From the Kitchen Table: The Duffys - Declaring A Post-Debate "Victory For Vance"

Episode Date: October 3, 2024

On this special episode, Sean and Rachel leave their kitchen table to join 'Fox & Friends Weekend' co-host and the host of 'The Will Cain Show,' Will Cain and The Washington Times Opinion Editor Charlie Hurt to break down what happened at last night's vice presidential debate, why they unanimously agree it was a victory for Ohio Senator JD Vance, and how much of an impact the debate could have with only weeks until Election Day. Follow Sean & Rachel on X: @SeanDuffyWI & @RCamposDuffy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Breaking news happens anywhere, anytime. Police have warned the protesters repeatedly, get back. CBC News brings the story to you as it happens. Hundreds of wildfires are burning. Be the first to know what's going on and what that means for you and for Canadians. This situation has changed very quickly. Helping make sense of the world when it matters most. Stay in the know. CBC News.

Hey everybody, welcome to From the Kitchen Table. I'm Sean Duffy and today we have a special episode of The Kitchen Table because Rachel and I sat down on the Will Cain show along with Charlie Hurt and unpacked what happened last night at the vice presidential debate. But most importantly, we talk about do vice presidential debates, do they move the numbers? Can they impact the presidential election? Can it help Kamala Harris or Donald Trump with what happened last night? It's a great conversation. So sit back, enjoy this unpacking of what happened in the debate. Thanks so much for listening. Hey, Sean, you and I were together the day after the debate between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris. And I remember we had a similar reaction and the reaction. And I joke with your wife about this all the time.

You know, you got to be able to see the world through different eyes than just your own eyes. You know, my eyes tell me last night that J.D. Vance was absolutely dominant. But I do try to come into this this morning. Oh, yeah. But how did America how did or non-committed voters feel about it? What do you think today? So, Will, when we did the last post-debate coverage, this was after the Donald Trump debate. And both of us agreed Donald Trump wasn't very good, right? He took the bait. And we were honest about that. Like, I wanted Trump to do well, but he didn't. And I look at last night's debate, and hands down, J.D. Vance totally crushed, slapped, spanked Tim Walz. I mean, Tim Walz came out like a deer in headlights, and he was nervous.

And J.D. was calm, knew the facts, delivered the facts. I actually wish he would have called out Kamala Harris and Tim Walz more on their lies that the media wasn't willing to do over the course of this campaign. But I think he was trying to still be a nice guy and be a likable vice presidential candidate. If that was a strategy, I think he accomplished it. But all in all, I thought it was, to your point, a victory for Vance. And just listening to the polls that you're laying out, Will, and I don't know which debate they watched because I don't think there's any question about who won.

Yeah, you know, Rachel, to the extent that these polls, I give validity. And by the way, Sean and I both said that, and I think we were both wrong for what it's worth, by the way. I think the polling after that debate showed that Donald Trump did much better than Sean and I thought. And that's fine. I want to own that potentiality because I'm trying to project what other people see, not just what I see. Right. And so, yeah, right. So here I'm going

to put a specific question to you, Rachel. There's a moment last night which many people who agree with the three of us loved. It's when J.D. Vance wouldn't be fact checked. Right. By Margaret Brennan. In fact, I want you and everyone watching and listening to watch this moment. I'm going to ask you how you think this played. Here's that moment. The rules were that you guys were going to fact check. And since you're fact checking me, I think it's important to say what's actually going on. checking me, I think it's important to say what's actually going on. So there's an application called the CBP One app, where you can go on as an illegal migrant, apply for asylum or apply for parole and be granted legal status at the wave of a Kamala Harris open border wand. That is not a person coming in, applying for a green card and waiting for 10 years. That is the facilitation

of illegal immigration, Margaret, by our own leadership. Thank you, Senator, for describing the legal process. We have so much to get to, Senator. Those laws have been on the books since 1990. Thank you, gentlemen. The CBP 1F has not been on the books since 1990. It's something that Kamala Harris created, Margaret. Gentlemen, the audience can't hear you because your mics are cut. its creative department. Gentlemen, the audience can't hear you because your mics are cut. All right. By the way, we're joined now by Fox News contributor Charlie Hurt. Welcome, Charlie. Thank you. We've got the technical difficulties figured out. That's my specialty. I'm glad. Everybody's their own tech manager today. Rachel, here's what I was going to ask you. Everyone who agrees with us,

