My take: Trump/Harris debate resolves nothing
There are several ways to analyze the Trump/Harris Debate. One is to judge the performance of the individuals. The second is to critique the performance of the ABC moderators. Third is the nature and impact of the post-debate media spin. Fourth is determining the winner. And finally, how the debate will impact voters – meaning future polling numbers and ultimately, the election.
Personal performance
In terms of personal performance, I give both candidates a “C.” Trump and Harris each came to the stage with a goal. For Vice President Harris, it was to sell herself to that one-third of the voters who say they need to know more about her. However, she did not provide much more than what any half-informed voter already knew. She stuck close to the same boilerplate talking points she had been espousing in her scripted speeches. There was nothing new in terms of specific plans. Mostly platitudes.
Most notable was her avoidance of answering questions. It started with the initial question as to whether Americans were better off today than four years ago. Instead of responding to the specific question, Harris gave what essentially was an opening statement. In another instance, she ignored the question about her specific flip-flops on various policies. Harris said she would address each of them, but never did.
The same is true of Harris’ negative attacks on Trump. Nothing was new. She brought up the court cases … the Republican defections … the Capitol Hill riot … and his relationship with dictators.
In terms of style, Harris was so scripted that she could have been an AI facsimile. Even her zingers seemed programmed to go off like preset time bombs.
As a lifelong prosecutor, Harris has a reasonable command of the stage. She is articulate, if not informative. She presented her brief while avoiding cross examination. Essentially, Harris was the Harris we have seen and heard since she stepped in to replace President Biden as Democrat standard bearer.
Trump was also the same Trump we have seen and heard on the campaign trail. Unlike Harris, Trump is not good at presenting and closing an argument. He seems to operate without a strategy. Whereas Harris operates from a mental script, Trump wings it.
Based on polling, Trump had the winning positions on the issues that voters have said concern them most. According to the polls, voters trust Trump more in handling the economy … fighting inflation … securing the border … fighting crime. Trump did not take advantage of those advantages. Other than immigration, Trump did not offer to lay out the argument why he would be the right person to handle those issues.
What some saw as Harris putting Trump on the defensive, I saw as giving him an opportunity to correct the disinformation. Do some fact-checking that the moderators only provided one way. Trump made it clear that he does not oppose artificial fertilization, as Harris dishonestly, but has strongly supported and funded it. And there were others.
Trump obviously saw immigration as the most important issue. He kept referring to it throughout the debate. He made the salesman’s mistake of continuing to talk after the sale was made. He consumed airtime that could have been used to address other issues.
Trump also produced his characteristic head-scratchers. The dog eating migrant issue was one of them. On that one, the moderator did an instant fact check – as a rebuttal — saying that local officials have seen no evidence of the puppy as chow allegations.
Since one of the most persistent attack lines by Democrats is that Trump is too cozy with dictators, why would he cite Hungarian strongman Viktor Orban as a person who admires him?
Trump maintained his habit of hyperbole and superlatives — whether talking about himself or Harris. He claimed to produce the best economy in the history of America … that everyone wanted abortion to be handled by the states … and that Harris was the worst Vice President in American history. (Did he forget about Arron Burr?)
Trump did land some punches. He was effective in calling out Harris for not having a real plan – but just platitudes and promises. He asked Harris why – in the past three years — she and Biden had not done all the things she is now promising to do.
In terms of style, Trump dispelled the Democrat’s bogus narrative that he is in a state of age-related decline — physically and mentally. There were no senior moments.
The debate was moderated by Linsey Davis and David Muir of ABC news. They get an “F”.
Having seen every presidential debate since the famous 1960 debate between President Nixon and Senator John Kennedy, I would rate the ABC team as the worst ever.
From the onset, they seemed to have an anti-Trump attitude. There was a palpable disdain for Trump in the tone and the nature of the questions. More specifically, the moderators pushed back if they believed that Trump did not answer the question as posed. At no time did they ask Harris to respond to questions she dodged.
On several occasions, they challenged Trump’s answers – fact-checking as they call it – even as Harris gave multiple statements that were inaccurate. When Harris brought up that old “good people on both sides” quote, the moderators did not fact-check her, even though that accusation has been debunked by several media organizations, including the Washington Post. Same with Trump’s “bloodbath” statement.
