[Craving even more FPM content? Sign up for FPM+ to unlock exclusive series, virtual town-halls with our authors, and more. Click here to sign up.]

In the wake of Tuesday night’s vice presidential debate, former FBI body language expert Joe Navarro reported on Politico his analysis of the candidates, claiming that he used his 50 years of experience to “figure out what [JD] Vance and [Tim] Walz were really thinking and feeling behind all the talking points.” It is a mostly even-handed interpretation with some interesting points, albeit some predictable spin in favor of Democrat Walz.

Navarro listed eight significant signs he observed from the two candidates:

1)         Right at the top of that list, under the heading “Yes, Vance’s beard matters” – bolded to make sure you know it matters – Navarro seized upon the Republican’s facial hair to suggest it makes Vance off-putting to women voters. “[R]esearch indicates that voters see beards as (surprise, surprise) more masculine,” Navarro writes. “That can be positive to some, reading as strength and competence. But to others, especially women, it can be negative, conveying aggression and opposition to feminist ideals.” [emphasis added]

Is Politico trying to highlight here for women that Vance’s beard is a symbol of patriarchal misogyny? Is it trying to trigger those childless Democrat cat ladies who were offended by Vance’s notorious “childless cat ladies” putdown?

2)         In all fairness to Navarro, he then complimented Vance on the “precision grip” he used several times throughout the debate: “bringing his index finger and thumb together, almost like an OK sign.” It is a gesture, Navarro explains, which “communicates confidence and a command of the issue being discussed… It’s a sign of fluency and authority and it is very persuasive when utilized in those precise moments.”

Fact check: true. Despite his own later claim that he rated 11 on a scale of nervousness from 1 to 10 during the debate, Vance exuded relentless confidence, authority, and persuasiveness throughout.

3)         The body language expert then noted Walz’s tendency to address the viewer directly, even pointing at the camera with his index finger: “It was a bold, almost accusatory gesture.” Navarro says this can come across as hostile or threatening, but he found it effective for getting our attention. Maybe so, but no one likes to have a finger wagged at them.

4)        Navarro went on to claim, rather amusingly, that Walz’s “eye-popping” indicated passion and emotional intensity, such as during an exchange about abortion – a favorite policy of Walz and running mate Kamala Harris. He praised it as “a dynamic and emphatic facial motion that… gave extra weight to his feelings and held our gaze.”

I beg to differ – for me and almost certainly most other viewers, Walz’s bulging eyes conveyed panic and desperation. But hey, I’m no body language expert.

5)         During the aforementioned exchange about abortion, Navarro observed, “Vance did something striking: He placed his hand over his heart and tapped his chest,” communicating “deep emotion and sincerity.” Navarro expressed reluctance to concede that Vance was being sincere at this moment, only warning that if “it appears contrived, you are in trouble. Coming off as dishonest is worse than doing nothing at all.”

True, but I’m going to confirm that it did indeed suggest authenticity and sincerity, qualities that Vance always gives off.

6)        Navarro argued that Walz furrowed his eyebrows, which communicates doubt and insecurity as well as disagreement. “While Vance had the floor, this was a way for Walz to silently say, ‘No way, that’s not right, and I am going to challenge you on this.’”

Again, as with Walz’s popping eyes, I’m going to dispute Navarro’s interpretation and say that the furrowed eyebrows suggested worry and desperation.

7)         Navarro noted that when Walz brought up the subject of Project 2025 “Vance exhibited a little tell that carried a big message: a slight squinting of the eyes and a small frown.” To Navarro, this “clearly” indicated that Project 2025 is “a sore subject.” He warned that “[w]e have to guard against such behaviors in high-stakes interchanges like negotiations or, say, vice-presidential debates — they reveal to your opponent what topics you want to avoid and where your weaknesses lie.”

I would argue that Vance does not find Project 2025 a triggering subject or a weakness, since it’s only a Left-wing conspiracy theory which Trump has disavowed numerous times.

8)        Navarro concluded by fairly praising both Vance and Walz on a move he calls “turn yielding,”

when you demonstrate respect for someone by yielding your time and allowing them to speak. We can signal that it is their turn by framing the body toward them, or by tilting our heads—nonverbally communicating that they have your attention, that you are willing to listen. This was a marked contrast to the presidential debates, when candidates spoke all over one another.

Navarro credited this to both candidates’ roots in “that famous Midwestern politeness.” If so, our country desperately needs more of it.

No matter how Politico may want to subtly spin it, the vice-presidential debate was a decisive victory for JD Vance and thus for Donald Trump too. It would not be an exaggeration to state that Vance may have just handed Trump the White House. The radical totalitarian Walz, whom the Left has tried to sell as “nice dad Tim” and “Coach Walz,” sabotaged himself in numerous ways, perhaps most devastatingly when he utterly collapsed as the moderators confronted him about his false claim that he was in China during the Tiananmen Square protests. Another mortal self-wound came when he claimed the First Amendment doesn’t protect “hate speech.” And then of course, another nail in the coffin was when he weirdly described himself a being “friends with school shooters.”

JD Vance, by contrast, was cool, calm, collected, and in control of the facts. In one word, he presented himself as presidential. Can anyone honestly claim that Tim Walz or his epically incompetent running mate Kamala Harris ever come across as even vice presidential, much less presidential?

Follow Mark Tapson at Culture Warrior.