The first presidential debate of this long U.S. electoral cycle, which faced off in June Joe Biden and Donald Trump, lasted just five minutes. Both contenders formally spoke for 90 minutes in front of the cameras, but in the first two or three interventions, the outcome was clear. For the night and for Biden's campaign. The second debate, although technically the first face-to-face between Trump and Kamala Harris, held this Tuesday (Spanish early morning) in Philadelphia (Pennsylvania), was completely different. After a fierce exchange, the vice president emerged strengthened, without making mistakes and managing to unsettle the billionaire on several occasions, showing his most irascible, uncontrolled, and erratic side.
Analysts had been speculating for weeks about the clash, Trump's seventh presidential debate (in addition to countless more in his primaries) but only the first for Kamala Harris, whose most similar experience was a vice-presidential debate in 2020. It was not epic, it will not be remembered in the books, but it was dynamic and had a good pace, especially in its central part. Both had prepared, but the strategy of the Democratic leader, very evident and well executed, prevailed over the overwhelming rhetorical torrent of the Republican. The plan could not have been simpler: target Trump's ego and wait for his anger to do the rest. And it worked perfectly.
Trump started calmly, but every time his rival pricked his fragile vanity, the response was visceral, forcing the moderators to cut off the former president or correct his unsustainable claims. Harris achieved this by saying that people who attend the billionaire's rallies leave before they end out of boredom. She did it again by reminding that important figures of the Republican Party, like former Vice President Dick Cheney, are voting for her. And she hit a nerve by using economists from Trump's alma mater against his policies or stating that "world leaders laugh at Donald Trump and think he is a disgrace." From calmness, it escalated to shouting, accelerated speeches.
What followed has been seen many times. A tantrum defending that his rallies "are the best in history" or that "many professors say that my economic plan is extraordinary." Increase in tone, volume, personal attacks, against her or Biden "that poor weak and pathetic man" and unbelievable lies. Three times the ABC moderators had to address the millions of viewers to clarify that "there is no law in any U.S. state that allows killing newborns," in response to Trump's recurring story that Democrats allow "not abortion, but the execution of newborns."
They had to act a second time to emphasize that according to all authorities, there have been no detected cases of communities of any kind eating pets, after the former president repeated and even amplified the hoax that Haitian immigrants "are eating people's dogs and cats" in Ohio. And even once more to make it clear that Trump lost the 2020 elections and that none of the more than 60 processes opened by Republican instigation in different states have reached a different conclusion, after Trump insisted that he won those elections and will never acknowledge his defeat. This deeply irritated his campaign, which after the first hour of the debate strongly criticized the network for bias.
63% of registered voters who watched the debate believe that Harris performed better, according to a CNN poll, with only 37% seeing the Republican as the winner. Before the debate, the same voters were evenly divided on which candidate would perform better.
Trump's team's obsession was to calm him down, to maintain composure, at least within some order, as he did just a few weeks ago, which now seems like ages, against Joe Biden in Atlanta. Unlike Harris, who meticulously prepared the strategy with a professional and experienced team in debates and television, with actors imitating her rival's style, and many heads polishing the line, the former president chose to do what he likes best: follow his instinct. His own admitted on the eve, with a mix of faith and resignation, that getting him to study is not exactly easy. Senator Lindsey Graham, at the end, called for those experts to be fired because they had obviously failed.
Trump is a force of nature, uncontrollable, unstoppable, as hurtful and disrespectful as he is often entertaining in his interventions. "The best insulter in many generations," in the words of one of his former Republican rivals. Trying to keep up with him is suicide. Entering his game is a sure defeat. And Harris avoided it at all times, without falling into a single trap, without taking the bait, choosing the topics where she could inflict damage and not trailing behind. Showing a side that Trump was unfamiliar with, after belittling her, underestimating her, and ignoring her until now. He thought it would be a piece of cake and ended up somewhat scalded.
Harris had many angles to cover, perhaps too many. Maintaining the momentum that has driven her campaign in recent weeks, achieving record fundraising and a surge in the polls. Differentiating herself from Biden as much as possible, in terms of health, strength, youth, and vitality, but without disowning her boss, as she remains his vice president. Presenting herself as the figure of change, of the future, compared to the return to the past represented by a former president, even though she is the number 2 in the administration.
Also, emphasizing that she is the opposite of Trump in practically everything, the prosecutor against the felon; the one advocating for uniting the country against the one who symbolizes, according to Democrats, division and polarization. The one who can offer a friendly face, that "captivates and disarms" without shouting or insulting, but projecting a presidential image. And she chose not to try to address them all. She started by talking about her program, especially the economic one, and addressing the middle class. But then she found a goldmine by pressing the buttons that trigger Trump. If the debate had three phases, the imbalance was most evident in the central one. And Americans understood that she could perfectly hold her ground against the former president, that she could be just as combative or more. And that she was willing to pick a fight from the first sentence.
The entanglement with abortion and newborns
The clearest example is that of abortion. Trump failed to steer the debate towards the economy and especially inflation. Not even towards immigration and the border, his favorite topic and probably the most sensitive in the campaign. And in the issue of abortion, he lost control and the narrative. Harris's position is very clear, but the Republican has wavered, including in recent weeks. Faced with specific questions, he was unable to say whether he would sign or veto a law promoting a national ban. He shielded himself by saying it is a matter for the states, as it should be, but hesitated, threw his chosen vice president under the bus, and spun that twisted narrative about the murder of already born babies.
The format, theoretically constrained, did not allow the rhythm on paper, but it provided much more room for maneuver than the June debate in Atlanta. In the last eight years, Trump has changed the country, communication, and the way politics is done in the world's leading power, and also the way debates are conducted. To avoid constant interruptions, attacks, insults, and even reproaches to the moderators, everything is controlled and managed. There is no audience in the studio (in 2016, against Hillary Clinton, Trump brought women who had accused Bill Clinton of inappropriate sexual behavior to the debate). Initial statements have been eliminated, microphones are muted when not in turn, and there is no direct interaction between rivals. Since 2016, in fact, there is no handshake. It is a rigid format. And if the moderators adopt a passive attitude, as happened in the CNN debate, viewers are not even warned of blatant lies or obvious contradictions.
This time it was not like that. The protagonists forced to the maximum, interrupted on occasion, and the moderators, in addition to calling to order or intervening in the most blatant falsehoods, allowed some play. Respecting the bulk of the turns, but without hiding behind time limits if they believed the conversation was flowing or worth seeing where it led.
Hope and decadence
Trump's central message is that his presidency was the best in history and the next one is better, although when asked for more precision, as for example on Health Care, he said that what he has is "outlines, concepts of a plan" and not a concrete one because that is done once in power. He remained anchored in the past, including the months after the 2020 defeat. "We are a failed nation, in serious decline. The world laughs at us, we have no leader, we don't know anything," he said in his remarks, charging "the worst president in the history of the country."
Harris' message was one of change, "hope." "I am not Joe Biden and I am clearly not Donald Trump. I propose new leadership that extols optimism instead of always being angry," she concluded after one of her rival's cantankerous responses. "There are two visions of the country, one in the future and one in the past and that wants to drag us down. But we are not going backwards. We have to have a plan, understand the aspirations, dreams and ambitions of Americans, that's why we need an economy of opportunity," he stressed in his keynote address. He also made no proposals in virtually any area, no big announcements or promises, but it wasn't the main thing, it wasn't the most important thing that night. It's not what will be remembered.