(Having negotiated and moderated major debates, it is my personal belief that it is NOT the role of a moderator to fact-check. That is the role of the opponent. By challenging a candidate, the moderator is literally entering the debate on the side of the opponent – which is exactly what the ABC team did. They were not moderating. They were attempting to influence the election.)
Then there was the nature of the questions asked. Questions to Trump dealt with more controversial issues that put him in an unfavorable light. Harris was given mostly softball questions, or questions that would raise issues about Trump – setting up a negative attack.
Perhaps the greatest failure was by sin of omission. The moderators simply failed to ask specific tough questions of Harris. And when they offered up even a slightly tough question, Harris ignored it – and the moderators failed to push back for an answer. There was a blatantly unfair treatment of Trump by the moderators. It was an utter failure based on a combination of obvious bias and gross incompetency.
Post Debate Spin
Since many people will not have seen the debate, how the media spins can have a significant impact on voter perception. I watched the spin on virtually all the networks. As expected, the left-wing media, such as MSNBC, saw Harris as the run-away winner. FOX News gave the win to Trump – although not entirely uncritical of his performance.
Most surprising was the immediate response from CNN. Of course, they gave the win to Harris – as expected. But it was the extreme nature of their evaluation. Jake Tapper came on immediately following the debate — and not only declared Harris the clear winner but viewed Trump’s performance as a total collapse. The entire panel concurred. The most insane comment came from Chris Wallace, who said he never thought he would see a worse debate performance than Biden. But Trump’s was it. Worse than Biden? That was totally out of line. That is nothing less than biased gaslighting.
In the morning newscasts, a bit of objectivity and rationality settled in. There was still a bias, but not to the degree that was seen immediately following the debate. Fortunately for Trump, the late-night post-debate shows could not compete in viewership with FOX’s post-debate program and the morning shows –blunting the value of the outrageous media spin immediately following the debate.
The Winner
There were certainly no knockouts. But in terms of content, I give the edge to Trump. In terms of style-over-content, I edge to Harris. Generally, I saw it as a draw. Not based on what the candidates did, but on what they did not do. No forced errors. They each had their say. No one got thrown out of kilter.
Harris proved that she would deliver a decent speech – although the content was vapid. Trump proved he could address the issues with some substance – and without name calling. And while he got into the immigration issue too many times, he did get some small advantages on the issues of crime and the economy. I do not believe that those who watched only the debate would agree with the post-debate media spin version. They may not see Trump as a winner, but certainly not the loser reflected in the left-wing media.
This was reflected in various media focus groups. Voters did not see Harris win. Reuters assembled 10 independents. Following the debate, 6 said they there were now leaning to Trump … 3 to Harris … and one remained undecided.
The difference in the opinions of the media and political establishment and the voters reminded me of the 1980 Reagan/Carter debate. The professional politicians and pundits gave the win to Carter. All that Reagan won was the hearts and votes of the people.
The Vote
The impact on voters is the great unknown – and we will not even see the first evidence until the later polls – in a week or so
My general impression is that we will not see a significant change in polling numbers. That has less to do with the debate, but more to the fact that the undecided or persuadable voters are a very small sliver of the electorate at this point. Most folks know who they will vote for – and the debate will not change that.
What most pundits will be looking for – me included — is any small shift in the pre-debate trend, which was moving ever so slightly in Trump’s direction. He is currently closing on the bump Harris received for not being Joe Biden. She did not get a second bump coming out of the convention – as many expected.
Any change will be mostly within the margin of error, so we will not know with any degree of accuracy who is ahead – and who is not.
It will be interesting to see if the trend toward Trump continues or has stalled – or reverses. That will be the impact of the debate. But it will be seen in very small numbers and may not be determinant in terms of the election outcome.
And as a reminder, early voting has already started.
So. there ‘tis.
Larry Gilbertson and Joe Horist —- gotta fix your site software……
Did you expect resolution?
Democrats got to know Harris a bit better, watched her take Don apart, get under his skin, and who let the dogs out, woof, woof.
Harris got a two point bump in the polls within 2-3 days, probably will get a few more in the coming week, it could be enough to win, and now they will settle in for the last stretch.
Oh yeah, she got a boatload of cash from the debate, he got a dog’s breakfast.
He said he did not want another debate, now he’s teasing, she says bring it on, but probably could care less. If he asks for one now, it will look like defeat before the second debate. He’s in a bind.
