GREGORY RUSOVICH
Guest Writer
rusovich@lbknews.com
There were several takeaways from the Trump-Harris debate. Vice President Kamala Harris was articulate and well prepared, but failed to address voter concerns over immigration and inflation. Lots of style, little substance. Former President Donald Trump was boisterous and erratic, but broadly highlighted several of the administration’s failings on critical issues. ABC moderators David Muir and Linsey Davis were surrogates for Harris, and a discredit to their profession and to the country.
Harris overperformed. Democrats were jubilant over the vice president’s poise and ability to goad her opponent into airing his usual grievances. Her successful tactics provoked Trump to use precious time yelping about several matters important to him, but insignificant to the electorate. It was clear that she meant to provoke him, and rather than ignore her obvious taunts, Trump reacted foolishly. And his responses were frequently irrational.
She consistently attempted to reach out to undecided voters, but many of her pleas came across as staged and insincere. Her relentless smirking and exaggerated facial expressions —including placement of her chin atop her clenched fist at one point — became irritating. She spoke of a vague “opportunity economy,” and focused on childcare, healthcare, abortion rights, and down payments to first-time homeowners. Harris steered clear of her weaknesses on immigration and inflation. She was never pressed on the issues by either Trump or the moderators, and she provided no serious proposals for closing the border or reducing inflation. But by remaining focused and centered, she held up on the national stage.
Team Trump’s goal entering the debate was for the former president to simply keep calm, focus solely on the critical issues, and emphasize the Biden-Harris failures. But inevitably, Trump was Trump. He did repeatedly spotlight the border and inflation, and it’s possible that his positions on those issues ultimately resonate with more voters as policy differences seep deeper into the public mindset.
Trump also brought up Harris’ previous pledge of support for transgender surgery for detained migrants. But he frequently found ways to drown out his own assertions and positions, which are supported by many. Since Biden-Harris took office, over 10 million illegal immigrants have poured across the border ─ resulting in almost 300,000 fentanyl deaths, rampant migrant crime, and overrun communities. Somehow, Trump’s messaging on the border moved away from these impactful points and shifted to pets allegedly eaten by migrants in Springfield, Ohio. Even if this were true, it sounded crazy and played right into Harris’ hands.
Trump’s debate preparation process was clearly flawed. The old-fashioned tried-and-true formula of hunkering down, having specific statistics and lines ready to deploy, and pouring through various scenarios with aides is the best way to prep for national debates. Walking into a possibly determinative national debate with the strategy of simply blurting out what first comes to mind is not a winning formula. It led to a lack of discipline, allowed his opponent to cajole him off course, and detracted from his ability to emphasize the most impactful points around his popular positions. Trump’s insistence on winging it may have cost him dearly.
The debate also proved that Republican concerns over partisan moderators in these debates is spot on. No Republican candidate should ever agree to another nationally televised debate unless one of the moderators is from Fox News or the Wall Street Journal. Disney-owned ABC trotted out moderators who had an agenda and clearly displayed their bias throughout the debate. They fact-checked Trump five times and never once did the same with Harris. And she had plenty of fodder to fact-check. Contrary to Harris’ false claims, Trump has disavowed Project 2025, vigorously supported IVF, and never praised the Charlottesville protests. Yet, Muir and Davis sat silent during Harris’ many false statements.
The moderators pounced at every opportunity to challenge Trump on his assertions —only to learn later that they were the ones who needed to be fact-checked. After Trump voiced alarm over certain state laws allowing babies to be killed after birth, Davis inexplicably stepped in and told Trump, “There is no state in this country where it is legal to kill a baby after it is born.” Wrong, Linsey. In New York and Vice-Presidential Candidate Tim Walz’s Minnesota, babies born alive during an abortion can be left to die. Tragically for our republic, partisan moderators and national news outlets are becoming a consistent reality.
Even before the debate, the Media Research Center reported that ABC gave Kamala Harris positive coverage an astonishing 100% of the time. Conversely, Trump received negative coverage 93% of the time.
Charles C.W. Cooke of National Review stated it best, “ABC’s management of the debate last night was a disgrace. It was a scandal. It had no place in a free republic.” It should be noted that Cooke does not support Trump.
Trump is now saying that he won’t debate again. He should reconsider. Let’s have another debate jointly moderated by news correspondents from Fox and another major network. This would satisfy both Republicans and Democrats and address the legitimate complaint of media bias in the last debate. Harris could demonstrate her presumed prowess in another national showdown and Trump, in his final presidential election debate, could show discipline and focus. Viewers may even learn more about the vast policy differences between the two candidates. Too much to ask?
