Thoughts On the Debate in Real Time

*PS added.

Who won each round and overall? 

Just my opinion, in real time ... 

ECONOMY

WHO WON:  Neither.  In fact, they both actually failed this one, miserably.

Kamala unfortunately didn't answer the very first question, a very important question "Are Americans better off (financially) than they were four years ago?" 

She ignored it in favor of a speech on supporting small business and the middle class and reconsidering tax shelters for the corporations and wealthiest 1% -  which is true and I agree with 100% as a Democrat - but  it's one thing to say it and another to do it and explain how - and she ignored the state we're currently in - missed opportunity #1..

Trump seized that opportunity and ran with it - the fact that Americans weren't better off and blamed Democrats for it.

However, neither explained exactly how they were going to improve the economy, just that they were.

Trump pushed the foreign tariffs and foreign debt thing again, which has already been tried during his own presidency, and in fact, they're still largely in place  - and yet here we are economically still anyway.

As Harris stated, these tariffs increased the price of goods to the consumer because China and others just raised their prices for goods and services - and that we are cleaning up that mess still.

(Aside: For example, Denmark's GDP has grown 2% because of us and Ozempic sales, because we are the only country that pays full (over) price for it. ) 

On the other hand, Trump said if the Biden administration didn't like the tariffs, they should've repealed them - but they didn't.

As much as I hate to say it, that is actually a fair point - why didn't the Biden administration get rid of the tariffs?

I wish I knew - and Harris didn't answer that - missed opportunity #2.

And then when Muir asked her directly why they didn't, she went on to talk about something else rather than answering - missed opportunity #3. 

She DID, however, say that not only did his foreign tariffs/taxes plan fail, but his prior tax shelters for corporations and the wealthiest 1% do not benefit the middle class at all are also largely responsible for this current mess, causing the middle class and small businesses to bear most of the tax burden, and that she was was aiming at making taxes more fair by giving more shelters to small business, less to corporations and the wealthiest 1% -  but she was vague on the details.

ABORTION

WHO WON: Harris. 

He talked first, stating that he doesn't personally support abortions for rape victims or incest, but that is "what the people wanted." 

Harris successfully retorted that by saying that as a result of his SCOTUS placements and supporters, the type of abortions he claims to actually support - rape and incest - were now made criminal in many states (like mine).

She also said that doctors not giving a D&C to women after miscarriage, despite the woman bleeding out, for fear of being prosecuted -  or 12-year-old girls being forced to carry a child after being raped or incest -  isn't what anyone "wanted" or voted for.

Slam dunk.

He added that the SCOTUS simply gave the rights back to each state to decide and that Ohio and Kansas voted on it.

Yeah, but in states like mine (Kentucky) the issue of abortion  was never put to a vote like Ohio - the state legislature - majority (Trump) Republicans - made the laws for "no abortions, no exceptions" and we had no say or vote on the issue at all!

The only thing she floundered on is she should have said, when Trump asked her, "No, I do not support late or at-term abortions" when Trump asked.  

Instead, she just said "Oh, come on" and "That's not true."

She needed to state clearly "No, I do not." - missed opportunity #3.

However, both she - and moderator, Linsey Davis - reminded him that in NO state is abortion legal at near or full term.

(Also, literally no one supports that OR "execution" of live babies, nor did the former governor of Virginia, Trump quoted, ever said that!)

IMMIGRATION

WHO WON:  Neither - but Trump fared the poorest.

First of all, he claimed that immigration is taking black/Latino jobs.

Not sure what his point is - that they're taking the lowest paying jobs that us white people think we're too good to do anyway?

At that point is where it gets good. 🙂

Up until now, Trump remained calm.

Then Kamala cleverly hung out some bait about crowd sizes that she knew he'd react to - including encouragement to watch videos of  the attendees of his rallies, with people actually leaving after some of the crazy things he says - and he took the bait   🙂

He then raised his voice and went off on his usual crazy talk about immigrants eating dogs and cats in Springfield, Ohio!!!

That, of course, is not only not true, but cuckoo.