probably all four of us here love that moment. Nicole Wallace on MSNBC said it was mansplaining that everyone, and I saw a tweet that every woman felt that in their bones as he talked over Margaret Brennan. Is there anything at all to that? No, totally disagree. By the way, you guys talked about

why you were both wrong on the donald trump analysis after the last debate and i think it relates to this um and why i think both of you i know you both second i don't admit that we were wrong well we were right actually but we'll become that later we were okay i i think both of you i think both of you liked jd waltz of you, I think both of you liked J.D. Waltz, I mean, J.D. Vance, going after, in this last debate, more than I did. And I do. And I'll explain. So this moment was his strongest moment. And this moment was the most Trump-like moment he had. So that might help set the stage a little bit for what I think happened. I think the reason why Donald Trump did so well, despite like what sort of the pundit class thought, is because what Donald Trump did

by being bombastic and by not accepting the premise set by these really biased moderators during his debate was he exposed them. So, you know, he talked about the Haitians and he said the dogs and the cats and it just it destabilizes everybody. And so these guys just started taking off their masks all over the place. And at the end of the debate, when everyone sort of digested it all, I think what everyone came up with was, God, these moderators were horrible. And they were. They always are. And Donald Trump has a way of making them expose themselves in that way.

Like the congeniality of J.D. Vance, while of course he came off as super intelligent and calm and capable in all those ways, to me personally, it doesn't meet the moment. I hated seeing these guys get along. And maybe there's certain people that like it. And the way he was so deferential and and that it doesn't meet the moment. This is like game time, like free speeches on the line, war and peace is on the line. Everything's on the line. And there and there were so many moments that just ticked me off. Like, for example, you know, he did a great job, by the way, of bringing up the CBP pass or one pass, which is basically like a fast pass in Disney World.

While all these other people have to wait in line, the people that we actually really should have as new citizens, the ones who do it right and sit in their country and care about our laws and apply lawfully and wait five, ten years to get in line, these people are all getting a fast pass, like he said, thanks to the Kamala Harris wand. But he didn't bring up a lot. I mean, Tim Walz should have had to explain what happened to the 300,000 children that were lost at the border. He should have had to explain, you know, and by the way, fact check. He said there was no no children being used as mules. I would have come back if I was J.D. Vance and said, clearly, you've never spoken to a Border Patrol agent. That is a flat out lie. That's what should have

been fact checked. So I guess I feel like J.D. Vance appeals to people who really wish and probably for really good reasons, wish we could go back to a different era when a pre-Trump era, when being nice and cordial worked. I don't think it works anymore. Sorry. I go off. I'm going to I'm going to rebut it. No, I love it. I love it. And I'm going to rebut and put it to Charlie, though. So I think that, first of all, it's a tag team affair. And Donald Trump checks that box of creating chaos. And you're absolutely right about the chaos that he creates and the way it makes people rip off the masks. He doesn't need a double down on that with J.D. Vance.

He doesn't need a tag team partner that fights the same way he does. He needs a partner that fights with a different style. And I will admit, I think J.D., now I'll go to you, I think J.D. threads

a really fine, a nice needle. And he does it on Sunday shows. He punches the moderators back in the nose, but does it with a smile and does it with smooth, like, yeah, I guess it's intellect.

And I do worry to this, Rachel, that Donald Trump's style has a ceiling and the goal is to win. And you have to figure out a way to raise that ceiling. If Donald Trump can get you 48 percent, you need somebody who's going to get you to 52 percent. And that's what I'm looking at with J.D. Vance, Charlie. That's why I think he was so dominant. It's his it's a style, I think, that ultimately has pretty broad appeal. Yeah, and I agree. And I and I do like having politics where you have politicians who are, you know, more poised, more politic, more polished. I like that, actually. But I completely agree with you, Rachel, that we would not be here. We would not have been, we would not be where we were last night with J.D. Vance against walls without Donald Trump and without Donald Trump being the impolitic

vulgarian that he is, without being the guy, the barbarian at the gate in 2016. We would not be here. Not only because, not just because Donald Trump picked J.D. Vance, which is obviously a very, very important part of this, and it demonstrates his judgment and also not only his judgment, but also his judgment in terms of how much he's learned since 2016. He's a different candidate now. He knows more and he's willing to do something different.

