Start spreading the news, you’re leaving today
I want to be a part of it, New York, New York –Fred Ebb, “New York, New York”

And to make the headline and the epigraph crystal clear:

[embedded content]

Could be the best thing you’ll hear all night (though probably not, as I wrote: “Personally, I expect this debate to be more interesting than the Presidential debate, given the logorrhea of the previous combatants. But Vance has written a book, and Walz’s wife, also a teacher, had 40 students (!) on her high school debate team, so maybe something rubbed off”).

The Host: CBS.

The Time: 9:00pm ET.

The Place: CBS Broadcast Center, New York City.

The Rules:

Let’s have a good clean fight here. No holding, no low punches, no biting, gouging, or rabbit punches. You’ll break when I say break. And if you’re decked, you’ll get a count of ten to get back on your feet.

Oh, wait. Sorry for the glitch. Forbes:

The rules for tonight’s debate are similar to those set in place for the presidential debate between former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris three weeks ago and the Trump-Biden debate in June.

At the start of the event, the moderators will introduce the candidates in order of incumbent party, with Walz going first, according to CBS News. There will be no opening statements, and campaign staff will are not permitted to interact with the candidates during the two four-minute commercial breaks.

Walz will stand behind the podium on the left side of the stage, which will be on the right side of viewers’ screens. Meanwhile, Vance will be at the podium on the stage’s right side but on the left side of people’s screens. Candidates will be given two minutes to answer a question, two minutes to respond, and one minute for rebuttals. Candidates may receive an extra minute at the moderator’s discretion.

The major difference between the presidential and vice presidential debates is that the candidate’s microphone will not be muted when their opponent speaks tonight. However, CBS still has the right to turn off microphones.

And:

The debate is being moderated by “CBS Evening News” anchor Norah O’Donnell and “Face the Nation” host Margaret Brennan.

And:

For the first time since 2008, the veep candidates will stand rather than sit.

(Hard for me to imagine debating sitting down. How does one gesture properly?)

I plowed through a good deal of opinion-having (BBC was good), but I thought Politico’s was the best take, despite the personalization. “Expect a slugfest“:

Like his running mate Donald Trump, Vance prefers to go on offense, turning his opponents’ barbs against them and blurring the line between personal and political attacks. Walz, meanwhile, can get fiery when he attacks his opponents, but he tends to lean into his folksy demeanor to defuse tough questions about his record. Both men struggle at times to hide their tempers, and with plenty of bad blood between the two of them — stemming in large part from Vance’s attacks on Walz’s military record and Walz’s crusade to label Vance as ‘weird’ — don’t be surprised if things turn personal.

(Not to mention the couch lie, in which Walz gleefully participated.)

So I’m going to sit back and watch the action. Enjoy!

UPDATE Of course, now I’m imagining the first question is about Middle East policy, with both candidates competing in displays of ritual fealty to Israel (with Vance blunderingly ruining Trump’s performance-based reputation for not being being as much of a warmonger as Biden/Harris, oh well).

This entry was posted in Guest Post, Notices, Politics on by Lambert Strether.

About Lambert Strether

Readers, I have had a correspondent characterize my views as realistic cynical. Let me briefly explain them. I believe in universal programs that provide concrete material benefits, especially to the working class. Medicare for All is the prime example, but tuition-free college and a Post Office Bank also fall under this heading. So do a Jobs Guarantee and a Debt Jubilee. Clearly, neither liberal Democrats nor conservative Republicans can deliver on such programs, because the two are different flavors of neoliberalism (“Because markets”). I don’t much care about the “ism” that delivers the benefits, although whichever one does have to put common humanity first, as opposed to markets. Could be a second FDR saving capitalism, democratic socialism leashing and collaring it, or communism razing it. I don’t much care, as long as the benefits are delivered. To me, the key issue — and this is why Medicare for All is always first with me — is the tens of thousands of excess “deaths from despair,” as described by the Case-Deaton study, and other recent studies. That enormous body count makes Medicare for All, at the very least, a moral and strategic imperative. And that level of suffering and organic damage makes the concerns of identity politics — even the worthy fight to help the refugees Bush, Obama, and Clinton’s wars created — bright shiny objects by comparison. Hence my frustration with the news flow — currently in my view the swirling intersection of two, separate Shock Doctrine campaigns, one by the Administration, and the other by out-of-power liberals and their allies in the State and in the press — a news flow that constantly forces me to focus on matters that I regard as of secondary importance to the excess deaths. What kind of political economy is it that halts or even reverses the increases in life expectancy that civilized societies have achieved? I am also very hopeful that the continuing destruction of both party establishments will open the space for voices supporting programs similar to those I have listed; let’s call such voices “the left.” Volatility creates opportunity, especially if the Democrat establishment, which puts markets first and opposes all such programs, isn’t allowed to get back into the saddle. Eyes on the prize! I love the tactical level, and secretly love even the horse race, since I’ve been blogging about it daily for fourteen years, but everything I write has this perspective at the back of it.