It was civil. It was somewhat thoughtful. It was focused for the most part on policy.  

It was, frankly, a novel experience to be watching a modern U.S political debate that didn't immediately descend into petty name calling, insults, conspiracy theories, hyperbole and lies.

I thought JD Vance was much better than Tim Walz. If these things are to be scored, then he was the winner for me.

He didn't throw around insults in the same way that he has on the campaign trail, which I thought was an interesting strategic approach. I thought he did a really good job of presenting as smart and reasonable, and as a steady partner of a more chaotic running mate.

I also thought he was humane in a way that Trump never is. Tim Walz talked about his 17-year-old witnessing a shooting, and JD Vance let him speak - and immediately responded in a decent way. I didn't know, he said. I'm really sorry.

For the most part, Tim Walz, wasn't terrible. He made that weird gaffe where it sounded as though he said something about becoming friends with school shooters, and he just didn't look as fresh, self-assured, and slick as JD Vance.

His best moment was directly asking Vance if he believed Trump won the 2020 election... Vance gave a classic politician answer, said he was 'focused on the future'.

What does it mean for the race? Not heaps. There was more to lose tonight for the respective campaigns than there was to win. It might translate to a wee bump in support, a few more voters shoring up their decisions - but more than anything, for Team Trump, it's probably the first bit of momentum in the right direction for the best part of six weeks.

LISTEN ABOVE

• Barry Soper: Interesting arguments at the Tim Walz-JD Vance debate
• Vance-Walz VP debate: Analysis after the fact
• Watch: Pundits weigh in after Walz and Vance VP debate focuses on policy over personal attacks
• Kamala Harris picks Tim Walz as running mate to win rural US votes
• Watch live: Trump VP pick JD Vance gives speech at Republican convention