Was tempted to call this “Debate 2: Electric Boogaloo” but a) A lot of Lemmy won’t get the OG reference. and 2) “Boogaloo” has been co-opted and carries an unfortunate connotation these days.

Also, while it’s Trump’s 2nd debate of the season, it’s Harris’s first…

It’s being run by ABC News at 9 PM Eastern time, 6 PM Pacific, I see MSNBC starts their coverage TWO HOURS EARLY. That’s a lot of air time to fill, guys. Good luck!

Live updates, how and when to watch, debate rules, etc. here:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/09/10/debate-trump-harris-2024-live-updates/75145043007/

Link to the first debate thread here:

https://lemmy.world/post/16973660

That’t it! Thanks for hanging with it everbody!

  • kescusay@lemmy.world
    1071·
    2 months ago

    So here are my thoughts:

    • First, the obvious: Harris won handily. She was in her element, and just thoroughly excoriated Trump at every turn, while maintaining an optimistic tone.
    • But at the same time, Trump is probably not losing any of his base over his abysmal performance. Most of them probably didn’t watch, and the few that did probably tuned out in favor of reading conservative bloggers’ desperate spinning about halfway through.
    • The real question is how off-putting he’s been for undecideds. He was pretty bad, but I’m aware enough of my own biases to wonder exactly how bad his behavior looks to undecideds.
    • On the issues, Harris didn’t really have a stumble. I was pleasantly surprised by how well she handled the issue of Israel/Palestine, for example.
    • The moderators get a B for following up questions, a C- for mic handling, and an A- for calling it out when Trump’s bizarre, rambling bullshit failed to even vaguely resemble an answer.

    All in all, I didn’t hate this (other than the sound of Trump’s face hole).

    • GladiusB@lemmy.world
      71·
      2 months ago

      I don’t understand how people think any of their bases will ever change. It’s always about the undecided. I am not mocking you. But it’s an obvious thing to me.

      • Hacksaw@lemmy.ca
        22·
        2 months ago

        It’s not about the undecided. You’d have to have brain worms to be undecided when Trump is an option. Undecided right now is like choosing between a stale pile of dog shit and fast food and justifying it by saying “well fast food is pretty shitty”.

        It’s about getting people to VOTE. People who don’t usually vote need to get out and vote. That’s it. That’s what’s going to make the difference. Kamala has to mobilise reluctant voters.

        • GladiusB@lemmy.world
          31·
          2 months ago

          Did you read what I wrote? It is always about the undecideds. Bases hardly ever sway. I did a paper about it in college. I even received a high mark. Maybe you are responding to the wrong thread?

          • Hacksaw@lemmy.ca
            23·
            2 months ago

            It’s not about the people who are undecided between Kamala and Trump. It’s about the people who are undecided between Kamala and not voting at all.

            • GladiusB@lemmy.world
              11·
              2 months ago

              You are over simplifying the problem to suit your needs. There are no facts to support it either. If more people vote it would help a little bit of each. Undecideds are the biggest percentages of voters. Something like 70 percent.

        • LillyPip@lemmy.ca
          31·
          2 months ago

          There are undecideds, though. Every election, millions and millions of people turn 18, and they were under 14 the last time this lunatic was in office, too young to really understand. Many may have been raised in conservative households and are just now forming their own opinions as they enter the real world.

          It’s about getting people to VOTE.

          And you’re absolutely right about this, which is why the right is desperately trying to make that as hard as possible right now.

          e: can’t spell

    • linearchaos@lemmy.worldEnglish
      13·
      2 months ago

      I’m in no way undecided but I think I can see this pretty clearly from both sides.

      He presented better than he has previously, and they absolutely claimed he won then. I think the only thing they’re going to ding them on is not being aggressive enough they really loved it when he was slapping his meat at Hillary. By those standards this was a rather dull showing by him. And you bet they watched it. This is the only debate that’s going to happen they’re not going to miss that.

      And from the Democrat side her anti-Israeli war statements were kind of weak. We’re not taking away your guns, we’re fracking, But she’s not here to convert more Democrats she’s here to convert moderates and he’s just slinging to his base.

      He showed up a little nutty instead of roughly senile like he’s been showing on tour. I was expecting him to turn into a rabid squirrel.

      She presented very well she speaks very well she’s well thought out I hope to God she has this.

    • ReallyActuallyFrankenstein@lemmynsfw.comEnglish
      26·
      2 months ago

      I also feel like the moderators were relatively good at calling out egregious lies and not giving Trump the final word. Usually.

      But yeah, Trump apparently controlled the mics, not the moderators.

      • jacksilver@lemmy.world
        11·
        2 months ago

        It was sooo frustrating cause they shut down Harris at one point, like stop letting Trump steam roll you and be consistent on who can speak.

        • BReel@lemmy.one
          7·
          2 months ago

          And then she came back and made a point to address what she wanted anyways (it was about taking peoples guns). She just did it without being a raging lunatic screaming loud enough to be heard in OTHER mics lol

    • Vordimous@lemmy.ml
      11·
      2 months ago

      As an undecided, never trumper, Trump looked like an asshat. The oldest trick in the rhetoric books is to attack the person instead of the subject. A sure sign of weakness.