Republican vice presidential candidate JD Vance arguably had one job in Tuesday night’s debate: convince the American public that he, and his party, don’t hate women.

Even with that painfully low bar, I’d say he failed. The once anti-Trump senator did wear a pink tie, but did not address his previous comments about menopausal women, “childless cat ladies” and historically low approval ratings. Instead, he used most of his allotted speaking time to make his views clear to the two moderating women, the voting women, and even to his own wife.

During a question about immigration, Vance attempted to talk to CBS moderators Norah O’Donnell and Margaret Brennan after spouting dangerous lies about Haitian immigrants living in Springfield, Ohio. To Vance’s dismay, Brennan reminded the audience that the immigrants in Springfield are there legally.

“The lines you weren’t going to fact-check,” Vance joked, referring to CBS’ statement that it would be left to Vance and Minnesota Governor Tim Walz to fact-check each other during the debate. “And since you’re fact-checking me, I think it’s important to say what’s really going on.”

Vance continued talking, interrupting both O’Donnell and Brennan as they tried to continue the debate.

“Thank you, Senator, for describing the legal process,” Brennan said, before the network turned off Vance’s microphone.

“The audience can’t hear you because your microphones are dead,” Brennan said. “We have so much we want to address. Thank you for explaining the legal process,” she added, in a tone that every woman in a cubicle, boardroom or classroom knows deep in her bones.

Unlike his windmills, sharks, and Hannibal Lecter-obsessed running mate, Vance deftly wields a very specific brand of misogyny that, while far less obvious, is just as insidious—one that can seem empathetic but is undeniably condescending. normalizes the most draconian right-wing policies.

An example of this was Vance consistently referring to Brennan – a woman he does not know personally – by her first name instead of addressing her properly. The lightly misogynistic move may have been Vance’s attempt to appear sympathetic and down-to-earth, but many viewers saw it differently: condescending, patronizing and rude.

Vance himself admitted that the Republican Party has a problem when it comes to women’s trust. He reminded women watching Tuesday that they don’t trust Republicans when it comes to abortion and the human right to bodily autonomy — but did not explain how he, his running mate and his party colleagues plan to tackle the issue.

“We have to do so much better to regain the trust of the American people on this issue, where quite frankly they just don’t trust us,” Vance said, before claiming that this is “one of the things that Donald Trump and I try to do this.”

To demonstrate his party’s commitment to achieving that goal, Vance lied about not supporting a nationwide abortion ban, the realities of abortion care later in pregnancy, and Minnesota’s PRO Act signed by his opponent, Governor Tim Walz . Because nothing says, “Trust me, I know what’s best for you,” like hosting an impromptu gaslighting masterclass.

While Vance was able to come across as much more down-to-earth than Trump in his ill-fated debate performance against Vice President Kamala Harris last month, it was Vance’s false praise for his wife while discussing the need for childcare that truly epitomized his very particular brand of mansplaining. and misogyny.

“I speak about this very personally because I am married to a beautiful woman who is a wonderful mother to our three beautiful children, but is also a very brilliant trial attorney, and I am so proud of her,” Vance began. . “But being a working mother, even for someone who has all the benefits of my wife, is extremely difficult.”

It’s telling when a man publicly complains about the challenges his working wife faces, but he doesn’t seem to face the same challenges as a working father. Although he seems to appreciate everything his wife does, Vance still chooses to explain how difficult it is to work outside the home while taking on the majority of childcare and household responsibilities without structural support—precisely the structural support that Republicans have opposed in the past.

Before his coup de grâce, Vance then pontificated on the importance of providing a “family care model that enables choice.”

“The cultural pressures on young families, and especially on young women, I think make it very difficult for people to choose the family model that they want,” Vance said, ignoring how anti-abortion laws make it difficult, dangerous and in some cases make impossible. for women to choose when and how to create a ‘family model’ in the first place.

Overall, it’s true that Vance managed to portray himself as a level-headed, somewhat ordinary politician during Tuesday’s debate (if the definition of ‘ordinary’ calmly discusses the largest mass deportation effort in American history) . But that may be what makes Vance far more Machiavellian than even Trump. And it’s what should put us all on high alert as we prepare to go to the polls in November.