Topic category: Elections - Politics, Polling, etc.
A Look at the Trump - Harris Debate: Winners & Losers There were clear winners and losers in the September 10 debate
The much-anticipated debate between former President Donald Trump and current VP Kamala Harris produced clear winners and losers, depending upon the audience viewing the event.
As the morning fog cleared after the "debate" between former President Trump and current VP Kamala Harris, some clear winners and losers become obvious. You'll note that the word "debate" is in quotes in recognition of the fact that the show ABC news produced was pure form without substance, in effect, a political show designed to boost the spirits of Kamala Harris supporters. ABC news may have succeeded on that front, however, it is very doubtful Harris inspired many undecided voters to support her. Depending upon the audience, different views of winners and losers emerge.
Those who supported either Trump or Harris are unlikely to have changed their support based on their performances. Trump is not a polished debater and everyone knows it, but, like him or not, his performance revealed him to be well-informed, honest, transparent and willing to discuss issues. Harris, on the other hand, showed she was good at grandstanding, making faces, feigning smiles, and trying to agitate her opponent while deftly avoiding substance with platitudes and outright lies.
Harris' facial expression suggests a new more fitting word, Smirkle: a cross between a smile and a smirk. The term "smirkle" best describes Harris' facial expressions for most of the evening. Perhaps Harris is seeking a new crown: Smirkle Queen.
Depending upon the audience, here's how the winners and losers stack up:
Winners:
Trump: Those predisposed to vote for Trump were reminded that Trump is not as skilled a debater as is his running mate, VP candidate J.D. Vance. Yet the show ABC News presented was not a debate at all, with so-called "moderators" doing everything they could to support candidate Harris and badger candidate Trump. There were no "fact checks" of Harris' many misleading and false statements, yet moderators frequently badgered Trump with challenges to statements he made that were absolutely true. Trump was serious and only challenged by his lack of skill at debating, too often rising to the bait tossed his way by Harris who spent far too much time hurling false accusations at her opponent. Nevertheless, Trump has a record that is far superior to that of the Biden-Harris administration (see table below) and there is every reason to believe he means business when he promises to reverse the malaise of the Biden-Harris administration and make America great yet again.
Harris: Those predisposed to vote for Harris were pleased at her ability to avoid substance with "motherhood" platitudes, pie-in-the-sky nebulous goals, and the snide innuendo she employed while continually smirkling and uttering numerous fabrications about Trump. Clearly, Harris's intent was to appeal to voters suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS), and she was well-coached in her unrelenting flow of dubious statements and accusations to that end. Devout Harris supporters should be thrilled with that performance for it was devoid of any substance and lost no opportunity to try to malign her opponent.
Losers:
ABC News: Clearly, ABC News was the biggest loser. So-called "moderators" were consistently questioning Trump's informed answers while ignoring the blatant misrepresentations and outright lies that spewed from the smirking queen of cackle. Evidently, Harris and ABC News decided to make this a three-on-one match... and they succeeded. However, discerning viewers could not help but see through the collusion that was became blindingly obvious as the debate charade progressed. Anyone looking for honest "news" will not find it anywhere near ABC News whose performance is likely to have motivated a huge potential audience to never tune in to ABC News for anything but a clown show.
Harris: The smirkle pasted on Harris' face all evening at what should have been a sober discussion of serious issues is an affront to all viewers not suffering from TDS. Have you ever seen a serious panel discussion or real debate of serious questions wherein one of the participants, whenever she wasn't talking to the camera, smirkled while staring and making faces at her opponent? If you watched the ABC News show last night, you would have seen just that. While Harris did spew a litany of "positions", they were all as thin as a glaze of ice on a puddle after the first Autumn frost, mere "sound bites" rather than serious positions. It is unlikely that undecided voters saw anything in Harris' performance that would recommend voting for her.
Trump The major difference between the Trump-Harris "debate" and the Trump-Biden "debate" was in the differences between President Biden and VP Harris. Biden, evidently suffering from deteriorating mental capacity, was unable to effectively debate any issue. Harris, on the other hand, seemed committed to avoiding any serious debate of issues by presenting platitudes through a mask of smirking gestures intended to "wow" viewers with her ability to incessantly nag her opponent. Unfortunately, Trump wasted too much time responding to her attacks, valuable time that could have been better used by highlight how much worse off our nation is today than when Trump was President nearly four years ago (see chart below).
By any reasonable standard, Trump won the debate... or perhaps better, both Trump won and Harris lost the debate.
The economy, inflation, and cost of living are always near the top of any voter's mind when voting for President. A look at the figures shows why President Trump is favored to win the 2024 election over the queen of word salads and question dodging, Kamala Harris:
In every meaningful category shown above, the Trump administration was far superior to the Biden-Harris administration.
These figures are reflected in the first post-debate snapshot survey of 600 likely American voters (conducted by the Democracy Institute for Daily Express US). That survey found 45% of the respondents thought Trump won, compared with just 34% who thought Harris had won. There is every reason to expect that 11% margin will increase over the next two months.
Contrast how the usual suspects in the "noise" media were jubilant over Kamala Harris' performance last night with the survey of how the public felt as reported by the Daily Express. This gives new meaning to the expression "out of touch" that defines the "noise" media's viewpoint.
The Harris-Walz campaign slogan is "A New Way Forward". Looking at the state of the nation figures above and the post-debate polling, the American people are clearly more inclined to moving back to the Trump era than plunging forward into the abyss of a Harris-Walz administration that seems to run on little more than platitudes.
Author of "Looking Out the Window", an evidence-based examination of the "climate change" issue, Bob Webster, is a 12th-generation descendent of both the Darte family (Connecticut, 1630s) and the Webster family (Massachusetts, 1630s). He is a descendant of Daniel Webster's father, Revolutionary War patriot Ebenezer Webster, who served with General Washington. Bob has always had a strong interest in early American history, our Constitution, U.S. politics, and law. Politically he is a constitutional republican with objectivist and libertarian roots. He has faith in the ultimate triumph of truth and reason over deception and emotion. He is a strong believer in our Constitution as written and views the abandonment of constitutional restraint by the regressive Progressive movement as a great danger to our Republic. His favorite novel is Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand and believes it should be required reading for all high school students so they can appreciate the cost of tolerating the growth of unconstitutional crushingly powerful central government. He strongly believes, as our Constitution enshrines, that the interests of the individual should be held superior to the interests of the state.
A lifelong interest in meteorology and climatology spurred his strong interest in science. Bob earned his degree in Mathematics at Virginia Tech, graduating in 1964.
Cover
•
Commentary
•
Books & Reviews
•
Climate Change
•
Site Links
•
Feedback