But also because, as you point out, he has smashed the system. He smashed the media. He smashed everything to the point where, you know, just if you just looked at J.D.'s record and his position on the issues, you would not have a Republican standing on the stage talking about the dangers of China, talking about the dangers of illegal immigration, talking about like his very nuanced, complicated, you know, acknowledging the complexities of abortion in America today. acknowledging the complexities of abortion in America today, you wouldn't have had any of those things, except Donald Trump has for eight years demolished the system. But I also agree with you,

that I like where we are with this guy, because I do think that our politics is better if you have somebody who is able to be genial and able to sort of talk like that and win people over. You know, if we could just talk about the issues, Donald Trump's side would be winning 60, 70, 80 percent of the of the American people. The problem is that you don't get there because the political set on both sides for so long has been so poisoned and so captured in ways that the only people who don't have a voice in Washington have been the American people for literally decades. with somebody like J.D. Vance after four more years of Donald Trump, we could be looking at a very sane, sensible kind of governance that I could not be more optimistic than I am today after watching what we saw last night. As an individual politician in my book, J.D. Vance went way up for me last night. I mean i i don't know i i uh i was probably skeptical of his long-term political future to your point before this debate not because of his ideology or anything um but after last night i'm like i think this guy inherits the mantle in a way i'm not saying i'm not anointing him there's going to be a big competition right but he can he can

inherit the mantle in a way that can really, really appeal to. The thing is, Rachel, infinitely more than Ron DeSantis at the art of politics. Oh, and infinitely, infinitely. I agree. And also, J.D. Vance is right. Like on Ukraine, J.D. J.D. J.D. Vance is right on Ukraine. J.D. Vance has J.D. Vance is right on Ukraine. J.D. Vance has really great instincts. I'm just saying, wouldn't it be nice for Donald Trump for once to have an attack dog so he can show his softer side? You know, one of the things people really liked. He is the attack dog. He actually does have a softer side. When we saw the great when we saw his daughter, one of the most powerful moments of the convention, and Will and I have talked about this quite a bit on our show, was when the granddaughter, Kaya, came out.

And he talked about that. Donald Trump, when he came on, when I asked him directly, will you find, will you commit to finding the over 300,000 children that this administration has lost? And he said to my face, that's easy. Of course I will. I will do that. You know, he is somebody who genuinely cares, but he's had to fight so hard, tooth and nail, you know, scratching, clawing, because all these attacks on him, it would be nice to have him. And I'm not saying Judy's not a good candidate. I think he's doing, he's delivering well. I think a Vivek Ram Swamy would be, would have been also really good. So hold up.

I mean, make, I'm going to say better. Can I weigh in here, Will? Because. Of course. What happened last night was J.D. Vance was not trying to win Charlie's vote or Rachel's vote or my vote. They've got our vote. Right. There was a different set of voters

that he was messaging to last night. That's the undecided middle or persuadable voter that might think Donald Trump's a little too harsh for them, maybe a little too bombastic for them. But it's like they could see J.D. Vance to go, you know, this guy is cool, calm, and collective. And I kind of like that as a balance to Trump. It was that package that J.D. was rounding out for the ticket

that could bring other people in to vote for them. Again, I would have loved for J.D. Vance to call Tim Walz a liar, right? Lay out, you know, whether it was his rank, military service. And now you lied about being in Tiananmen Square. What happened? You lied about Tim. You lie about everything. I mean, like that could have been really great. He has your vote. We would have been foaming about that and loving it.

But I don't think that would have worked to get voters. Right. I love how most of us are like smash mouth politics is what we have to have to get there. And Rachel's like, no, smash mouth politics is what we're here for. Right. They're so mean because they're so vicious on the other side. Yes, I agree. She wants blood.