Frankly, if you can’t see Trump is on his heels, that he’s operating in back-up mode, retreating to his top-ten-hits and loyal, very loyal, team of racists, isolationists, and autocrat lover yes men to feed his ego and paranoia’s. His team is probably lying to him. He’s got a third of her money, still needs to feed his family of lawyers, and not much is coming in post his Harris nomination surge. She brought in 360m to his 130m in August. He’s got 300 staffers, she’s got 1,100. For PA, he’s got 50 staffers, GOP says needs 75 and she’s got 375. He will have to sell his soul to the superpacs to be able to compete. But they are just ramping up staff, and who wants to work on a loser for 2 months. She’s got a much larger ground game than Trump beyond PA too. And she will drop an amount of cash there that equals his entire war chest, and it’s only 25% of here. So, Trump and team, they will be pushing Plan B: why they cheated us out of the win which will be your sign of surrender.
This bullshit needs to stop. My Irish heritage got here post the civil war and had to live on Whiskey Row as the indigenous species named it. My first namesake worked the Conshy steel mills as a puddler, a job that kills you before 40. He lived, kept his working age kids in school, and the next two generations worked for the trains as baggage masters, station masters, and even one engineer (yeah, the lucky one died of TB…), I jokingly say they got here facing “Irish need not apply” signs and feelings. In one generation, they took to the train stations and soon placed a sign in the window: “Help wanted, only Irish need apply, preferably Stetsons.” A few generations more, the GI bill, and we broke out from the blue collar life. It’s the American story that we are making Springfield live once again, big time. But there’s a good chance someone will, once again, get hurt based on Trump lies. FYI — there is a craft beer out of Bridgeport, right next to Conshy, making Pudder’s Row; I don’t drink much, but recommend this. My kids, adults, loved it too. Can only ship to PA so you need friends….. *https://www.conshohockenbrewing.com/ourcore* If you go, ping me here and I will tell you the best two spots for the legendary Zep, Norristown’s signature sandwich. We still make Mom’s bastard zep, a family favorite. Sorry, it’s a summer thing so recent memory….
Proof of being in backup is Springfield. Why would he listen to whoever told him that without fact checking? The Haitians there are mostly legal, not illegal. Yes, they have been placed there by the federal government and, of course, some in the area don’t like the change while others note that Springfield was dying and new people, new opportunities, is just what the city needs. And no one says they are eating pets or wildlife. He’s flailing tilting at this windmill. He says pets, no. He says illegal, no. He says deport — can’t, they are legal asylum seekers from a country we recognize for asylum. He may have a point, but not in Springfield where it’s getting as dicey as a Capitol vote count on 1/6/2021. Bomb threats, people being threatened, outsiders coming in, it’s not a good plan.
Larry, you know this game, you know the money game. Trump has been able to go low cost by being the news, all the news, and blocking any daylight to be shown by his competitor. Now even FOX does not run the rallies because, of all reasons, they want him to win. MSNBC stopped running them because they can’t afford the fact checker support :>) kidding. But they stopped too. You have to know this debate was not good for Trump, was good for Harris, she has the momentum with the wind at her back and he’s got his core and the rest is fading away. He is not is a good place and really needs the October surprise to recover
I should have added that Trump has shown the ability to get a lot of votes with little expenditure. He still has that ability but I am pretty sure he will needs some new tools in that tool bag to pull in off too. I think the rallies are maxed out, the current rhetoric, beyond immigration fear and loathing, pretty weak, and the X / Truth Social —— who the fuck really reads anymore. I do not count him out, fear she’s getting cocky, caught close to a cackle in her laughing at him, that’s real bad, but am pretty sure she’s not going to let up, much less back down.
He’s been proven not to be the smartest person in the room in that debate.
She invited people to go to his rallies —- that’s bold and new.
I have said similar since he announced, here on PBP I suggested that folks start with his 1/6/2021 rally speech to begin to see how Trump 2016 has morphed farther into the Dark Side as Trump 2021. That’s where I realized that, if elected, he will use any power he has to attack his fellow citizens that he perceives as enemies of the state. Today starts there, and the current rallies show the real, the current Trump and to me, IMO, scary frightening and not at all like Trump 2016.
