Rachel Mak, Contributing Photographer

In the hallowed halls of Yale Law School, where Senator JD Vance LAW ’13 himself used to wander, about 50 Yale Law Students gathered with Yale Law Dems in Baker Hall to watch Vance debate Governor Tim Walz. 

At this Law School event and at watch parties across campus, Yalies gathered to observe as Vance and Walz face off in the first, and only, 2024 vice presidential debate. 

Native to Middletown, Ohio, Vance graduated from Yale Law School in 2013. He was offered nearly a full-ride scholarship for his first year. 

“Despite him potentially having learned how to orate at YLS, he and I have much different value systems and that was made even more clear after watching the debate,” Mariko Lewis LAW ’26, vice president of policy for Yale Law Dems, wrote to the News.  

As Americans nationwide turned on their televisions at home to watch last night’s vice presidential debate, Yalies across campus followed the debate at a myriad of debate watch parties, including events hosted by Yalies4Harris and Yale Dems, the Yale College Republicans and YaleVotes: A Student Initiative. In all, over 700 Yale students watched the debate together at these events. 

The debate on Oct. 1, which was hosted by CBS News, was the first and only between Vance and Walz. Vance was announced as former President Donald Trump’s running mate in mid July during the Republican National Convention, and Walz became the Democratic nominee for vice president in early August. 

The debate offered both candidates an opportunity to showcase their ticket’s platform, as well as their personal characteristics. 

“Vance is sort of trying to push back against the certification that’s built over the past few months, that he’s a ‘weird’ guy, and Walz is holding on to this vibe that he’s built for himself, that he’s like ‘America’s dad,’” Bipul Soti ’27, who attended the YaleVotes watch party in SSS 114, said.

Following the debate, Lewis noted that Walz came across as “passionate” and “sincere,” while Lewis perceived Vance as “polished” and “trained.” 

Lewis added that Vance’s ability to dodge questions and rely on “questionable” facts served to undermine this shiny demeanor.

A few students thought Vance came across as a more polished and experienced speaker. 

Kevin Wang LAW ’27 said that he believes Vance was able to avoid being challenged on some of his points because his speaking style was “civil” and “polite.” 

“I think performance wise, people are going to be saying that Vance did a better job. JD Vance comes across as a really good public speaker, he gives off Model UN, mock trial type vibes,” said Christina Oh GRD ’26. “But Walz stuck to his talking points, which I thought was good, and I really liked how he used Vance’s own words against him.” 

In reference to Vance’s demeanor as a speaker, Colin Dunkley LAW ’26, vice president of programming for Yale Law Dems, pointed to recent media attention. Dunkley said that Vance has had many chances to perfect answers to questions such as those focused on his previous comments comparing Trump to Hitler. 

Dunkley further focused on Vance’s strategy of grounding his answers in economic issues and the needs of working-class America. Dunkley said that if the Republican ticket can successfully portray themselves as the party of working class Americans, it could be “super worrisome” for Democrats. 

“I think it’s been a bit of a tough night for Walz, although he’s gotten better over time,” said Dunkley.  

One student said that he thought the moderators could have done more to fact check the candidates. 

“Something that stood out to me was the moderators not confirming whether or not controversial statements that the candidates said or denied are true, which is their job,” said Nick Wojnar ’27. 

Wojnar added that he thought the moderators should have confirmed or denied Vance’s assertion that Minnesota law under Walz had no restrictions on abortion in the ninth-month.

Gevin Reynolds LAW ‘26, president of Yale Law Dems, pointed to the concluding portion of the debate, which focused on whether the candidates would agree to peacefully hand over power regardless of the results of the election. 

“J. D. Vance couldn’t admit that Donald Trump lost the 2020 election … All night long, his smooth talking helped mask the lies he was telling. He spat in the face of honesty on all issues — respect for the rule of law, democracy, reproductive freedom, immigration, and more” Reynolds wrote to the News. 

Reynolds described Vance as “someone who just really lacks, in my opinion, integrity. I think we see that in how he has shifted not just his views, but his values.” 

Reynolds highlighted Vance’s past critiques of Trump as well as Vance’s support of classmates from diverse backgrounds while at YLS as two values that have seemingly been “abandoned” as Vance has embarked on a “quest for power.” 

Reynolds noted that Vance’s background at YLS serves to remind current students and himself to hold on to their values and model them for the future. 

“We should demand more from a YLS grad, and the American people should demand more of their VP,” wrote Reynolds. 

After the debate ended, Walz and Vance shook hands and then, with their respective spouses, seemed to have a civil conversation. 

Manu Anpalagan ’26, president of Yale College Republicans, wrote to the News that the civility between the two candidates made him “excited for the future of [the Republican] party.” 

“Today was a beautiful day for America. Putting politics aside, we saw something we hadn’t seen for over a decade on the national stage. And that’s a real discussion of policy without it getting bitter or personal,” Anpalagan wrote.

Yale College Democrats President Janalie Cobb ’25 wrote that the Yalies4Harris watch party, which she attended, was full of “energy” and “enthusiasm.” 

Cobb added that Dems is motivated to continue to work with students across campus to campaign for Harris and Walz. 

Election day is on Tuesday, Nov. 5.

Correction, Oct. 2: The article was updated to reflect that Yalies4Harris and Yale Dems co-organized their debate watch party.