It is difficult to evaluate a debate when the protagonists inhabit two parallel universes.
In front of the criminal Trump, the former prosecutor Harris had the burden of proof. She did well, but no KO
A torrent of lies
First, Harris was supposed to put Trump on the defensive about his crimes. She did, but the eel slithered away with a torrent of lies.
She was supposed to denounce some of Trump’s proposals, including his promise to deport millions of undocumented immigrants and his prohibitive tariffs. Trump’s remarks on these pillars of his program made neither head nor tail. Harris missed the opportunity to expose more clearly their profound stupidity.
Harris was also supposed to expose Trump’s contradictions on abortion. It was quite successful, but Trump strung together too many lies to counter them all.
On foreign policy, Trump has emphasized his affinity with autocrats and seemed convinced that shouting his words would make them more convincing. To her credit, Harris has made a reasonable and coherent case for the policies she intends to pursue.
Harris was ultimately supposed to succeed in getting Donald Trump off his rocker to demonstrate to the undecided that Trump has neither the temperament nor the cognitive abilities to become the oldest elected president in the history of the United States. Mission accomplished.
In short, in the world of facts, reality, correct syntax and respect for norms and conventions, Kamala Harris has won hands down. In the world of outlandish performances, “alternative facts”, word salads and bulliesDonald Trump could not lose.
Unfortunately, swing voters fall somewhere in the middle, and it’s often easy for them to gravitate toward the magical thinking of the Trump universe, especially if the media continues to do its utmost to normalize the behavior of a candidate who remains anything but normal.