So David Muir, one of the moderators, reached out to the City Manager of Springfield, Ohio, who stated there were no reports of eating animals by immigrants ever reported.  😂😂

Trump continued calling her the "Border Czar," which in reality, Harris has no power over the border as Vice President.  

Trump also claimed falsely that she and Biden had the power to close the borders right now and to "Go sign the bill."

Um - there IS no immigration bill to sign anymore, because YOU asked Republicans to kill their own bill until after the election, Trump!

And neither the POTUS or the VPOTUS  have the authority to close the borders on their own, only Congress does - they just sign the bill.  

They can send in the national guard to help prevent crossings or enforce already-existing legislation, but they can't close the borders completely alone.

If that were true, or even possible that the president and vice president could close the borders entirely on their own, then YOU would've done it yourself, when you were president - but you didn't. 

However, although Harris did not say anything cuckoo, she also did not strongly or clearly state her position on immigration, so she didn't win this one, either - missed opportunity #4.

CRIME

WHO WON:  Neither.

Trump claimed the crime has increased under Biden (it has not, it's actually dropped overall -  which Muir verified).

Instead of addressing her views on crime - which should be her strong suit as a former prosecutor -  Harris simply stated that she found it interesting he was so against crime, when he had been found guilty of several of them (listing them).

Though funny, not an appropriate retort.

Neither gave a clear plan for dealing with crime.

ENERGY/FRACKING

WHO WON: Neither.

Kamala has changed her position on fracking and has explained why, several times - she ultimately decided that finding internal sources of energy instead of relying on the Middle East was worth the risks - and yet he continued to state that she was against fracking.

Neither of them addressed a clear plan on what to do about energy.

JANUARY 6th

WHO WON:  It depends - if you choose belief over fact, then Trump won.  If you choose facts - then Harris - and the moderators, actually.

To start, the moderators asked the question I wanted them to - if he still believes the election was stolen and he answered that yes, he did.

Both the moderator and Harris reminded him that in every court case he has tried to prove the election was stolen, he has lost. 

Trump claimed that they didn't even look at the evidence, and what they said was he "didn't have standing."

Erm  - that is what "not having any standing" means, Trump - several judges DID look at the "evidence" you presented, but either found found it not credible or substantial enough to support a case or actually ruled this way!

Trump also said the January 6th people were "treated very badly," and that Ashley Babbitt was shot by a "very bad police officer" (who was trying to protect Capitol from people violently breaking in, injuring police/security in the process?!?), and had "no reason" to shoot her -  despite previously stating he supported the police, as well as Muir presenting the fact that 140 police officers and security personnel were injured trying to protect the Capitol. 

Harris retorted (paraphrasing) that the reason January 6th happened was his inability to accept that 81 million people voted against him, ignoring facts versus his belief, which makes him appear more concerned with himself than democracy or the constitution. 

She went further, turned right to him and said that it's not that dictators are afraid of him, it's that they know he admires dictators rather than democracy, and that he allows himself to be manipulated by these leaders - softening to "they are manipulating you with flattery" and thus you appear weak.

That was effing brilliant - and true. 

She also stated that a true test of a good leader is one who builds others up and unifies them, instead of tearing them down, name-calling and dividing them. 

Amen!

ISRAEL-HAMAS 

WHO WON:  Harris, and she probably made her clearest point here.

She spoke very eloquently on always supporting Israel to defend itself from terrorist organizations - and in particular, Iran -  but also stated that it matters HOW Israel defends itself.

She also stated that her goal would be a two-state system where both Palestine and Israel had a an official statehood, sharing the Gaza strip.

Trump then accused her of hating both Israel and Palestine, which made no sense whatsoever, particularly after what she'd just said.

The only valid point - or even coherent one - that Trump made was that the Biden administration has not been hard enough on Iran, which is a fair point and true.

UKRAINE - RUSSIA

WHO WON: Neither, but actually possibly Trump, simply because Harris dug herself into a hole, on this one..

Harris stated she met with Zelensky days before the war, which of course begs the question then why did it happen as if it were a surprise.

Trump zoned in on that, which was fair.

However, Trump stated again the war will be over within 24 hours if he was elected, but did not clearly explain how he would accomplish that or how he could guarantee it.

