Why VP debates aren't all that important

We've all been there: It's a hot summer day, and you roll up to your local ice-cream shop for two scoops of double fudge chocolate chip. But alas - today, they're all out, and all they have left is vanilla. You're not exactly happy about it, but you order a scoop of it anyway, because, hey, some ice cream is better than no ice cream.

That's basically the situation we're in with debates. Barring a last-minute change of heart, former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris have debated for the last time this year, leaving only one major event on the campaign calendar: Tuesday's vice presidential debate between Ohio Sen. JD Vance and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz.

But the truth is, it's just not the same. Typically, fewer people watch vice presidential debates than presidential debates. And while presidential debates are historically one of the few things that can actually make a dent in the polls, vice presidential debates don't have the same track record. True, they can slightly impact how voters feel about the vice presidential nominees themselves - but at the end of the day, running mates don't affect many people's votes.

Vice presidential candidates tend to get overshadowed by their counterparts at the top of the ticket - and vice presidential debates usually do too. According to Nielsen, since 2008, presidential debates have drawn an average audience of 65.7 million people. But vice presidential debates have drawn an average of just 54.1 million viewers. In the last three presidential elections, the vice presidential debate was the least-watched debate of the fall.