Tim Walz is being forced to clean up after Tuesday's debate, and in my not-so-humble opinion the aftershocks of the debate will be much more profound than the event itself. 

As I wrote yesterday before my migraine hit hard, I thought the debate was something of a mess. Vance is so much better than Walz at speaking and explaining himself, but I didn't think that was the point that mattered. The exchanges back and forth took place quickly, were packed with information, and my judgment was that most people were overwhelmed if they didn't come in well-informed beforehand. 

Dead even: POLITICO snap poll shows stark division on debate https://t.co/zkHRUdF0dF via @politico

— Charles Powell (@CharlesTPowell) October 2, 2024

One thing I missed the first time, mostly because my head was down looking at my computer, was the facial expressions. Looking at the clips, I saw what I missed from listening in real-time: Tim Walz LOOKED terrible, and that changed my perception a lot. Vance looked calm, cool, and collected. Walz looked scared and out of his depth. 

But the lasting significance will come over the next week, and it will be driven by the fact that Walz has been forced out of his bubble and is now answering press inquiries. 

It all comes down to this: Walz's lies and odd answers that went by quickly but have settled into the narrative. Walz is doing cleanup, and he is not at all good at that. 

The more Tampon Tim humiliates himself on the national stage, the more awkward his gesticulations become. Freak! pic.twitter.com/rshSs1dwag

— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) October 2, 2024

Debates come down to short answers and soundbites that are practiced, and only the unscripted parts matter. Nobody gets moved by a canned response, but when people are speaking off the cuff, you get a look into their mind and soul. Neither of which is very attractive in Tim Walz's case. 

REPORTER: Can you clarify why you said you've befriended school shooters?

WALZ: "I'm super passionate about this!"

(No clarification was offered) pic.twitter.com/P0f0Dz4w6G

— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) October 2, 2024

Suddenly, Walz is out of his element. He has never had hostile or even curious media to deal with, but reporters have been starving for something to cover other than stump speeches. There are a ton of questions stored up, a sense that there will be few opportunities to ask them, so the media is more aggressive than they normally would be with a candidate they want to win. 

They have to get SOMETHING. 

I think the China lies will stick because Walz is on very thin ice here. His lie was not incidental, and it surely wasn't a mistake. This, even more than the stolen valor issue, has the potential to stick. Not because it is more important than the stolen valor but because for people outside the military it is more easily comprehended and inexplicable. 

Tiananmen Tim Walz tries, fails at clarifying his botched clarification on why he lied about being in Hong Kong during the Tiananmen Square massacre (when he was really in Nebraska): "I do understand China" pic.twitter.com/EPmwqtCdeU

— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) October 2, 2024

Tim's lie about being in China during the Tiananmen massacre when he was, in fact, in Nebraska is similar to describing in detail your experience at Ground Zero on September 11th when you were actually watching the events on TV in Omaha. It's a self-aggrandizing lie, and his dancing around trying to justify it makes him look small. 

Biden got away with it because he is more shameless and simply powers through; Walz doesn't have the stones to do that because he has never been so exposed as a liar. 

Tim Walz's many different faces of losing. pic.twitter.com/bnynelK1JS

— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) October 2, 2024

As is often the case, the few days after the debate matter much more than the exchanges during it. "Winning" a debate on points really doesn't matter much; winning the post-debate matters a lot. 

Tim Walz is losing the post-debate because he finally has to answer questions, and most of those questions are about his character. You and I know a lot and care a lot about policy; the public is evaluating the character (which is why so many people are so set against Trump--they hate him much more than anything he will do). Vance came out looking normal and smart; Walz is being revealed to be a rather fishy character. 

The democracy protests were from April to June of 1989, shutting down after the Tiananmen Massacre. Walz did not go there till August. So even his clarification last night was a lie. pic.twitter.com/yVKmMeOoFG

— Erick Erickson (@EWErickson) October 2, 2024

I still think the immediate post-debate enthusiasm for Vance's victory on points is overdone. The post-debate polls didn't show it, because most people weren't evaluating the debate in the way that political obsessives do. 

I don't buy these CNN poll results.

There is no way 49% of viewers believed Tim Walz won that debate. pic.twitter.com/VwvVRqYpDz

— Brigitte Gabriel (@ACTBrigitte) October 2, 2024

Frank Luntz's focus group, though, had an overwhelmingly positive view coming out of the debate, moving significantly toward Vance. So obviously I underplayed Vance's impact on voters.

I joined @SaraSidnerCNN this morning to share results from my #VPDebate focus group.

An overwhelming majority (12-2) said JD Vance won the debate, and also felt he was far better at communicating the MAGA agenda than Donald Trump. pic.twitter.com/3aalhnhBX0

— Frank Luntz (@FrankLuntz) October 2, 2024

But the Walz performance will haunt him more than the Vance performance will help Trump. People who DO watch debates as you and I do are now poking at Walz's vulnerabilities, and he is being forced to deal with them. And if he goes back into a bubble again he will be declaring himself a scared loser. 

Amazing. This would be like saying you were in Lower Manhattan on 9/11 and, oops I got my dates wrong, I was actually there in December ‘01. https://t.co/lqCeDB93gK

— Chuck Ross (@ChuckRossDC) October 2, 2024

The most critical moment of the debate was the Hong Kong answer. He had nothing to say except that he was a "knucklehead." He was trying to look "normal," but the impression was that he was caught in a lie. He looked guilty. 

Walz Clarifies That He Meant The 'Tiananmen Square Chinese Buffet' In Omaha, Nebraska https://t.co/GU4GZYkxPW pic.twitter.com/VQw63bDD8S

— The Babylon Bee (@TheBabylonBee) October 2, 2024

That image will stick and will remain a sore spot. That matters more than the back and forth, because it was a window into Walz's character. That is what people were really looking for, not a specific policy position. Nobody is voting on policy positions this election. 

In short, I have revised my opinion about the debate. Not about what happened--I thought Vance was clearly better than Walz, but that it wouldn't matter. Now I think it very well might, not because Vance won the debate but rather the manner in which Walz lost it. 

Walz lost it by looking deranged at times and like a liar. The visuals mattered and Walz's dancing around on his personal lies mattered even more. 

So I was wrong...I think. The aftermath of the debate has the potential to be devastating to Tim Walz.