Hundreds of students attended watch parties across campus to see Ohio Sen. JD Vance and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz face off on Tuesday night at 9 p.m., 5 weeks before election day. 

The Pitt News attended on-campus watch parties hosted by College Democrats at Pitt, Pitt Votes and the Political Science Student Association (PSSA) to ask students their thoughts on the debate as it progressed. College Republicans at Pitt held a private watch party off campus.

The two vice presidential nominees debated the economy, immigration, ongoing conflicts in the Middle East and more in what is currently the last scheduled debate of the election cycle. Both candidates focused on policy differences rather than launching personal attacks against their opponent. 

At the start of the night, students said they hoped to hear discussion of relevant political events and ways that the vice presidential nominees plan to support their fellow presidential candidates in the 2024 presidency. By the end, students said they were satisfied with both candidates’ performances.

Students thoughts before the debate

Sam Podnar, junior politics and philosophy major and the co-president of the College Democrats at Pitt, said she hoped the candidates would discuss policies that impact students.

“I would say as a student, I’m definitely concerned about hearing [about] bringing down the cost of living,” Podnar said. “How they’re building a better economy for us, how they are tackling student loan debt, the cost of college and reproductive rights are something that a lot of people care about.”

Hannah Yomi, a senior English and communications major at the PSSA watch party, said she hoped that the vice presidential debate would be different from the presidential debate in September.

“I’m trying to hear solid plans. I feel like listening to the presidential debate, it was a comedy show,” Yomi said. “I’m just trying to see an actual debate, not just the memes coming from the debate.”

Daniel Jacke, a first-year environmental studies major at the Pitt Votes watch party, said he expected the debate would help students decide who to vote for.

“I’m sure there are at least a couple people on campus who are undecided on who they are voting for,” Jacke said. “And having [a debate] encourages those people to [decide].”

Reactions during the debate

Halfway through the debate, Ava Nicholas, a sophomore political science major at the PSSA watch party, said she felt better about this debate than the previous presidential debate in September.

“I think it’s going a lot better than the first debate, just in terms of both candidates being a lot more polite,” Nicholas said. “There’s not as much cutting off of anyone, even though it kind of got that way towards the end, I feel like there are clear answers. They’re being a lot more efficient.”

Frank Postava, a first-year computer science major attending the Pitt College Democrats party, expressed his concerns about the candidates dodging questions during the debate.

“There’s a lack of questions being answered and it’s kind of driving me insane,” Postava said. “It goes for both sides. Not really anything being said, and I think that needs to be changed.”

Students’ concluding thoughts

When the debate finished around 10:50 p.m., Tommy Berenson, a junior urban planning major attending the Pitt College Democrats party, said he thought Walz won and “appeared much more reasonable” than Vance.

“I think [Walz] outlined how he would competently serve as vice president. I think JD Vance constantly just spouted lies,” Berenson said. “When he was fact-checked, he complained that he was fact-checked, even though he was accurately fact-checked by the moderators, which was their job.”

Jamie Hackney, a senior history major attending the Pitt College Democrats party, thought the two candidates performed evenly on presentation.

“JD Vance doesn’t come across as a doddering fool, but you’re kind of grading on a curve because Trump is his running mate,” Hackney said.

Hackney emphasized the difference between this debate and the September presidential debate, saying it was “a lot more policy-focused overall.”

Josephine Cantelmo, a senior political science student and the vice president of PSSA, appreciated that Vance and Walz were civil towards each other throughout the debate. 

“I actually think the debate went well,” Cantelmo said. “Especially towards the end, when they were talking about their mutual respect for each other — I appreciated seeing that.”

Makayla Painter, a junior political science major at the PSSA watch party, felt that the respect Vance and Walz showed each other is “how things really should be.”

“I feel like rather than focusing on a winner here or a winner there, we should be focused on the fact that these are two people who seem to really care about the American people,” Painter said. “Whether you agree with Walz’s opinion or Vance’s opinion, it’s just important that they clearly have goals and they want to do right by the Americans in the way that they see it.”