TV debates have mattered more than ever before in this year’s US presidential election.
President Joe Biden’s pitiful performance on 27 June effectively knocked the incumbent out of the race for the White House.
Then on 10 September Biden’s replacement, vice president Kamala Harris, proved she is a real contender, baiting her opponent Donald Trump into wild statements such as “they’re eating the pets!”.
The Democrats have recovered in the polls since Harris took over the nomination, including in so-called swing states, to the point that she is now narrow favourite to beat Trump, according to some respected analysts.
Others still reckon the Republican Trump will be re-elected. Either way, all agree the contest is on a knife edge with voting already under way in a handful of less populated states, and opening next week in Illinois.
With things so close, the televised debate next Tuesday could even tip the balance.
“All the needle needs to be moved is 0.1% in either direction, and that could be the difference in four or five states,” according to Steven Maviglio, a Democratic strategist.
More on Jd Vance
Related Topics:
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
Harris and Trump will not be on stage. This latest debate in CBS studios in New York City on 1 October is between their running mates, JD Vance and Tim Walz.
Advertisement
In most years vice presidential debates are sideshows which have little impact on the voters. Not this year.
The rise of Harris to presidential candidate has shown Americans that VPs are important. Just as Trump had to scramble to find a new running mate following stinging condemnation from Mike Pence, the man who served as his vice president for four years.
Adding to the excitement, the two men who will be facing off this week are also the best phrase-makers in this campaign.
Image: Donald Trump and JD Vance. Pic: AP
Vance wrote bestselling book Hillbilly Elegy, based on his rough upbringing in the Appalachians. He likes to launch sweeping attacks on his foes, including dismissing Democratic women as “childless cat ladies”. Taylor Swift embraced this jibe for herself in her recent post endorsing Harris.
Walz probably owes his place on the ticket to the single word “weird”, which he spent the summer sticking on Trump and Vance to devastating effect in multiple media interviews on behalf of the Democratic campaign.
The confrontation between the two men promises to be spicy.
There is a generation gap between them. Walz is 60. Vance is 20 years younger. Walz likes to present himself as a folksy centrist dad. In The Manual, a signature campaign commercial, Walz sets about fixing his old car, “a ’79 International Harvester Scout”, while likening it to creating an opportunity economy for all.
He is also a veteran democratic politician having served 12 years in Washington in the US House of Representatives before being elected Governor of Minnesota in 2018, the post he still holds.
Vance’s career has been meteoric. Four years in US Marine Corps provided his ladder to university. Then he became a corporate lawyer for investment firms.
Following the success of his book, his backers included the controversial tech titans Peter Thiel, Eric Schmidt and Marc Andreessen. After a lightning campaign in 2022, he is currently a first-term Republican US Senator for Ohio.
Image: JD Vance wrote the bestseller Hillbilly Elegy based on his upbringing. Pic: Reuters
Both men served in the military in non-combat roles. Vance was a journalist in uniform during his four years which included deployment to Iraq. Walz belonged to the Minnesota National Guard for 24 years.
The Harris campaign admitted he “misspoke” when he described assault rifles as “weapons of war that I carried in war”.
The two “VP picks” share archetypal middle-American backgrounds, Nebraska and Minnesota for Walz and Kentucky and Ohio for Vance, which were major factors in why they were chosen as running mates. Harris is from California, Trump from New York City and Florida, all of which are regarded as coastal fleshpots by citizens in “flyover states”.
Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Georgia, North Carolina, Arizona; the main candidates are all concentrating their campaigning on the battleground states – those most likely to “flip” decisively for one party or another, delivering a majority in the electoral college.
Image: Tim Walz during a campaign event in Minnesota in 2016. Pic: AP
This weekend Walz has set up his debate camp in Michigan. In between mock debates in which the Transport Secretary Pete Buttigieg is standing in for Vance, Walz will meet and greet the locals in the bayside resort of Harbor Springs. Conveniently there is a “Festival of the Book” taking place which will allow Walz to strut his stuff as a school teacher.
Vance has called up US representative Tom Emmer from Walz’s home state for his prep. The House majority whip should know where his old foe’s vulnerabilities lie.
This debate will not be relaxed. Unusually for a vice presidential encounter, the protagonists will not be sitting down, they will be standing at lecterns. The last time that happened was 2008 with Sarah Palin and Joe Biden.