Frank, there you go again, writing a book. You should publish your posts. You’d be rich. But you went far and beyond what the article articulated. You again brought up things that did not appear in the article. You repeat the same old tired rhetoric every time. We all know how you feel and what you are going to say. And your hatred for Donald Trump and Republicans/Conservatives is showing bigtime. Can’t you stick to the subject at all? Do you have to slam your hatred of us down our throats every damned day? Just when I think I can relax from you, you come back worse than before. Could you please tell all of us why you are so hateful? It doesn’t look good on you.
Where did I go off topic, AF.
Where did I express hatred for conservatives?
Frank, you always address me as AF as in America First, I am Americafirst – all one name. IT is not AF.
Where did I go off topic, A.
Where did I express hatred for conservatives?
Why expect “resolution”? It’s mid-September. and Americans are fickle and very easily swayed. Don’t expect “resolution” after the election, either. Take out the s from resolution and insert a v. Only then.
Obviously your hatred of democrats colors your opinion-strongly. You give the win on ‘content’ to trump? Impossible! Most of his ‘content’ was lies. I do agree that not everything that Kamala said was factual, but no comparison to trump. As for the moderators not being ‘fact checkers’, when the speaker says something so ridiculous as trump did-immigrants eating pets, doctors aborting in the 9th month and then killing the baby-the moderator has an obligation to not just let it pass. The only reason Kamala didn’t get fact checked like this was-she didn’t spout absurd information. In addition, you made no comment about all the extra time trump got versus Kamala-had they been biased against him as you state, they would have muted his mic as soon as he started to speak when it wasn’t his turn. I would also question your statement that Kamala got softball questions compared to trump-yet another example of your hatred of democrats. I will give you credit Larry-you at least didn’t spout the BS that the other ignoramus who writes for WBP who said ‘Kamala obviously had the questions ahead of time’. Kamala obviously prepared and trump didn’t, and came across as looking like the tired, angry old fool that he is…
Mike, you said Trump Lied and Kamala did not? How do you know for a fact that that is true? How would you even know for a fact? Please enlighten us as to you are so magic to know for sure Trump lied and Kamala did not? Also, your hatred for Republicans/Conservatives is alive and well on here by what you did say and what you did not. Every site I get has said Kamala got softball question, some of the Democrats also said that. Most people do not hate Democrats, they only distrust them. GEt your facts straight, please.
AF-perhaps before you spout BS about my reply to Larry, you might do yourself a favor (to avoid appearing ignorant) and read what I actually wrote. I merely pointed out that trump lied much more, and the lies he was fact checked were so ridiculous that the moderators would have been criticized if they were allowed to pass. As for softball vs hardball-I didn’t see it that way nor have I seen any comments from any media other than WBP that the questions were inherently different. I did point out that trump spoke more, and the moderators didn’t do much to stop him from speaking when his time was up. So, bottom line-you are busted…
To Mike: Except for the facts that everything online from so very many websites, even from Democrats are now on Trumps side. Not all but they are turning to him. I do not hate Democrats either. I never said I was Republican or conservative any time or anywhere. I don’t discriminate either side, and I listen carefully to make the right decision. I don’t vote for one party because of some man or woman. I don’t vote for a man or a woman because of who they are. It is because of what they want to do for America. I never heard anything from Kamala for what she wants to do for Americans or Citizens of the United States. I only heard her say what she wants for the immigrants. I am still undecided. I may not even vote in the election either, if there is even going to be an election. I will leave it at that.
Mikef … just for the record, I am not a hater. I have never hated anyone in my life. I can disagree and disrespect what individual say or do. I also do not stereotype. I do not characterize groups one way or the other. In fact, I enjoy the culture of groups. That is why I have written that I like Jews… I like Blacks. .. I like Hispanics … I like Middle easterners … and yes, I like Democrats. I enjoy the diversity of groups … and limit my disrespect to individuals based on actions. As a conservative, I strongly disagree with the with the far left agenda. I argue against those who advance radical progressive views that I believe threaten long term freedom and the American democracy. Perhaps my weakness is scraping with those who level personal insults or completely mischaracterize me. It is like boxing. I may return some punches, but I don’t get angry or emotional about. These exchanges are more amusing than meaningful. I am not the straw man some would like to fight. Just to let you know — whether you believe it or not.
Larry, I agree with the notion that the majority of this piece came from your previous position commentaries. In truth, if that word is applicable stall, the whole of this piece is a relation from your opinion set and long in tooth.
Therefore, nothing new to see here.
