the ticket, vice-presidential candidates are typically not substantive. They can subtract, but rarely do they add. However, both added last night — although Vance added more."
Gerard Gibert, Mississippi's most popular radio talk show host, said he felt Vance "dominated this debate from the outset. In post-debate interviews, the Republican vice presidential candidate stated that he was nervous, but it wasn't evident on television."
Conversely, Gibert added, "Walz appeared rattled and frazzled. His facial expressions and body movements while Vance was speaking were consistent with a person who lacks self-confidence. I believe that's because Walz was desperately attempting to present himself as a normal person rather than one who supports abortion through the point of birth and stocking tampons in boys' bathrooms. The vast majority of Americans believe those ideas are crazy."
Gibert said he felt "Vance's best moment of the night came in his closing remarks. He attributed the concerns that matter most to voters to [Kamala] Harris as vice president over the past 3 1/2 years, and deftly made the case for change."
"Neither had a bad night," said historian Irwin Gellman, now at work on the fourth volume of the life of Richard Nixon, "But Walz was not as good as Vance. He appeared on too many occasions to frown. I bet a dollar to the proverbial donut that Vance's approval rating gains from this."
But Gellman also noted that "as bad as Walz might have been or as good as Vance might have been, it didn't matter much in terms of the eventual voting."
Dan Schnur, professor at the University of California, Berkeley's, Institute of Governmental Studies, and top aide to former California GOP Gov. Pete Wilson, concluded that "Vance dominated the debate for almost the entire evening, but he couldn't answer the question about the 2020 election. He defended the MAGA agenda eloquently, but when you're Donald Trump's running mate, there is only so far you can go."
John Gizzi is chief political columnist and White House correspondent for Newsmax. For more of his reports, Go Here Now.