As with the other debates this year, the Presidential Debates Commission has not been called upon to organise this one. The two sides agreed their own rules with the broadcaster. This time there will be no studio audience, once again, and two moderators: CBS presenters news anchor Norah O’Donnell and Margaret Brennan of Meet The Press.
As Harris continues to challenge Trump to another debate without success, Vance has countered in advance demanding a second debate with Walz on 18 October. The Democrat is acting modest, protesting of Vance “he’s a Yale Law guy. I’m public school teacher”.
Image: Pics: AP/Reuters
Walz hopes to play the part of a schoolmaster chiding a tearaway pupil. He will do well if he can emulate Lloyd Bentsen’s crushing put down of the younger Dan Quayle in their 1988 vice presidential debate: “I knew Jack Kennedy. You’re no Jack Kennedy.”
Walz has fertile territory to exploit. JD Vance has already had to eat many of his wilder statements. He once likened his boss Trump to “Hitler”. For electoral reasons he has U-turned on his book’s thesis that his fellow poor whites were to blame for their own fecklessness.
Republican strategists hope that Vance will counter Walz’s rebukes over sexism and abortion by sticking to mainstream issues such as inflation and immigration.
Vance can boast a nuanced personal record on some social issues including healthcare. But he is also pugnacious and may be unable to resist going after Walz aggressively for what Republicans regard as his left-wing voting record.
Trump’s groundless claims that Harris is “a communist” seem to be impressing Hispanic voters.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:29
Crowd chants ‘we’re not eating cats’
Walz has more to lose and Vance has more to prove in the debate. Harris has embraced her choice of Walz, notably by appearing with him for her first major TV interview. Trump barely mentions Vance at his rallies. In opinion polls Walz has net approval ratings of 10%, Vance is at around minus 35%.
Debates are proving their value in this election year. Americans are paying increasing attention to them. 51.3 million tuned in to Biden/Trump earlier in the summer, 67.1 million watched Harris/Trump earlier this month.
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
An outcome on Tuesday night as vivid as in the two previous debates this year could well be a defining moment for the next presidency.
On the other hand, both veteran Democrats and Republicans will also remember that while Lloyd Bentsen smashed the debate, George H W Bush and Dan Quayle won the election.
US President Donald Trump has had a “very good” call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the White House says, during which US ownership of Ukraine’s energy network was discussed to help protect it.
Mr Trump also agreed to “help locate” additional air defence support in Europe after a request from the Ukrainian leader, a statement about the one-hour phone call said.
Further talks will take place in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, in the coming days, and the US will continue intelligence sharing with Ukraine, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters.
Mr Trump also agreed to work to ensure missing Ukrainian children are returned home and both parties agreed to a temporary 30-day ceasefire involving attacks against energy facilities, with the US president saying the US “could be very helpful in running those plants with its electricity and utility expertise”, Ms Leavitt said.
Secretary of state Marco Rubio also issued a statement about the call saying that “President Trump also discussed Ukraine’s electrical supply and nuclear power plants.
“He said that the United States could be very helpful in running those plants with its electricity and utility expertise. American ownership of those plants would be the best protection for that infrastructure and support for Ukrainian energy infrastructure.”
The White House statement added that Mr Trump and Mr Zelenskyy also reviewed the situation in Kursk and agreed to share information closely.
More on Donald Trump
Related Topics:
The presidents instructed their teams to move ahead with the details of implementing a partial ceasefire, with discussions to include expanding any ceasefire to the Black Sea.
Could US nuclear power takeover replace the minerals deal?
By David Blevins, Sky correspondent, in Washington DC
The readout of the call from President Zelenskyy was conciliatory, repeatedly thanking Donald Trump for military support and for his peace efforts.
In agreeing to a partial ceasefire, he held out the prospect of US investment in Ukrainian power – perhaps deeming that more of a security guarantee than the minerals deal.
“American ownership of those plants would be the best protection for that infrastructure and support for Ukrainian energy infrastructure,” the Marco Rubio and Mike Waltz readout of Trump-Zelenskyy call said.
Trump agreed to continue sharing intelligence but when Zelenskyy asked for additional air defence, he said he’d see what was available in Europe.
