Penn students gather at vice presidential watch parties — and respond to multiple mentions of Wharton models

The Annenberg School for Communication and Penn Democrats hosted watch parties Tuesday evening for the vice presidential debate between Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio).

Penn students gathered at Annenberg School and Huntsman Hall to watch Walz and Vance discuss a variety of topics during the 90-minute debate, including the Middle East, Hurricane Helene, immigration, economics and reproductive rights. During the course of the debate, the Wharton School – specifically the Penn Wharton Budget Model – was mentioned three times.

Approximately 100 members of the University community attended the wake party at Annenberg School, where refreshments were provided. The debate was broadcast on various news channels in various classrooms in the building. The Penn Dems Watch Party, held at Huntsman Hall, attracted over 65 attendees and was organized in collaboration with Vice President Kamala Harris’ presidential campaign and the Pennsylvania Democratic Party.

Penn Leads the Vote had a voter registration table at the entrance of Annenberg School where students could verify their voter registration to be entered into a drawing. According to Annenberg School senior director of marketing and communications Mandira Banerjee, about four students registered to vote. Viewers could also fill out bingo cards and check boxes when former president and 1968 Wharton graduate Donald Trump or Taylor Swift were mentioned, or when they heard the words “hillbilly energy.”

During the economic policy portion of the debate, moderator Norah O’Donnell asked both vice presidential candidates how they would implement their campaigns’ economic promises without increasing the federal deficit, citing the PWBM. The same studies were mentioned by Harris and Trump during the Sept. 10 presidential debate in Philadelphia.

O’Donnell asked Walz how Harris’ proposed manufacturing tax credits, housing tax credits and a renewed child tax credit will be funded, given that the PWBM predicts Harris’ proposals will add $1.2 trillion to the federal deficit . She also asked Vance the same question, explaining that the PWBM predicts that former President Donald Trump’s plan will increase the deficit by $5.8 trillion.

“Many of these same economists are attacking Donald Trump’s plans, and they have doctorates, but they lack common sense and they have no wisdom because Donald Trump’s economic policies produced the highest take-home pay in a generation in this country,” Vance responded.

Later in the debate, Walz appeared to cite findings from the PWBM when discussing the Harris campaign’s child care tax credit policies and the impact of Trump’s economic policies on the middle class.

“This is the Wharton School. That’s his alma mater,” Walz said.

In its letter published in August, PWBM wrote: “[t]Harris’ campaign proposals would cut taxes for low- and middle-income households by expanding tax credit policies and support for homebuyers and those covered by the Affordable Care Act.

The mention of Wharton was one of several moments that elicited reactions from both viewers. At the Penn Dems’ watch party, every mention was greeted with applause and cheers from watch party attendees.

Audiences at both watch parties responded with groans and laughter to Vance’s mentions of his working-class upbringing as well as claims about immigration policy and undocumented immigrants. The crowd also reacted when Walz was questioned about his claim that he was in Hong Kong during China’s Tiananmen Square protests in the spring of 1989 – some audibly gasped and visibly winced when Walz said he had ” expressed incorrectly.”

Students at both watch parties noted that the debate was largely non-argumentative.

“It was a little strange to see how both candidates were constantly in agreement, which isn’t really common given today’s partisan politics,” said college senior Michael Palacios, a former staff writer for The Daily Pennsylvanian. Palacios attended the Annenberg School wake party.

Steve Yang, a sophomore and Penn Dems communications director who attended the Penn Dems watch party, said, “We need to return to this warmer tone in future debates.”

College junior and Penn Dems Secretary Eunho Jung agreed, but said she was “surprised” by Walz’s reluctance to issue rebuttals against Vance – particularly given Vance’s claims about Haitian immigrants in Ohio.

“I really thought he would clarify the matter, but he didn’t,” Jung said. “I wish he had done it somehow, based on the terrible things JD Vance and Donald Trump have said.”

However, Raeva Patwardhan, a first-year at the college who attended Annenberg School’s wake party for her Introduction to Political Communication course, said the debate felt more like “an insult battle.”

Kathleen Jamieson, director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center and Elizabeth Ware Packard Professor of Communication, also noted the relative warmth during the Oct. 1 debate.

“This debate gives viewers the opportunity to compare candidates’ biographies, records and viewpoints, observe their temperament and communication style, and draw conclusions from hidden questions,” Jamieson wrote in a statement to the DP. “It is rare for debates to come to some points on which the candidates agree. This was a refreshing exception.”

Historically, vice presidential debates have resulted in negligible changes in voter opinion. Jung said she was “not optimistic about this debate … and that it will influence anyone’s opinion so close to the election.”

College freshman Hope Nasatir said she hopes to understand each vice presidential candidate’s views “a little better” and to be “just entertained” as the debate progresses. She also hoped that Walz and Vance would talk about abortion, an issue that is important to her.

“I know who I will vote for. I don’t know if [the debate] will really impact students,” she said.