No surprisingly, the usual suspects appeared after another opus of yours without so much as a hint given to your subject what followed addressed each other’s’ doubts relative to the comments of others.
Finally, you thought to finish the rambling on with comments you regular readers have heard from you in defense of your personal virtuous character on the theme of hatred toward others as persons. Intimating that your hatred was not for others who opposed you and your opinion’s philosophy, but you direct your contempt for others’ ideology or lack there of, as well as their lack of knowledge and ability to clearly represent their points.
Not at any time did you intend as hate speech that your retort came out with. Since, you claim none of your readers actually know you for who you actually are In personality, we can not make judgements on your character. And, there may be some truth in your profession that you hold no hate for any person, but “like” all kinds of people, gender, race, religion, and even difference in political philosophy.
As I said above, this piece covers no new and enlightening territory. Therefore, what your comments at this moment change at all the impression we long time readers with other opinions have drawn from the type of assessment your character drew against whatever proposition the other made your reply revealed the real Horist. That Horist showed a hate filled person attacking ideas and persons as one and the same. Not once, but twice, and more. So, disrespectful is the tone and atmosphere attached to your almost daily dalliances in serial trials in attack journalism that your commentary has lost any real impact or ability to convince the skeptic that your commentary represents a topic told by you has any t er both in it. If what your comments propose has more truth than fiction, then truly the old men do conjure up illusionary wars and willfully direct young men and women into needless wars and sure death.
Those truculent souls who say the hate others’ ideals but like and respect those who hold those different ideals know not the truth. What was spoken of Biden and Harris by Larry and his like were not considering the persons as they leveled there abusive missives.
Larry, your words confirm you revere personal political philosophy over the good of country. If what you believe is good for the country as a whole and the Democrats have nothing wroth contributing, then your narrow minded political myopia will dog you in your defeat.
Best for Republicans the your man accepts defeat In November. The few like you should not be encouraged with a win, as your glee would be short lived when your ideals go down in flames. This going down will make Nixon’s demise look like a reprieve with honors.
This message I write while experiencing the UK and the British sense of politics US style. You read even more out of step from the British prospective. Go figure, you do not translate clearly in American English or the Queen’s English. But, I hear much cheering for Harris.
Larry, Those of us who have been reading your posts for a while find it amusing that you say you don’t hate democrats. You choose to blame democrats for your lifetime of failure, and for all the ailments that our very large country has, some of us would interpret that as hatred. Instead you say that it is only the “far left agenda” you disagree with. A) You disparage Biden constantly, but nothing that he has done is anywhere close to “far left”, is slightly right of center if you take a worldview. B) There are no elected officials who espouse a “far left agenda”. Feeling that everyone should have access to good healthcare, the ability to get a good education at a reasonable cost that will set them up for success in their adult years to the best of their ability and to feel safe that you are not going to be shot with an assault weapon when you head to school is not “far left”, it is something that is standard in the vast majority of western nations-we are the outlier in these matters. The reason you (and others) find these topics to be “far left” is that your party (the arses) have moved so far to the right to be completely unrecognizable to the majority of people that voted for Eisenhower in the ’50’s, instead you espouse the ‘virtues’ of the John Birch Society, which was considered ‘radical’ 60 years ago…
Mikef … Glad you are amused. But I do not hate anyone. I disagree on policies … period. I do not hate Biden or Harris.
It is not personal with me.. I push back against their politics. Most folks — Democrats included — are great people. I would not be surprised if my feeling about the Democrat voters is more positive than your feeling about Trump voters.
And OMG… how old are you? Voting for Ike in the 1950s?? … the John Birch Society?? I did not espouse the “virtues” of the JBS even back then. And I had not even reached puberty when Eisenhower was elected. My criticism is with modern Democrats polices.–which have shifted to the left. Biden is not right of center and his big government/big spending policies make that clear. And Harris has been rated as the most left wing member of the Senate — and her initial policies prove it. Your statement that there are no elected official who espouse left wing policies is utterly ridiculous. Who are all those members of the progressive caucus? Crazy statements like that put you beyond intelligent discourse.
I have observed the rhetoric from both sides on this site and cannot help but notice that the liberal posts are more likely than not to cause violence. Tom and Frank are the worse. My butthole tells me that Trump will win. I was given a sign when I farted and it came out truuuuuuuuump!!!!!! It’s a sign from heaven.