That’s a vague response from the US president as he seeks to keep both Ukraine and Putin on board.
Those ambiguous words and the change in tone are both indicative of the sensitive point they’ve reached days before fresh negotiations in Saudi Arabia.
“We have never been closer to peace,” Ms Leavitt added.
In comments later on Wednesday, Mr Zelenskyy said that Mr Trump understands that Ukraine will not recognise occupied land as Russian, and that he would like the US president to visit Ukraine – adding that “it would be helpful for Trump in his peace efforts”.
In an earlier statement, President Zelenskyy said the two leaders had “a positive, very substantive and frank conversation”.
Mr Zelenskyy echoed much of Mr Trump’s statement about what was decided, and said later that he “felt no pressure” from the US president.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:20
Trump and Zelenskyy ‘on track’
“We agreed that Ukraine and the United States should continue working together to achieve a real end to the war and lasting peace. We believe that together with America, with President Trump, and under American leadership, lasting peace can be achieved this year,” Mr Zelenskyy said
He added that Ukraine would “continue working to make this happen”.
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
“I stressed that Ukrainians want peace, which is why Ukraine accepted the proposal for an unconditional ceasefire,” he said. “I highlighted the importance of President Trump’s concept of peace through strength. We agreed to maintain constant contact, including at the highest level and through our teams.”
In an earlier post on Truth Social, Mr Trump said the “very good” phone call lasted around one hour.
“Much of the discussion was based on the call made yesterday with President Putin in order to align both Russia and Ukraine in terms of their requests and needs,” Mr Trump said.
“We are very much on track,” he added.
The call marks the first time Mr Trump and Mr Zelenskyy have spoken since the disastrous confrontation in the White House last month.
Mr Zelenskyy travelled to Washington expecting to sign a critical minerals deal but left early after he and Trump clashed in front of the world’s cameras.
On Tuesday, Mr Trump and Vladimir Putin held a phone call lasting about an hour and a half in which the Russian leader rejected a full 30-day ceasefire.
He agreed to not attack Ukraine’s energy infrastructure for 30 days. The two countries also swapped 175 prisoners each earlier this morning.
The relationship between Donald Trump and Volodymyr Zelenskyy has been complex over the years.
Relations between the two presidents extend as far back as 2019, the year the Ukrainian leader took office.
It has since weathered the start of the war in Ukraine, Mr Trump‘s reelection and last month’s heated exchange in the Oval Office, in which Mr Zelenskyy was accused of being “disrespectful” to his country’s most powerful ally.
Here we look back at the key moments that have helped shape the pair’s relationship and how it has changed over the years.
The ‘perfect’ phone call
One of the first times Mr Zelenskyy spoke with Mr Trump was in July 2019, months after he became president of Ukraine.
During a 30-minute phone call, the US leader suggested that in exchange for future military support for Ukraine, Mr Zelenskyy should help launch an investigation into Joe Biden’s son, Hunter.
Trump allies alleged Mr Biden had lobbied Ukraine to dismiss its top prosecutor to obstruct a probe into energy fIrm Burisma, which had Hunter Biden as one of its board members.
Image: Zelenskyy and Trump first met at the United Nations General Assembly in 2019. Pic: Reuters
Image: Pic: Reuters
Mr Trumo’s request coincided with him appearing to want to weaken Mr Biden as he competed to become the Democratic nominee for the presidential election.
It was this call that formed the basis for Mr Trump’s first impeachment by the Democratic-controlled House in December 2019 on abuse of power and obstruction of justice charges.
Image: Part of the transcript of the phone call Trump and Zelenskyy that was used as evidence during the impeachment inquiry. Pic: Reuters
Mr Trump denied wrongdoing at the time and referred to his exchange with Mr Zelenskyy as a “perfect” phone call. He was later acquitted by the Senate.
Mr Zelenskyy later admitted, during his first face-to-face meeting with Mr Trump on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly in September 2019, that there was “no blackmail” involved in the exchange.
Outbreak of war
Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine on 24 February 2022, triggering the biggest conflict on the European continent since the Second World War.
At the time, the Biden administration made steadfast military and political support for Ukraine a centrepiece of US foreign policy, which included huge sums of military assistance.
