The Big Debate: Impressions

When I watch a presidential debate, I tend to go to a network that supports the candidate I felt had the worst performance for post-debate coverage. After Biden’s disastrous performance on June 27, I watched the commentary on CNN. The panel looked devastated and you could sense that they knew his candidacy was in trouble. Following the Trump-Harris debate last night, I tuned into Fox to see their reaction. It wasn’t as dour as the CNN crew in June, but they were struggling to put a positive spin on Trump’s performance. They were mostly complaining about the ABC moderators. While some of their complaints are legitimate, in my experience the team complaining about the officiating is the team that’s losing.

My impressions were that Kamala Harris was extremely well prepared. Her responses were expertly crafted, memorized and delivered like a skilled actor or orator. Even though she didn’t say much of substance, her platitudes were delivered with confidence. Trump appeared to be poorly prepared, spoke off the cuff more than he recited practiced responses, and couldn’t stop himself from chasing rabbits that he should have known would hurt him.

I stated in a recent article that if he performs poorly or if the obnoxious, condescending Trump shows up, it’s game over. That might have happened. All voters who choose their candidate based on policy positions have already made up their minds and the debate likely didn’t affect their plans for Nov 5. But if there really is a sizable chunk of voters who were undecided and choose their candidate based on how the candidate makes them feel, Harris clearly won the night. She was warm, smiled a lot, delivered her lines with confidence. Trump scowled and was visibly angry throughout. Not the demeanor one needs when trying to win over voters who choose based on emotion.

One of the legitimate beefs that the Fox News folks had with the moderators is that they aggressively fact-checked Trump but not Harris. One chart I saw suggested the moderators corrected Trump five times to zero for Harris. This might give the “vote-on-emotion” crowd the sense that the only one stating falsehoods on the stage was Trump. In fact, they each played fast and loose with facts. One could argue that Harris’ lies are more concerning because they were clearly premeditated. Trump was slinging mud seemingly out of desperation. Let’s look at some of the claims by both candidates.

• Trump claimed that Haitian immigrants were eating people’s pets in Springfield, Ohio. This story has been debunked.
• Trump claimed that Democrats are open to killing newborn babies, citing an odd comment from a former governor of Virginia as evidence. Republicans fairly criticize Democrats who are unwilling to commit to a time limit on when abortions can take place (up to 6 weeks, 12 weeks, 18 weeks?). But suggesting that Democrats favor abortion in the third trimester or especially after birth is a bit of a stretch.
• Trump may be exaggerating the number of illegal crossings. He said 21 million have entered the U.S. during the Biden administration. The official numbers are lower, but it is difficult to estimate the number of immigrants who enter undetected. His point that the numbers are much higher now than during his term is correct, even if he’s exaggerating the extent.
• He claimed that for 18 months, no service men or women were killed during his administration, but the data doesn’t back that claim up. Similar to Harris’ claim that no military personnel are currently in war zones, it all comes down to how you define the terms.
• He claimed that Kamala Harris would ban fracking. It’s fair to criticize Harris for flip-flopping on fracking. But since her “conversion” which occurred when Biden chose her as his running mate, she’s been adamant that she won’t attempt to ban fracking.
• He claimed, once again, that he did not lose the 2020 election. I could almost hear Republicans across the country groaning when he took the bait and began defending that position. I’m not sure you can accuse Trump of lying when he truly believes he got hosed, but only he and his most loyal followers believe it. The evidence just doesn’t support the claim and his continued denial is problematic for his campaign. He should have known that question would come up and should have had a plan for dealing with it. Even if it was lame, like Harris’ “my values haven’t changed” explanation for her shift from progressivism to more moderate policy positions, anything would have been better than saying he still believes he won.

• Harris twice claimed that Trump would use the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 as his playbook. Trump has repeatedly said that the document has nothing to do with his campaign and he hasn’t endorsed it. Harris knows this but keeps saying it.
• Harris claimed that the Biden administration was responsible for 500,000 new manufacturing jobs. This was a creative use of statistics by Harris – the jobs went away during the last year of the Trump administration due to COVID lockdowns. They came back when the COVID lockdowns were lifted. The data also shows a steady loss of manufacturing jobs throughout 2024, so Harris’ claims that Bidenomics is good for manufacturing is questionable. Trump (and ABC) missed the opportunity to ask her how raising corporate taxes from 21% to 28% would help a manufacturing sector which many believe is already in a recession.
• Harris claimed that the Trump tax cuts only benefited billionaires. In reality, 65% of taxpayers benefited from those tax cuts. Of course billionaires benefited disproportionately because they pay a disproportionate amount of taxes anyway. But her plan to allow those cuts to expire will result in a tax increase on that 65%. Therefore, her claim that no one earning under $400,000 will see a tax increase is blatantly false.
• Harris brought back up the “there will be a bloodbath” statement from a March 2024 speech, suggesting this is evidence Trump plans to attempt to take over the country in a violent revolution. This has been debunked as Trump was talking about the potential effects of Democratic policies on the U.S. auto industry when he uttered that line. Harris knows this, but keeps saying it to stoke the “Trump wants to be a dictator” theme.
• Harris claimed that Trump tariff proposals would cost American families $4,000 per year. Like Trump’s 21 million undocumented migrants claim, this is on the high end of estimates. She’s correct that tariffs can be inflationary, but they can also have benefits. Trump correctly pointed out that even though the Biden administration criticized his previous tariffs, they left the majority of them in place.
• Harris brought back up the “good people on both sides” phrase Democrats love to use to paint Trump as sympathetic to neo-nazis and white supremacist groups. She knows he was referring to the debate about whether or not to remove confederate statues, not the guy who drove into the crowd killing one and injuring many. Criticisms from the left that Trump is slow to condemn the Proud Boys and groups like that are fair. But they are equally slow to criticize Antifa, BLM, or Occupy groups that are actually responsible for more violence and property damage than the right wing groups are. Remember Biden’s “Antifa is not a group, it’s an idea” line from at 2020 debate? Both candidates and parties are disingenuous in this regard.
• Harris claimed that Trump would sign a national abortion ban and favors monitoring pregnancies and miscarriages. The first is hard to know. Like Harris on fracking, Trump has waffled on abortion. His latest position is that he does not favor a national ban and thinks it should be a decision left to the states. But he has been inconsistent. J.D. Vance recently said that Trump would veto such a ban, but Trump backpedaled on that during the debate. The second claim is completely bogus. Harris created this straw man by twisting some words from the Project 2025 document mentioned earlier. Trump has never suggested the government collect data along those lines.

So, both candidates were guilty of outright lies or misleading claims during the debate. The question now becomes, “who lied better?” Harris’ lies and out-of-context or misleading claims were intentional, well prepared, well rehearsed and well delivered. Trump’s lies and misleading claims were extemporaneous, poorly timed and poorly delivered. As a result, Harris won both the likability contest and the lying contest. This can’t be good news for Trump.