Last month, former President Donald Trump missed a key chance to challenge Vice President Kamala Harris during their debate.

This was Trump’s moment to highlight Harris’s numerous (and significant) position changes to a national audience and, more importantly, to link her with the unsuccessful economic and immigration policies of the current administration.

With the recent vice presidential debate between GOP Ohio Senator JD Vance and Democratic Minnesota Governor Tim Walz likely being one of the final opportunities before the Nov. 5 election, it was critical for both sides to make their case on such a widely viewed stage, especially since Trump stated he wouldn’t engage with Harris in another debate.

Vance stepped up to compensate for Trump’s missed opportunity. He focused on Harris and emphasized her essential role in the Biden-Harris administration.

To my surprise, Vance presented himself as confident, relatable, and well-informed on the issues, while Walz often came off as anxious and uncertain.

Top Voter Concerns: Economy and Immigration

For several months, voters have voiced that rising prices and increasing illegal immigration are their primary concerns.

Many Americans hold President Joe Biden and Harris accountable for the issues that have persisted during their four years in office. Incidents at the border have escalated under the Biden-Harris administration, and Harris’ role as border czar early in her vice presidency has resulted in notable failure.

Fortunately, Walz and Vance kept the immigration debate clear of the bizarre “eating pets” comments that Trump made in his last debate—topics that Vance has also referred to during his campaign.

When discussing the economy, Walz attempted to defend Harris’ government-centered proposals for housing, childcare, and other key spending programs that would significantly increase the deficit without addressing rising prices.

Vance cleverly redirected the conversation to Harris’s performance in the White House, criticizing her for failing to alleviate inflation, while also reminding viewers that under Trump, the economy was thriving until the COVID-19 pandemic.

Harris has made significant efforts to distance herself from the problematic aspects of the Biden-Harris administration, but this has become difficult when Biden publicly stated, as he did last week on “The View”:

“As vice president, there wasn’t a single thing that I did that she couldn’t do, and so I was able to delegate her responsibility on everything from foreign policy to domestic policy.”

Vance consistently reminded voters of this point.

Will the VP Debate Shift Voter Opinions?

Regardless of who you believe won the debate on Tuesday, does it truly affect anything?

I have my reservations.

The presidential election remains extremely competitive, and a majority of voters have likely made their choices by now. Early voting has already commenced in several states.

In Michigan, a state seen as crucial for determining the election outcome, a recent YSL News/Suffolk University poll indicated Harris holds a slight edge (48% to 45%) over Trump, which falls within the margin of error.

The same survey showed that 93% of respondents have already firmly committed to their voting choice, with only 5% indicating they might reconsider.

“I doubt there are any truly undecided voters left at this stage,” Republican strategist Dennis Lennox shared with me before the debate. “If you haven’t made a decision yet, I don’t believe you will be swayed, and you probably won’t bother to vote. This is about turnout.”

David Dulio, a prominent political science professor at Oakland University in Michigan, concurs that the VP debate won’t greatly influence voter opinions. He pointed out that polling has remained “incredibly stable” since Harris entered the race, even following Trump’s underwhelming performance in his debate with her.

However, Tuesday’s debate wasn’t without significance.

The purpose of running mates is to assure voters feel more at ease supporting the leading candidate, Dulio explained.

“Consider it as bolstering a choice rather than swaying one,” he noted.

In that regard, Vance accomplished more than Walz did in supporting Trump over Harris.