I love it. Yeah. Rachel, Rachel's got the base. It's all right. Sean, you brought this up. Okay, I want to see if you guys disagree with me. Hold on real quick. I want to see if you guys disagree with me, what I said earlier.

I don't think Tim Walz was horrible. I think that Tim Walz would give people excuses that want to vote that way. But hold on, before you get to address that, Sean, because you brought this up. This was Tim Walz's worst moment of the debate. Him talking about Tiananmen Square in China. My commitment, whether it be through teaching, which I was good at, or whether it was being a good soldier or was being a good member of Congress. Those are the things that I think are the values that people care about. Governor, just to follow up on that, the question was, can you explain the discrepancy?

All I said on this was, is I got there that summer and misspoke on this. So I will just, that's what I've said. So I was in Hong Kong and China during the democracy protest went in. And from that, I learned a lot of what needed to be in governance. He said, I'm a knucklehead. That was his excuse. I'm a knucklehead. Go ahead now, Sean. So, yeah, so that was the worst moment for him of the night. And I would agree with you, Will, that he did. He did OK. Right. But the question is, with how nervous he was and how the policies they're talking about, in air quotes, because there's not really much policy there, how do you do that?

How can you be successful in a debate when you can't really defend the things that you truly think you want to do with the country? Let me give you an example of how the moderators set it up and curated a debate and questions to make it work for Tim Walz, to make you say, and I would agree with you, that Tim Walz did okay. So here's the question. The biggest issue for the American voter is what? The economy and inflation. That's the number one issue.

And so what did the debate moderators ask for the inflation question? They come in with inflation's a big issue, but the biggest part of inflation is the cost of housing. What are you going to do, Tim Walz, to affect the rate of increase of our inflation around housing? Housing, right? So what the moderator did was specifically target to Tim Walz a question on inflation that was on housing, which is where they have one simple policy that, by the way, will not work. But Tim Walz could answer that question on inflation.

well, how are you going to fix food prices and gas prices and insurance costs and everything else that we have been crushed with on the cost increase? The moderators gave him a tee up to answer it in a way that Kamala has. Can I give you a worse one? Yeah, go ahead. Here's the worst example in my mind. And then I want to hear why Rachel thought that Waltz did all right. I was I mean, this one upset me and I rarely get upset at this stuff. I leave that to Rachel on like getting my blood up um all right right now there's like 150 people dead in north

carolina right and the whole place is underwater in south carolina and georgia and it's a complete absence of leadership and it needs action today i need. Look, sometimes I'm real sympathetic. It's like, I don't want us to be a four sycophantic people to Donald Trump, but I do know they showed up. I do know that he's raised over three and a half million dollars on a GoFundMe. And I do know, cause I called GoFundMe this morning, that money is going directly to three charities. I don't know what they are yet. I'm going to assume one of them is Samaritan's Purse, but it's going to help people. Okay. And how did the moderators ask about this issue that is on, this is the front issue, right? There's a lot of big issues, but this is the one staring you in the face right now. How'd they ask it? What would you do about climate

change? That was the, that was the question. It was all about climate change. And within one, within one question, it was about, is climate change a hoax? They took this from a very real world need and issue and took it to a Harvard classroom in 30 seconds and also played it into Tim Walz's hands. It made me so mad, Rachel. Wait right there. We'll have more of this conversation next. From the Fox News Podcast Network.

Stay on top of the latest news and information from Fox News. Listen and download the Fox News hourly update on your time. The trending stories you need anytime you want it. Listen and download now by going to Fox News Podcasts dot com. I'll tell you what made me mad that it wasn't the first question that they started with the Middle East. As we're in the middle of this, you know, terrible, catastrophic situation where, you know, hundreds of Americans have died. Six states are affected. We've just sent troops off,

more troops off to the Middle East than probably we've sent to help out in this situation. I was mad as hell that that was the first question. That wasn't that that was that the Middle East was the first question and not what was happening to Americans here. And I thought it was emblematic of everything that's wrong with Washington, D.C. and with the media. And yes, here's another. This is a perfect example. Climate change. They asked it in that context. But also they kept saying how it was a fact. Donald Trump would. And and what what J.D. Vance said was, well, assuming your premise, then he went on to answer in a very sort of, you know, free Donald Trump Republican way of answering a question. side, the Democrat donors are all making money off of this, what he calls the green use scam, because it is, and how it's hurting our prices of our gasoline and ultimately our food and the inflation.

