Ohio Republican Sen. J.D. Vance "made Trumpism sound polite, calm and coherent" in the vice presidential debate on Tuesday evening, according to a member of the New York Times editorial board.

"JD Vance was more effective in presenting a version of his party’s ticket that might broaden its appeal. He made Trumpism sound polite, calm and coherent," said Binyamin Appelbaum, the editorial board's lead writer on economics and business.

"The question is whether voters will credit a performance so strikingly at odds with the behavior and views of the man he was purporting to represent," he added.

Josh Barro, author of the NYT newsletter, "Very Serious" said that Vance was "far nimbler than the nervous Tim Walz, especially in the first half of the debate."

Barro said Vance "stumbled" on abortion and the 2020 election results "where his rhetorical skill could not salvage the very unappealing material he was working with."

Most of the 13 columnists the NYT featured in its debate reaction piece thought Vance outperformed Walz, aside from Charles M. Blow who said Walz won and two others who called it a tie.