Mr Trump condemned the war as “appalling”, saying at the time that he was praying for Ukrainians. He even extended praise to Mr Zelenskyy, calling him “brave” for staying in the capital, Kyiv.
Image: Trump shakes hands with Zelenskyy in Paris’s Notre-Dame cathedral. Pic: Reuters
In the run-up to the 2024 presidential election, Mr Trump claimed he would be able to stop the war in 24 hours, adding that he would be able to “get it settled” before even entering the White House.
Doubting the claims, Mr Zelenskyy invited Mr Trump to Ukraine during an interview with Sky News’ US partner network, NBC News, in November 2023.
“If he can come here, I will need 24 minutes – yes, 24 minutes. Not more. Yes. Not more – 24 minutes to explain [to] President Trump that he can’t manage this war [in that time frame],” Mr Zelenskyy told Meet The Press presenter Kristen Welker.
He added at the time that he was unsure if Mr Trump would have Ukraine’s back if he were to re-enter the White House.
Meeting ahead of US election
A month before Mr Trump won the US election, Mr Zelenskyy visited him in Trump Tower, New York.
The trip, which took place in September, came after Mr Zelenskyy told the New Yorker magazine that he thought Mr Trump “doesn’t really know how to stop the war”.
He added, “many leaders have thought they could, but have been unable to do so”.
Image: Zelenskyy at Trump Tower right before the US election. Pic: Reuters
While in New York, the pair discussed ending the war, with Mr Trump telling Fox News after the meeting that Mr Zelenskyy wants fighting in his country to stop.
Mr Zelenskyy also reissued the invite for Mr Trump to visit Ukraine, to which he said he would accept.
‘Dictator without elections’
Work seemingly began on a ceasefire deal soon after Mr Trump was sworn into office.
Mr Zelenskyy said in February that he was working with a team from the Trump administration, describing the US as the “power that has the ability to not only stop the war but also help ensure the reliability of peace afterwards”.
But relations quickly seemed to turn sour when the US administration held talks with Russian officials in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia without Ukraine.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:28
‘Dictator’ Zelenskyy ‘better move fast’
The four-and-a-half hour meeting was condemned by Kyiv, who said talks should not be held behind Ukraine’s back. Mr Zelenskyy also postponed a visit to Saudi Arabia, reportedly as a way to avoid giving the US-Russian meeting “legitimacy”.
The US-Russian meetings appeared to work as a catalyst of dwindling relations between the two presidents, with Mr Trump then suggesting that Ukraine was responsible for starting the war, adding that Mr Zelenskyy had “better move fast” or he would have no country left.
Her later called Mr Zelenskyy a “dictator without elections” – a dig at him remaining in office after Ukraine’s general election was delayed due to Russia’s invasion.
He also repeated the claim that the Ukrainian president has low approval ratings – which had already been dismissed by Mr Zelenskyy as Russian disinformation – and claimed American aid money had been misused.
That Oval Office meeting
Despite prior crosswords, relations between Mr Trump and Mr Zelenskyy appeared to be back on track near the end of February, when Ukraine said it wanted to sign a minerals deal with the US, giving them the right to $500bn (£394bn) in potential revenue from the resources.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:58
Trump and Zelenskyy’s body language analysed
The last 10 minutes of the almost 45-minute meeting descended into a tense back-and-forth, which began with vice presidentJD Vance telling Mr Zelenksyy: “I think it’s disrespectful for you to come to the Oval Office to try to litigate this in front of the American media.
“You should be thanking the President [Trump] for trying to bring an end to this conflict.”
As the Ukrainian president tried to object, Mr Trump raised his voice and told him: “You’re gambling with the lives of millions of people.
“You’re gambling with World War Three, and what you’re doing is very disrespectful to the country, this country that’s backed you far more than a lot of people say they should have.”
Addressing Congress a few days after the meeting in the Oval Office, Mr Trump said he had received an “important letter” from Mr Zelenskyy in which he said he would work under his leadership to reach a peace deal.
The letter appeared to echo what Mr Zelenskyy had said in a statement on social media hours after the US reported it was pausing military aid to Kyiv.
Mr Zelenskyy described the Oval Office meeting as “regrettable”, adding that it “did not go the way it was supposed to be” and it was “time to make things right”.
