Republican vice presidential candidate JD Vance may have had one job before Tuesday night’s debate: convincing the American public that he and his party don’t hate women.

Despite this painfully low bar, I would say he didn’t make it. The once anti-Trump senator wore a pink tie but did not respond to his previous comments about menopausal women, “childless cat ladies” and historically low popularity ratings. Instead, he spent most of his speaking time explaining his views to the two women moderators, the women voting and even his own wife.

During a question about immigration, Vance attempted to talk over CBS anchors Norah O’Donnell and Margaret Brennan after repeating 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 rules you didn’t want to fact-check,” Vance quipped, referring to CBS’ statement that it would be left to Vance and Minnesota Gov. 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 actually going on.”

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

“Thank you, Senator, for describing the legal process,” Brennan said before the station muted Vance’s microphone.

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

Unlike his windmill-, shark-, and Hannibal Lecter-obsessed running mate, Vance deftly perpetrates a very specific brand of misogyny that, while far less obvious, is just as insidious – one that can seem just as empathetic but is undeniably condescending and normalized at its most draconian right-wing politics.

One example of this was Vance consistently calling Brennan – a woman he does not know personally – by her first name rather than addressing her appropriately. The flippant, misogynistic move may have been Vance’s attempt to appear sympathetic and down-to-earth, but many viewers saw it differently: condescending, condescending and rude.

Vance himself admitted that the Republican Party has a problem with 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 failed to explain how he, his vice president and his fellow party members plan to address the issue.

“We need to do a much better job of regaining the trust of the American people on this issue, where, quite frankly, they just don’t trust us,” Vance said, before claiming that was “one of the things that Donald Trump and I’ll try to do it.”

To demonstrate his party’s commitment to achieving this goal, Vance lied about not supporting a statewide abortion ban, about the reality of abortion care later in pregnancy, and about Minnesota’s PRO Act, which was signed into law by his opponent, Gov. Tim Walz became. Because nothing says, “Trust me, I know what’s best for you,” like hosting an impromptu masterclass on gaslighting.

While Vance managed to appear far more level-headed than Trump in his fateful debate appearance against Vice President Kamala Harris last month, it was Vance’s false praise of his wife while discussing the need for child care that truly epitomized his very specific brand of mansplaining and misogyny.

“I’m speaking very personally because I’m married to a beautiful woman who is an incredible mother to our three beautiful children, but also a very, very brilliant corporate litigator, and I’m so proud of her,” Vance began. “But being a working mother is extraordinarily difficult, even for someone who has all the advantages of being a wife.”

It’s telling when a man publicly laments the challenges his working wife faces, but doesn’t seem to face the same challenges as a working father. While Vance seems to appreciate everything his wife does, he still chose to openly explain how hard it is to work outside the home while also managing the majority of childcare and household responsibilities without structural support – just structural Support that Republicans have rejected in the past.

For his fraternal coup de grace, Vance then emphasized the importance of offering a “family care model that allows for choice.”

“The cultural pressures that are placed on young families, and particularly on young women, I think make it really difficult for people to choose the family model that they want,” Vance said, ignoring how difficult, dangerous and in In some cases, anti-abortion laws make this impossible. Women must decide when and how to even begin creating a “family model.”

Overall, it’s true that in Tuesday’s debate, Vance managed to portray himself as a level-headed, somewhat ordinary politician (if the definition of “ordinary” is calmly debating the largest mass deportation effort in U.S. history). But that may be what makes Vance far more Machiavellian than Trump. And that should put us all on high alert as we prepare for the November election.