That's what I'm talking about. That's why I got frustrated. Same thing with abortion. The question was asked as reproductive rights. What? It's about abortion. It's about abortion. It's about abortion. Tim Walz came ready with stories about women who have been affected by this. Why didn't J.D. have stories?

I know. We've had them on the show. We've had several women, three of them, who survived abortions. One of them doesn't have an arm. You know, both of them, all three of them talk about, you know, what they went through, what happened to them. We've also had on our show, somebody who was conceived after a rape. His life is valuable. You know, why don't we have these stories? I felt like on abortion, as a pro-lifer, I felt abandoned. And by the way, I felt like on abortion as a pro-lifer, I felt abandoned. And by the way, with IVF too, one last thing, IVF, they just totally sold that out.

I'm like, wait a minute, IVF, you could have turned this into make America healthy again. Why don't we talk about why infertility is so huge now that it's growing? That was a missed opportunity. I felt as a pro-lifer, a little abandoned. I'm going to go with Sean. I think Sean has the answer to this. And that is, I actually liked his answer on the climate change thing. Like, I can have the debate on whether or not it's a hoax.

I like how he pivoted it to American energy. If you believe in this, then you would want to be on-shoring American energy. I thought that was a really smart pivot to not get stuck in the, is it a hoax debate. You don't want to be stuck there. to not get stuck in the is it a hoax debate you don't want to be stuck there um and i also thought on the abortion his point was to try to find new voters not not high five the ones that are already with you charlie what do you think especially specifically on the idea that tim waltz did what sean and i said charlie that tim waltz actually did okay um yeah i think he probably did okay in terms of people who were already going to vote for him.

And but, you know, for I thought his biggest problem. And while obviously the Tiananmen Square thing was just devastating, the entire country breathed a sigh of relief when he finally got out of that jam. And it was just it was it was painful, even as somebody who is not rooting for him. But I think that he didn't answer any questions. And for people who were for the first time dialing in to meet J.D. Vance and Tim Walls, they saw J.D. Vance, who was prepared, who answered questions and did it, albeit in a sort of politic way, and tried to be as appealing as possible to win over people that don't necessarily agree with them. And I get what you're saying, Rachel, about all that.

We have for so long been captured by those types of politicians who have sold us out time and again. But it can be effective if the person has real principles that they don't bend on. But rather, the difference between – it's a funny little thing in politics to have your principles that you don't bend on, but at the same time, you still have to negotiate and win over people. It's a funny little dance. And for so long, we've had politicians who only did the funny dance and, you know, compromise, but never stuck up for their principles. But you can't really only have one and not the other. As Trump has said about abortion, you know, you still have to win elections. And, you know, the fight that we have on abortion is more with, you know, winning over our fellow Americans, you know, and you can look at the polling and see that and make the issue.

I have not liked the way Donald Trump and J.D. Vance, but mostly Donald Trump, frankly, has handled abortion in this election. You know, some people say, well, you know, you're a one issue voter. Yeah, I'm a one issue voter. I would also be a one issue voter in the 1800s when the debate about slavery was was was was being fought over in our country. was being fought over in our country. So I don't have any shame about that. I think life and how we treat the most vulnerable humans in our American family is a non-negotiable. And I hated seeing during this election the kind of pandering.

And I think the pro-life movement has made a lot of advances. And I thought, you know, in terms of, you know, politically, and I just felt like I feel abandoned as a pro-lifer. But Rachel, can you can you accept the fact the idea that it is a multi-step process? And if we want to execute the long term, multi term process, I would rather have J.D. Vance and Donald Trump in charge of the train than people who believe in abortion. And, you know, Governor Northam and Nancy Pelosi in charge of the train. I I'm with you. I'm with you. I'm I'm like a jihadist on abortion. But honestly, though, I don't. But I would. Wouldn't you rather, Charlie, than just go, you know what? It's for the states. I'm not having this argument anymore. I'm OK with that. Then, you know, Charlie, that clip, I'm a jihadist, is going to be about as bad as this one from Tim Waltz on who he's friends with.