He also added that he was “ready to sign” the mineral deal, which had remained a sticking point between the two countries.
The pair did not have any direct contact until Wednesday, when they had an hour-long phone call.
Mr Trump described the conversation as “very good” adding that he and Mr Zelenskyy are “very much on track”.
He said most of the call was based on what he discussed with Russian President Vladimir Putin the day before.
Instead, Mr Trump appears to have achieved little in his conversation with Mr Putin, whose ‘red lines’ seem very much intact as his troops continue to hammer the Ukrainian frontlines and with Volodymyr Zelenskyy accusing him of hitting Ukrainian energy infrastructure overnight
It’s been a whirlwind first couple of months of the second Trump administration, both stateside and abroad.
As the fallout from the latest development in the Ukraine war continues, let’s look at how the dealmaker-in-chief has fared in his various international interactions.
Image: Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin spoke on the phone. File pic: Reuters
Cutting Ukraine out of negotiations
Mr Trump famously promised to end the Ukraine war within 24 hours of being sworn in as commander in chief for a second time (he now says he was being sarcastic), but certainly, a swift peace is firmly on his wishlist.
Now the 30-day pause on attacks on energy facilities that Mr Putin agreed to on the phone appears to have been abandoned the same day, with drone strikes launched against Ukraine overnight.
What is clear, however, is that Mr Trump’s comments (and those of his associates) around NATO allies not spending enough appear to have galvanised Europe.
Countries including the UK have pledged to boost defence spending and shoulder more of the security burden – though potentially pivoting away from lucrative American arms sales at the same time.
Image: Empty shelves in the American whiskey section of a shop in Vancouver. Pic: Reuters
Trade war with Canada
Mr Trump’s signature economic policy – tariffs on imports – have opened up what essentially amounts to a trade war with America’s biggest trade partner: Canada.
Image: Mark Carney has hit out at Donald Trump and called for Canada to be shown respect. Pic: Reuters
Canada, which is the biggest foreign supplier of steel and aluminium to the US, announced 25% retaliatory tariffs on those metals along with computers, sports equipment and other products worth $20bn in total.
That’s on top of tariffs imposed on 4 March worth a similar amount on US goods in response to broader tariffs by Mr Trump.
Canada is far from the only nation to be hit with sweeping trade tariffs by the Trump administration.
Mr Trump also imposed tariffs on Mexico – a key US trade partner – due to the fentanyl crisis in the US and illegal immigration. Mexico, along with Canada, hit back with retaliatory tariffs.
Mexico’s president Claudia Sheinbaum has sought to appease Mr Trump, including by sending 10,000 national guard soldiers to the border with the US – a win for Mr Trump, though it only amounts to an extra five guards per mile of the border.
The EU’s Ursula von der Leyen criticised new US tariffs on steel and aluminium, and the bloc pledged to raise its tariffs on American products.
Despite it being signed during the final days of US President Joe Biden’s time in office, Mr Trump took a great deal of credit for the ceasefire deal signed between Israel and Hamas back in January.
It seems that his impending inauguration served to spur things on and help get the deal over the line.
In December, he made a public demand for the release of the hostages, threatening “ALL HELL TO PAY in the Middle East”, while his envoy put pressure on Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu.
The eventual deal did bring some success – around 30 hostages were released along with more than 1,000 Palestinian prisoners.
But Israel launched airstrikes on Gaza this week, bringing the fragile ceasefire to an end without moving to phase two, which would have seen conversations around a permanent ceasefire.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:21
Why does Trump want Greenland?
Greenland and Panama
Mr Trump has also spoken repeatedly about his desire to annex Greenland, despite protests from Denmark and Greenlanders themselves.
He said the US already has a military presence in Greenland and added: “Maybe you’ll see more and more soldiers going there.”
The row has caused tensions between America and Denmark, which is a US ally and a member of NATO.
Mr Trump has also promised to take over the Panama Canal, a key trade route for international shipping.
He expressed a desire for America to “take back” the crucial waterway from alleged Chinese control.
Earlier this month, a Hong Kong firm sold two major ports on the Panama Canal to a US firm. Hong Kong-based CK Hutchison Holdings said the move was “wholly unrelated to recent political news” but the development was nonetheless welcomed by Mr Trump.