For Americans, Tuesday night’s debate between vice presidential candidates Ohio Senator JD Vance and Minnesota Governor Tim Walz was another chance to compare the two tickets.

But it was an especially important night for Midwestern voters. Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump both chose running mates from the region, hoping to win votes in key states.

The BBC spoke to five Mid-Western residents from across the political spectrum who saw Tuesday night’s 90-minute debate as a welcome dose of civility, even if it didn’t change their vote.

Jim, a lifelong Republican, voted for Trump in 2016 and 2020, but he says Vance could be a strong candidate in the future.

Without hesitation, I 100% think JD Vance won this debate. He did what he had to do. He got the style points, but also the substantive points.

Tim Walz, on the other hand, seemed nervous, he seemed surprised at times.

Vice presidential debates aren’t usually a big deal, but this may be an exception.

This was the most substantive, policy-driven and most normal debate we have seen in this country in a long time.

Shana’s perspective on the election hasn’t changed, but she is more hopeful about the future of American politics.

I liked the camaraderie they seemed to show, at least they played nice.

It seemed like what bipartisan politics should look like.

Yes, there were times where it felt like they were getting a little heated and maybe talking about each other a little, but at the same time it didn’t really devolve into bickering.

There were times when they could admit that they agreed with each other on certain issues.

After all, it meant something to see them shake hands and chat. It was striking to me.

Christina leans toward supporting the Harris-Walz ticket, but has voted for Trump in the past.

I enjoyed hearing from both of them and the fact that they were actually having a discussion and not just arguing or calling each other names.

I was glad that they were on the same page when it came to gun violence, and they were both willing to have a conversation about the issue.

Listening to these two, I thought maybe we could make progress.

This longtime Republican was impressed with Vance, and the senator’s performance solidified his support for the Trump-Vance ticket.

I thought they were both polite in the way they treated each other, which was good to see.

JD Vance was accurate, factual, deeply respectful and truly unflappable.

This is a brilliant guy who comes from an extremely humble upbringing.

Meanwhile, Walz was caught in several lies by the moderators.

The two men’s styles were completely different and I found Vance’s much more favorable.

Kristin generally supports Democrats and plans to vote for the Harris-Walz ticket because she trusts them on the issue of abortion, which is a top priority for her.

Walz won, for me, because he actually answered the most questions.

Vance kept mentioning the names of the female moderators – Margaret, Norah – and I think men do that in a condescending way. I found him smug, a bit condescending and evasive.

Walz did fine, it doesn’t really affect my support for him and Kamala Harris.

It was respectable that they agreed on some issues as problems and did not rely heavily on personal attacks. They talked about policy more than I expected.

North America correspondent Anthony Zurcher provides insight into the race for the White House in his weekly US Election Unspun newsletter.

Readers in Great Britain you can register here. Those outside Britain you can register here.