The Guardian - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for The Guardian:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: Medium - Factual Reporting: Mixed - United Kingdom
Wikipedia about this sourceSearch topics on Ground.News
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/sep/11/trump-harris-debate-analysis
it’s so funny how for weeks everyone telegraphed “she’s gonna bait him” and her team was like “we’re gonna bait him” and he managed to act normal for like 3 minutes and then she said one thing about his rallies and it was like feeding a gremlin after midnight
Look, I know this is a late response and all but this is serious: it’s feeding a mogwai after midnight that turns it into a gremlin. Gremlin feeding times have no impact on their behavior.
There’s enough fake news and disinformation in the world. You are doing all of us a great service. o7
The answer as always is, wait a week. We’ll know when the post debate polling hits the news.
Nope.
Trump fans don’t care.
Harris fans saw confirmation.
Disinterested voters didn’t watch.Yep, had a conversation about it with a coworker who won’t be voting. His stance on roe v Wade (he brought it up) was that both sides have points but he didn’t understand what the decision was about as evidenced by him thinking that the government just shouldn’t have a say in medical decisions.
Your coworker sounds like a dumbass.
He doesn’t see understanding the issues as a civic duty so he mostly just watches tone. This means if you politely and non-partisanly explain your left wing beliefs he thinks they make sense. So yeah, but he feels like exactly the average American
Clips of this will spread through media and word of mouth, though. People who did watch it can tell their friends stories about it. That’s why it’s good that she did well. It builds cultural momentum.
…and a news media that desperately needs a horse race for clicks will continue to hold Harris to a higher standard than the orange Mr. Magoo.
A convicted rapist literally claimed that you’re allowed to murder babies - then we put them side by side and double check if Harris said something that was slightly exaggerated. What’s so weird about it?
Ajnt Ornj: “
non white‘illegal immigrants’ are literally coming to eat your pets and the democrats want to let them”Media fact checker: "this may not be entirely true, as no evidence has been produced to support the claims, however we found a Twitter post that… "
Harris: “those polling numbers increased by 18%”
Media fact checker: “This is blatantly false. The number actually increased by 17.86%”
Idiots online: BOTH SIDES LIE THEY’RE EXACTLY THE SAME
Really love how y’all have morphed into claiming the lying fake news media is out to get your candidate.
Trump was barely coherent throughout, but you’ll see the media clean up his word salad as ‘Trump vigorously defended his economic policies and the handling of the pandemic.’
Thing is Trump made his most ridiculous statements highly memeable.
“They’re eating the dogs!” is gonna live on like “They’re turning the fricken frogs gay!”
That might draw enough of the disinterested crowd to figure out what happened that night.
Precisely. Harris is losing ground nationally and is losing ground in battleground states. Unless this debate significantly moves the needle, which I don’t think it will for the very elegant reasons you summed, current trend lines indicate Harris losing steam and Trump continuing to pick up voters. No amount of wishful thinking will change that.
I’ve been tracking polling all year and you can see the past few weeks of progress here:
https://lemmy.world/post/19253997
Harris is losing ground in AZ, GA, PA and MI. If that slide continues with no debate bump it’s going to be super hard to pull out a win.
WI moved to toss up. MI is on the verge of moving from Harris to toss up next week. PA and AZ have outright moved to the Trump category.
There’s time to reverse it… but man…
Yeah. The surprise nominee change and DNC bumps are ebbing and the debate will likely be a blip at best.
It’s like there’s an unceasing gravity to Trump’s numbers, like being choked by a boa constrictor. I think that’s largely a result of his polling numbers being much “harder” than Harris, i.e. the percent of each candidates numbers that will never change their mind for and reason whatsoever and will always and fully support their candidate no matter what is much higher for Trump than Harris.
I’ll add that it wouldn’t surprise me at all if Swift’s endorsement did more for Harris than the debate does. Kooky times we live in.
Disinterested voters didn’t watch.
It was a highly entertaining debate. Plenty of folks who dislike them both showed up with big bowls of popcorn to root for injuries. And Trump was true to form, just stepping into rake after rake for the full 90 minutes.
I came to count how many times Trump says “millions and millions”
People not voting for Harris because of Gaza need to avoid watching the debate, otherwise they’ll change their minds. No matter how bad things are, they can get worse.
Why is it always ‘voters need to lower their standards’, and never ‘candidates need to be decent human beings’?
Why do you think people still fall for the, “I’m just asking questions” routine?
instead of whining about voting for somebody you don’t absolutely love all aspects of, why don’t you use your time advocating to change the voting system so that you can vote for somebody else meaningfully.
