By Tony Bruce, Ben Emos and Mary Jones | Wednesday, September 11, 2024 | 10 min read
In the intense debate, Kamala Harris skillfully baited Donald Trump throughout the entire 1 hour and 45-minute event, with the former president falling into her trap repeatedly. Harris, clearly well-prepared, made sharp comments designed to provoke Trump, calling him “weak” and accusing him of being rejected by 81 million voters in 2020. She criticized his standing on the global stage and his handling of the military.
Trump, in response, became visibly agitated and continued pushing debunked claims, including falsehoods about the 2020 election and outlandish conspiracy theories. His rhetoric painted a bleak picture of America, reminiscent of his earlier warnings of “American carnage.”
As the debate concluded, Kamala Harris received an additional boost with Taylor Swift’s public endorsement of the Democratic ticket. Swift’s post, which referenced JD Vance’s controversial remarks, resonated with many women, adding to the post-debate momentum.
In the first portion of the debate, Kamala Harris executed a clear strategy: provoke Donald Trump and throw him off balance. One key turning point came when Harris jabbed at the size and excitement of Trump’s rally crowds. This deeply agitated the former president, who shifted focus from policy issues to defend the entertainment value of his rallies. He deflected from the moderators’ questions on immigration and other critical issues, opting instead to mock Harris’ crowds and boast about his own events.
At one point, Trump even launched into a bizarre claim that migrants were eating Americans’ pets, which Harris appeared to dismiss without much response. Despite attempts by the moderators to steer the conversation back to policy, Trump remained fixated on defending his rallies and pushing false narratives about the 2020 election being stolen.
The vice president’s tactic to divert Trump away from substantive debate seemed to work as Trump continued on these tangents, leaving important issues like immigration largely untouched.
Throughout the debate, Donald Trump repeatedly trafficked in conspiracy theories, even when his running mate and others had signaled the need to avoid such baseless claims. One of the most outlandish moments came when Trump insisted that migrants from Haiti living in Springfield, Ohio, were eating residents’ pets. Despite ABC moderator David Muir pointing out that local officials had debunked this claim, Trump persisted, asserting that media reports backed him up and vaguely stating, “We’ll find out.”
Trump also pushed another conspiracy when discussing crime rates, dismissing FBI data that showed a decline in recent years. Instead, he claimed the FBI was corrupt and issuing fraudulent statistics. Later, when the debate turned to elections, Trump revived his long-standing claim that the U.S. election system is flawed, alleging without evidence that Democrats were attempting to allow undocumented immigrants to vote.
These moments underscored Trump’s reliance on conspiracy theories to frame his arguments, even in the face of fact-checking and direct contradiction from his opponents and the moderators.
The debate over abortion proved to be one of the most contentious and defining moments of the night, showcasing the stark contrast between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump on this deeply divisive issue. As a key advocate for reproductive rights within the Biden administration, Harris delivered a forceful rebuttal to Trump’s defense of his abortion policies, a performance that stood in contrast to President Biden’s approach in the earlier June debate.
Trump, who appointed three Supreme Court justices pivotal in overturning Roe v. Wade, sought to moderate his position, voicing support for exceptions in cases of rape, incest, and the life of the mother. He also criticized strict six-week abortion bans while defending the reversal of Roe as a courageous decision. “I did a great service in doing it,” he said, emphasizing the return of abortion laws to state control, a move he claimed “everyone” wanted, despite significant opposition from Democrats and many independents.
However, Trump repeated several misleading and false claims about abortion, including the accusation that some states allow abortions after a baby is born—prompting a fact check from ABC moderator Linsey Davis, who pointed out that no state permits such practices. Trump also referenced comments from former Virginia Governor Ralph Northam about nonviable pregnancies, inaccurately suggesting they endorsed infant execution.
Harris hit back by focusing on the real-world consequences of restrictive abortion laws, highlighting harrowing cases of women being denied care after rape or miscarriage due to fear of legal repercussions. She recounted instances of women suffering medical emergencies, such as bleeding out in parking lots, as doctors hesitated to provide necessary care out of fear of prosecution. “Pregnant women who want to carry a pregnancy to term, suffering from a miscarriage, being denied care… she didn’t want that,” Harris said, underscoring the human impact of restrictive abortion laws.
This exchange underscored not only the profound policy divide but also the emotional and ethical complexities surrounding the issue, with Harris presenting a vivid contrast to Trump’s defense of his role in reshaping the nation’s abortion landscape.
In the debate, Vice President Kamala Harris aimed to differentiate herself from Donald Trump by portraying him as self-centered and out of touch with the needs of middle-class Americans. From the outset, Harris framed her economic vision as one that prioritizes families and small businesses, contrasting it with Trump’s track record of benefiting billionaires and large corporations. “Donald Trump has no plan for you,” she asserted, directly addressing voters and reinforcing her argument that Trump is more focused on defending himself than serving the public.