School shooters. Watch. You previously opposed an assault weapons ban, but it's only later in your political career. Did you change your position? Why? Yeah, I sat in that office with those Sandy Hook parents. I've become friends with school shooters. I don't want to hammer him too hard because it was clearly a mistake. I don't know what he was trying to say. I think probably the victims of school shooters.

I don't think that was a mistake. You know what? You think he's friends with school shooters? Can I just say that was one of the moments that I liked the best out of Tim Waltz. Can I explain? Because I think. Of course. I think so many of those young, let me explain. I think so many of those young boys who end up, you know, in these situations

are truly hurting, traumatized young men. They probably know they probably aren't psychotropic drugs. They usually have no father. They are in neglectful homes. There's a lot of things. Our country keeps focusing on guns. We're never talking about the drugs, and we're never talking about the home lives of these young boys who have been sort of abandoned in so many ways by their families and by our society. I have always felt, of course, the most empathy for the victims of these school shootings, but I have always reserved sympathy for these young men who I feel are lost boys. And that was actually a moment where I thought, you know, maybe a teacher, somebody at school could be somebody who reaches out to these kids and helps them.

So I didn't hate that moment. I felt that actually brought out the I'm a teacher, I'm looking out for kids moment. I don't think that's what he was talking about. I think you're right, Will. I think it was a mistake. He said something stupid. He didn't know what he was talking about. What he was trying to say is, and it fell in with the list

of other things, I'm a gun owner. I'm an NRA member. And he thinks that gun owners and NRA members are somehow the equivalent in line with school shooters. And so he said school shooters because he's an idiot. And he has no idea what he was just sort of babbling at that point. I guess I didn't take it as a mistake. I thought maybe he was a counselor to somebody at his school. That's how I took it. I wish you would have gone back to again, we don't want guns in the hands of sick people. OK, let's all agree to that. But we also don't want to take guns away from law-abiding citizens, right? There's a distinct difference. And just because we have people who do bad things with guns doesn't mean that we take guns away from people who actually follow the law. Again, there's a whole bunch of products out there that people do bad things with, and we don't ban the whole product.

We actually go, okay, how do we actually prevent these products? We don't ban knives. People stab folks all the time. It happens all the time. We don't ban knives people stab folks all the time happens all the time we don't ban knives we go well listen we got to make sure what's going on with you rachel you you took a knife to someone we have that conversation about how do we identify a rachel who stabbed her friend you know earlier in the process before she gets violent that's i think there's been this mission there's validity for these democrats there's validity in all of your points you know rachel um our relationship you're in mind sorry that your

husband's here while i talk about our relationship but our relationship um is is a it's a valuable relationship to me because we are so different uh in so many ways but that doesn't mean we disagree that's my point it's like how it's actually i I'll tell you about it later, Rachel, but I had a lunch with somebody you introduced me to and we were talking about how different you and I are, but that we end up, but we end up in the same place. I like what you had to say. Like, I really do. I think I obviously have much more sympathy for these boys on their way, like as they're

losing themselves than after they have lost themselves and have done this horrific thing. I just can't, I can't muster a lot for them after that. But, but it doesn't mean that you're not wrong, that there are lost boys and that all the things you listed off, I think are the things that we should be talking about more than the gun. But Charlie's right. I don't think that's where Tim Waltz was coming from. I think he just does not. It didn't occur to me that it was a mistake. I mean, I think that you seeing the world. This is what I joke you about. It's what I always joke about.

I think that's you seeing the world through the way you hope it is, you know, you're the way you want to be. Tim Walz is not where you are on that. That's that's not what he is trying to communicate. I see the world as I want to see it, not as it is. I disagree. I see the world. I have plenty of Jack Nicholson in in the few good men. She's who you want on that wall. Yeah, you need me on that wall.

