Vice presidential candidates, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and Ohio Sen. JD Vance faced off on the debate stage for the first time Oct. 5.

While there were some interesting, quotable moments, this debate was boring. Exactly how it is supposed to be.

America has not had a “normal” debate since 2012. The discussion with Vance and Waltz was refreshing and gave us that “Romney v. Obama” feel.

There was humor … that was intentional and there was kindness and respect shown between candidates. Frankly, the bar is low. But, they’ve seemed to raise it just a little.

Vance did seem to be faking it until he made it, with his friendliness feeling phony. In reality, I just don’t think it matters. You have to deal with people you don’t like now and then in a professional setting. We’ve been missing that quality of politics, and we may have just entered the first step of getting it back.

Vance seemingly hates women and wants nothing to do with half of the citizens of the U.S. That being said, he played the right game last Tuesday. That’s what separates him from his running mate, he listens to his team.

He knew he was up against Walz, who is America’s new sweetheart. If he appeared to debate Walz with personal attacks, he’d be looking at political suicide. When Walz told the viewers that his son, Gus, witnessed a shooting, Vance apologized and showed sympathy. Whether it was fake or not, it was the right move.

Policy was a key factor in this debate, unlike the one with former President Donald Trump and current Vice President Kamala Harris.

It makes sense, there’s a misconception that presidential debates are for stating policies and announcing plans. That’s how it should be, but that’s not the reality. Presidential debates are made for putting candidates in the spotlight and showcasing their personalities. Especially in an age where you can find all a candidate’s policies by researching and finding them on their websites.

This debate though was exactly what we wanted: a formal debate, with people who acted civil to each other and policy statements.

It caught me off guard. That says a lot about how politics and presidential races have been handled in the past decade. It’s usually fueled with chaos and candidates that thrive off of it. But this was a debate where there wasn’t a clear winner, and that’s OK.

It’s harmful though. There were points in the debate, like when Vance said, “You weren’t going to fact-check.” This should’ve raised more of an alarm for concern, but since everyone was in awe of how well-composed these candidates were, it slipped under the rug.

As much as I want to see another debate between Trump and Harris, if I were his team, I would also agree to end the debates here. Vance ended on a high note, and a debate where Trump counters everything he said in the vice presidential debate, would be harmful to his campaign.

Every debate in recent years has been a mess. This was refreshing. It was boring and underwhelming, exactly how it should be.