Harris drew on her personal story, describing herself as a “middle class kid,” to further connect with voters, emphasizing her commitment to tax cuts for families and support for small businesses. She argued that Trump’s economic approach, as seen in his previous tax policies, overwhelmingly favors the wealthy. “He is more interested in defending himself than looking out for you,” she stated, amplifying her campaign’s consistent message that Trump’s self-interest overshadows his ability to lead effectively.
Setting a civil tone at the start, Harris walked across the stage to shake Trump’s hand, an act that stood out given Trump’s absence at Biden’s inauguration. The handshake marked the first such gesture in a presidential debate since Trump and Hillary Clinton’s contentious 2016 encounter. Throughout the debate, Harris maintained her composure, often using facial expressions to communicate her reactions to Trump’s comments. She laughed or smirked at some of his more outlandish claims, particularly when he repeated the debunked conspiracy about Haitian immigrants eating pets, to which she mockingly laughed and gestured toward Trump.
This dynamic highlighted Harris’ effort to remain poised while subtly mocking Trump’s most exaggerated and unfounded claims, underscoring her argument that he is disconnected from the real issues facing Americans.
In the debate, Donald Trump’s past remarks about Kamala Harris’ racial identity and his history of racially controversial actions took center stage. When asked about his previous false claim that Harris had only recently started identifying as Black, Trump brushed it off, saying he’d read it somewhere and claimed, “I couldn’t care less. Whatever she wants to be is OK with me.” This comment mirrored his typical approach of deflecting responsibility for inflammatory statements.
Harris, who had previously refrained from engaging in that personal attack, used the debate to respond more substantively. Rather than defend her racial identity, which is indisputable, she pivoted to highlight Trump’s history of racial discrimination and controversial behavior. Harris cited several examples, including the investigations into Trump’s housing discrimination practices in the 1970s, his infamous call for the death penalty for the wrongfully accused Central Park Five, and his role in promoting the racist birther conspiracy against former President Barack Obama.
In her appeal to voters, Harris emphasized that Americans deserve better leadership, stating, “We see in each other a friend. We see in each other a neighbor. We don’t want a leader who is constantly trying to have Americans point their fingers at each other.”
Trump attempted to defend himself by pointing out that others, such as former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, had also supported the Central Park Five case. He further argued that Harris was reaching far into the past to criticize him and claimed that her examples were no longer relevant. “This is a person that has to stretch back years – 40, 50 years ago – because there’s nothing now,” he said, downplaying the impact of his past actions.
The exchange underscored the sharp divide between the candidates on issues of race and identity, with Harris framing Trump’s behavior as emblematic of the divisive politics that she believes the American people are ready to move beyond.
In the debate, Kamala Harris and Donald Trump both held firm positions on major global conflicts but failed to present detailed solutions for ending the wars in Gaza and Ukraine.
When asked about Gaza, Harris condemned the October 7, 2023, Hamas attacks on Israel, acknowledged Israel’s right to defend itself, and supported a two-state solution. While she lightly criticized Israel’s ongoing bombardment that has caused significant Palestinian casualties, she emphasized the need for a ceasefire and the release of hostages. However, she admitted that a ceasefire agreement was far from likely, echoing the Biden administration’s stance.
Trump, on the other hand, offered little concrete information. Instead, he launched personal attacks, claiming Harris “hates Israel” and “hates Arabs.” He criticized Harris for allegedly snubbing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, although she had met with him during a recent visit. Trump also reiterated that neither the Gaza conflict nor the Russian invasion of Ukraine would have happened if he had remained president, asserting his leadership could have prevented them.
Regarding Ukraine, Trump claimed that he could swiftly end the war, citing his relationship with Vladimir Putin as a key factor. Harris countered by pointing out Trump’s history of admiration for authoritarian figures, arguing that leaders like Putin are eager for Trump to return to office because they see him as easily manipulated.
Trump responded by touting his efforts to push NATO members to increase their contributions and criticized Harris for not doing the same under the Biden administration. This exchange highlighted the candidates’ differing views on leadership in foreign policy, with Harris framing Trump as vulnerable to manipulation by autocrats and Trump portraying himself as a forceful global leader.
In a sharp exchange over the war in Ukraine, Kamala Harris suggested that while Donald Trump might indeed bring the conflict to a swift conclusion, it would likely be through capitulation to Vladimir Putin. Harris warned that such a move would endanger Ukraine’s neighboring countries, particularly Poland, which has a significant Polish-American population, an important voting bloc in Pennsylvania, a key swing state.
Trump pivoted to criticize the Biden administration’s handling of the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, describing it as a display of weakness and criticizing Biden for not holding more officials accountable. Harris stood by the decision to pull U.S. troops out in 2021 but argued that Trump had “negotiated one of the weakest deals you can imagine” with the Taliban during his presidency, laying the groundwork for the chaotic exit.
In response to accusations of admiration for authoritarian leaders, Trump doubled down by quoting Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, who allegedly praised him as “the most respected, most feared person.” Trump used this as evidence that under his leadership, global strongmen did not pose challenges to U.S. interests, contrasting it with current international conflicts. This highlighted his reliance on foreign endorsements while Harris emphasized the dangers of his close relationships with autocrats.
Copyright 2024 FN, NewsRoom.