You can't handle it. That's right. That's exactly right. All right, Sean, I know you have something I'm going to set you up with this, though. I watched MSNc after the debate i wanted to i wanted to see what they were saying and it was bizarro world by the way it was uh jd vance was smooth but horrible the moderators were outstanding and tim waltz knocks jd vance at the out at the end of the debate it was a knockout but here's why they said it was a knockout this is their big moment sean and they say the campaign ads are already being cut. It is Walt's pressing Vance on January 6th.

Watch. Would you again seek to challenge this year's election results, even if every governor certifies the results? I'll give you two minutes. Well, Nora, first of all, I think that we're focused on the future. We need to figure out how to solve the inflation crisis caused by Kamala Harris's policies, make housing affordable, make groceries affordable. And that's what we're focused on the future. We need to figure out how to solve the inflation crisis caused by Kamala Harris's policies, make housing affordable, make groceries affordable. And that's what we're focused on.

But I want to answer your question because you did ask it. Look, what President Trump has said is that there were problems in 2020. And my own belief is that we should fight about those issues, debate those issues peacefully in the public square. And that's all I've said. And that's all that Donald Trump has said. The real moment, Sean, that everybody's grabbing is after that, Walt says, would you have certified the election? Would you have certified the election? And he doesn't answer.

He pivots to censorship. And they think that is a big, bad moment for voters out there for J.D. Vance. So listen, they're going to play January 6th, whether they had that moment or not, right? That's their go-to issue with abortion because they have nothing else to run on. So again, if you're a lefty on MSNBC, you've got to grab at straws to claim that your guy won. But we've got to be honest. So in California, Gavin Newsom just signed a bill because I think it was Huntington Beach, said we want to have voter ID in our community. And Gavin Newsom just signed a bill because I think it was Huntington Beach, said we want to have voter ID in our community. And Gavin Newsom signed a bill that came to his desk to outlaw voter ID in the whole state

of California. In Arizona, there are 218,000 people identified that were not lawfully registered, right? So they're illegals. They're not U.S. citizens. They're registered to vote in the swing state of Arizona. And in New Hampshire, they wanted to set up their laws to have you verify your citizenship before you register to vote. And the ACLU is suing New Hampshire. So I mean, when we look at the electoral system, where we're mailing in ballots, and we have drop boxes, and there's no voter ID. Well, of course, people are going to question the results of that election,

which is why anyone who's serious about how they conduct elections to make sure there's no fraud and any cheating, you don't have same day registration and you have voter ID. One person, one vote. We even did it in Iraq where people dip their fingers in the blue paint and put them up in the air. I want to go back to that. fingers in the blue paint and put them up in the air. I want to go back to that. So I think I think not just it was smart for J.D. not to answer the question, but we have a long history of Democrats going to the floor and contesting the results of elections happens all the time.

Right. And so. Right. Donald Trump answers this way. He's like, listen, I don't know if I'm going to contest it or not. I don't know what's going to happen. I want to watch and see how how the votes are cast. And is it is it fair? Is it not fair? Was there cheating or not cheating? And then I'll tell you. And now so you don't know until you see it.

If you're planning to cheat, that is exactly the question you would put before the person who's running in that election. By the way, I love that he pivoted to censorship, because I do think that actually is the number one issue in this election. I thought he made a really great case for why that's the case, and how Kamala Harris and Tim Walz are people who, you know, want to, you know to ban political speech. And January 6th, I feel so bad for those people in prison. I never thought, I remember giving speeches 15 years ago about what Cuba was like, how they execute and imprison anyone

who opposes their government. It's really, really difficult for someone like me to see what we've done. Many of those people did nothing wrong. They just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. And they're sitting there under horrible conditions. And frankly, the Republican Party has abandoned them with the exception of like two or three congressmen. Nobody wants to touch them because the because the media and the Democrat Party has made it such a hot potato, such a taboo issue that somehow you're an insurrectionist if you care about the well-being of Americans who simply went out, most of them, the majority of them to to to protest, as Sean said, some pretty

shady stuff in our election. Waltz was horrific on censorship, and it doesn't pass the minimum threshold for me on being a heartbeat, heartbeat away from the presidency. I mean, he said last night that, you know, the test is yelling fire in a crowded theater. That's just as a fact check. That's not true. That's a retired Supreme Court opinion, retired, by the way, in 1969. It's not the standard for the limitations of free speech. And he has said in the past that hate speech is not free speech. Welcome to America, Tim Walz.

