Americans waited in anticipation for Tuesday night’s debate, holding their breath as a razor-thin race reached a turning point in the face-off between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump. Trump fans hoped to see Harris taken to task for her administration’s record and finally face some tough questions, desperately wishing Trump would deliver a debate performance on par with his June outing. Harris supporters were excited to see her enumerate her policies, making a case for “new leadership” at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. All these hopes and assumptions went unfulfilled, and all parties turned off the TV disappointed.
The media will tell you that Harris beat Trump soundly. Talking heads on CNN went so far as to say that her performance may have been the best in American history and that she “spanked [his butt]” (profanity substituted). If American history started with Biden’s performance, they may be correct, but it didn’t, and the rich tradition of American debate, from the Lincoln-Douglas exchanges to Reagan’s charming one-liners, exposed the mainstream media’s unashamed bias, fawning over Harris.
Neither did she claim clear victory over Trump. He certainly did not perform up to par – I’ll get to that shortly – but any victory she claimed was far from resounding. Harris declined to lay out real policies, attacked Trump endlessly, and let the moderators do the work for her. When asked if Americans were better off today than when she took office, she said, “I was raised in a middle-class family…” and never answered the question.
But neither did Trump! Handed a golden opportunity to press Harris on inflation and her proposed price controls, which would exacerbate financial ruin, he went on defense, choosing to rebut Harris’ attacks, only giving somewhat of an answer towards the end of his two minutes. Trump was unfocused, undisciplined and unprepared. He often rambled, cited loosely covered news stories, and, most tragically, took the bait from Harris at every turn, hook, line and sinker.
Harris’ strategy was, as I expected, to shy away from answering questions herself, poking at the former president relentlessly to get under his skin. That she did and did well. She took a shot at his rallies; he responded angrily instead of focusing on the question. He repeatedly forewent the chance to answer the question and offer concrete policies and solutions to the most prominent issues to defend himself, the reason the most popular phrase among Republican pundits and politicos on Wednesday was “missed opportunity.”
Now, let me qualify my rebukes of Trump’s performance. The moderators took unabashed agency to diminish him, “fact-checking” him with mistruths and half-truths repeatedly, forcing him to answer questions – neither of which did they do to Harris, not even once. When asked about his responsibility for Jan. 6th, Trump pointed out former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s denial, as controller of the capitol police, of extra security and her documented admission of guilt. Moderator David Muir jumped in and said, “The question was about you, not Speaker Pelosi.” That is not the moderator’s job; it’s that of the opposing candidate. Herein lies the obvious point — the media are the opposing candidate because they are obviously motivated by a support for Harris.
Trump essentially had to fight one against three, which is unfortunate, but before I offer him an excuse for that, I must note that he undoubtedly expected that coming in. Thus, he should have been equipped to handle such attacks.
Instead of letting Harris’ attacks fall right off his shoulders, he ignored the bias of the moderators in favor of responding to the VP. I assume his staff calculated that fighting the moderators would cast Trump in a negative light, and that is possible, but instead, he allowed them to rig the thing in favor of Harris, putting her in a favorable position. Her attacks then got under his skin, distracted him, and caused him to lose discipline – something I warned against in my first article for this publication. On the other hand, choosing to ignore Harris’ darts and focus on the task at hand – detailed policies – would have not only given Trump a better image but then allowed him the opportunity to fire back at the moderators when they tried to fact-check him, yet neglected to counter Harris when she gave non-answers.
Across the board, the debate was disappointing, and I doubt it will affect the vote outcome. Trump certainly had some wins – like his answer on abortion laying out the details of Roe v. Wade and his closing statement asking Harris why she hasn’t implemented her policies (which he should’ve led off with) – but he didn’t move the ball forward. Harris’s attempt to appear Obama-like and distinguished in comparison to Trump was negated by her pretentious facial expressions and her inability to speak intelligently. Thus, things remain largely unchanged, and I look forward to possibly seeing the two face off again soon.
Carter Ashcraft is a 21-year-old from Tuscaloosa, Ala., who is majoring in political science at the University of Alabama. You can contact him at carterashcraft12@gmail.com.
The views and opinions expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the policy or position of 1819 News. To comment, please send an email with your name and contact information to Commentary@1819News.com.
Don't miss out! Subscribe to our newsletter and get our top stories every weekday morning.