He also continued to drill on how the rest of the world is "afraid of him," while simultaneously praising the world's worst offenders. 

RACE AND DIVERSITY

WHO WON: Harris.

Trump didn't deny saying that about whether she was black or Indian, but he said he didn't care what she was or wanted to be.

Harris stated that it's a tragedy that his focus and stances on race have been so divisive and taken us backwards.

AFGHANISTAN 

Can't comment because I was out of the room.

AFFORDABLE CARE ACT

WHO WON:  Both. Although I agree philosophically with Kamala,  they both made very good points on this one, and this was the only time Trump didn't completely make something up.

Trump stated he actually did not want to do away with the ACA/Obamacare, just change certain aspects, but the Democrats didn't want to get rid of certain aspects of it that weren't working.

This is actually true -  unfortunately, congressional Democrats didn't want to hear about problems after implementing it, but they later finally and eventually did recognize changes were needed and made them.

Harris brought up that nothing was done about skyrocketing drug prices during Trump's administration despite promise, but the Biden administration did do something - the Inflation Reduction Act was signed into law, which will go into effect in 2025.

This is also true - Trump said he would do something about it but never did, Biden at least did the IRA, which doesn't do much, even when it finally goes into effect in January.

Then, on a tangent, after a random comment Trump made about  Harris wanting to take the guns away, Harris directly addressed this as a lie - that both she, and Walz, are gun owners - they don't want to take guns away, they just want to make sure that the wrong guns don't get into the wrong hands.

I'm not sure why we didn't get more into gun laws and school shootings, considering it's on everyone's mind with recent events - perhaps due to lack of time, but it should have been one of the first issues.

FINAL ASSESSMENT

Okay, so it just ended, and though Harris's speech at the end was inspirational and eloquent, I'm actually disappointed in Harris's performance because I've seen her do better.

It was very important for her, going in, to be clear on her own policies, but she wasn't  - and she also needed to answer a clear yes or no, because Trump never does - but instead, she emulated his vagueness and not answering yes or no.

I can see why she was a really good prosecutor, and yet - not so great on the witness stand, is she?

As for Trump, although he kept repeating outrageous lies about  her stances on things like fracking, guns, and late-term abortion - despite Harris having just stated the opposite, several times -  Trump also did adopt a more reserved tone than his usual, only really going complete cuckoo-off-the-rails once about the eating-cats-and-dogs in Ohio thing 😂

Thus, my overall assessment is Trump did better than his usual, and Harris did worse than her usual - but in the end, neither of them  "won" this debate 🙁

If anyone did, it was Harris, but not by much - she had several missed opportunities.

_________________________________

PS - Now, after having read what the press has to say, let me say this  - I think they're overinflating her performance.

No, it was not a TKO on Harris's part, as much as I wanted it to be. 

Look, I know we all have hope for her, and the fact that anyone is better than Trump, but it was not the total knockout we had hoped for - there were several missed opportunities.

Frankly, press - I don't care if she looked calmer, younger, and smiled more!?!

Some of us are not total idiots.

I don't care about eloquent-but-vague rhetoric about moving forward in general terms.

I care about how they actually answer questions -  and yes, I CAN keep my eye on the ball and keep track of whether or not they were answered, despite their best efforts to distract..

Because the fact is, many people didn't know her policies versus Biden's and here was her chance to explain that - but she didn't.

To be fair, he kept trying to put her on the defensive and she was busy addressing that much of the time - and she managed to get him on the run in the same way - but it was important for her to explain her own policies clearly and that didn't happen except in general terms.

Thus, I think she did well, on her first presidential debate - but not great -  she had several missed opportunities she can learn from.

_____

PS x 2

Mark said "He refused to even once look at her."

I have a theory on this.

He has been soft with her since day 1 and actually complimentary of her at times.

I think Trump actually likes Kamala and always has (well, he did contribute to her campaign twice in California).

Not to mention, he has described her as "beautiful" and we all know what he's like with women he considers beautiful.

I think he didn't look at her because he knows he would've softened, because he actually likes Kamala as a person.  😉