Like, that's a that's a Canadian thing. That's a UK thing. That isn't an American thing. And they're openly horrific on free speech. Does anything, Charlie, from last night change the race for president? Charlie from last night change the race for president? Oh, I think that, yeah, I think that people who are, who did tune in for the first time to meet these two characters came away with the belief that they liked J.D. Vance and they liked what he was selling and they trusted him and they thought that he was informed

and knowledgeable and defending his tickets platform. And he was a great emissary for Donald Trump. And they looked at Tim Walz and they saw somebody who was evasive, who did not answer questions, who is pretty unserious and, you know, not able to defend, you defend, like what Sean said, not able to defend. It wasn't that he wasn't prepared in terms of, he studied hard and he had his little lines he wanted to drop and he dropped some of them. But the problem is he was trying to sell something that is unsellable. And so he sounded kind of ridiculous. And I think

that for a casual observer who watched that, again, if you're already in the bag for Harris Walls, just like if you're already in the bag for Trump Vance, I don't think it changed anything. But if you were sort of went in open you know minded wanting to hear about it i think you walked away thinking um that that uh walls was not a serious person and he didn't want to answer questions and jd vance uh addressed even questions that maybe not all of them to rachel's satisfaction but he at least addressed a lot of questions even questions he didn't particularly want to and i thought that vance did a good job of this. He pounded again and again the argument. And this is, I think, what he wanted to establish, that trust yourself.

If you thought you were better off in the four years that Donald Trump was president than you are the past three years, then vote for Donald Trump again. And that was the message he wanted to pound home. And I think he did. I think he did an excellent job of that. And I think that that could absolutely change a lot of people's minds, especially those people who I have been in disagreement with since the arrival of Donald Trump, who don't like Donald Trump because of his style, but they like his issues. Vance, I think, reached those people and gave them a reason to say, you know what? I'm part of this future. I want to go with this ticket.

Right. We're putting grains of sand on a scale and how it's going to move. I would just tell you that Tim Walsh did not deliver a confident message, nor did Kamala Harris. And so they're not on the JV team. They're on the eighth grade team when they're playing here. And I think people want to vote for him. I think there's a lot of people who want to come their way. They don't want to actually vote for Trump. But the pitch was not made effectively last night for the for the waltz Harris ticket, which is why I think when people saw J.D. Vance like, you know what, these guys actually understand the economy.

They understand world affairs. And on that slight balance, we're talking about, you know, just moving a little bit grain on a scale. I think that it's going to make a difference and it's going to favor the Trump fans. I'll be really quick. I think that I think Sean's right about that. I think that, you know, overall, J.D. did a lot better than than than Walt. J.D. came into this with a very big deficit with women because the cat lady attacks actually were very effective. And I think he did a lot to rehabilitate J.D. Vance in this debate. I actually really believe that part. I just want Trump to have a bit more of an attack dog. I like Trump style, but I get that you guys like this, you know, more.

Not in place of Trump. Yeah, that's the thing. It's not about like, I like this better than Trump. This is about it's a partnership. I do. And I think they're a good partnership and they're right on the issue. Don't put that evil on us. Lucky Bobby. Come on. She tried. She does that. She does that. She stakes the high ground and says anybody below the watermark is a traitor.

Hide the knives, Sean. Hide the knives. Hide the knives. Saturday and Sunday. All right. Charlie hurt. We'll be watching the bottom line. And of course, Fox friends a weekend. I almost plugged something else, but I'm not allowed to plug it yet for Rachel. I will soon. Thank you all very much. Listen ad free with a Fox news podcast,

plus subscription on Apple podcasts and Amazon prime members can listen to the show ad-free on the Amazon Music app. Listen to the all-new Bret Baier podcast featuring Common Ground. In-depth talks with lawmakers from opposite sides of the aisle, along with all your Bret Baier favorites like his all-star panel and much more. Available now at foxnewspodcasts.com or wherever you get your podcasts.