Because Liberals have always been spineless and will continue to be. There is a parasocial worshiping dynamic how they interact with people in power. Harris just praised a Dick Cheney endorsement. There is no red line for them.
Because the world is imperfect and politicians will always disappoint you.
Because having a tantrum because reality does not conform to your sense of fairness not only accomplishes fuck-all, but actively makes things worse.
Because we have an unjust voting system, and petulantly refusing to vote can and will get people killed, and rights stripped from millions.
Why do you only frame the issue in terms of the voters’ responsibilities, and never in terms of the candidate’s responsibilities?
Why aren’t the politicians the ones who need to make hard choices? Why can’t they get wedged on the issues for once?
Because voting has very limited choice and a winner takes all mechanism. Ob-fucking-viously the candidates should be better, but not voting won’t make that change. Trump elected will just make this worse.
Voting is harm reduction.
If you want to make things better and promote your own idealised society, get involved, donate to causes you consider to be up to your standards. But even then getting involved and convincing future candidates will be much harder if Trump is elected than if it’s Harris.
Because that’s not the reality or the America that we live in. Every time a truly leftist candidate tries to run, they get slapped down by the majority of the DNC’s voting base.
This is a center-right, Pro-Capitalist country with a center-right, pro-capitalist population. You don’t have to like it, I certainly don’t, but that’s the reality.
Without ranked choice voting, there is no way in hell an actual leftist will ever appear anywhere on a presidential ballot.
So hold your nose, put on your big boy pants, and vote for the lesser of two evils with the rest of us, because if you don’t the fucking Nazis will win again.
We can and should pressure put politicians to be better, but refusing to vote doesn’t do that.
You’re not wrong. It all sucks. But this is the reality we live in. Life is about choosing the best choices out of the options given to us and very rarely are any of those choices exactly what we want.
Because the candidates do have those responsibilities, but have shirked them. Ideally, we’d want a better voting system, that didn’t mathematically garuntee that only two viable parties emerge, so that when the politicians refuse to use their power as they should, people who will may be chosen instead, but we don’t have that, and changing that is a long and difficult process that only gets harder if the more authoritarian types get power anyway. If you’re in a lifeboat with holes, and there are two people that have rigged things so that one of them is going to be in charge, and one wants to stop bailing out water and the other wants to scoop it back into the boat, then even though those two aren’t following their responsibilities, it doesn’t mean you should stop bailing the water out, because it has to get done by somebody or you drown. And if you have a say in which of the two is in charge, the guy that just wants to sit there uselessly is still the option you must pick, because at least they aren’t trying to undo the progress you’re making. Ideally you’d want to figure out how to undo the rigged system too, but you have to deal with the water first, lest you all drown fighting over who’s in charge.
Because when you let perfect become the enemy of good, you end up with neither.
It’s literally named the Nirvana Fallacy and yet people double down on it like it’s the best decision they’ve ever made.
Hey! Wait! They’ve got a new complaint!
Who is the best alternative to Harris right now? Do I think she’s perfect? No. Do I think she’s the best alternative to Trump? Yes. We don’t have a super progressive candidate that stands a chance of winning in this race, we picked Biden in the primary, he stepped back and now we have Harris. The system sucks, but that’s what we have until voters put candidates in place to change the system.
That’s not the question.
The question should be what choice does Harris have, except to stop Israel?
If (as I strongly agree) trump is the worst human on the planet who will cause irreparable damage to :gestures wildly: fucking everything, then why doesn’t his opponent have the responsibility to do whatever the hell it takes, within the law to keep him out of power?
Especially as in this instance his opponent is currently sworn to be responsible for the ongoing welfare of the nation.
Imagine being so fucking intent on enabling genocide half a planet away that you’d rather let your own country fall into the hands of Camacho Harkonnen rather than attract progressive voters.
I’m under the impression there are more votes to lose by not appearing to stick with Israel than there are votes to lose by not attempting to intervene. At least, that’s what the party appears to have assessed.
Exactly this. If she turns on Isreal she will lose the election. I think it’s realistic to think that she will have more criticisms on Isreal after she is elected. She’s not a Zionist like Biden.
Because voters choose their own behavior but not the candidates’ positions.
This really can’t be the first time you’ve heard of changing the things you can and accepting things you can’t change.
Also, voters can absolutely change a candidate’s position. The fact that people want us to vote for Harris, and not Biden, is proof of that.
Still not voting for genocide.
If things get worse, we’ll just have to do something other than vote won’t we?
Voting for either side is voting for Genocide. Not voting or voting third party when you’re left wing is voting for Trump which is genocide with extra bad things sprinkled on top. I’d say don’t kid yourself but I suspect that horse has already bolted
If you don’t want to vote for genocide you need to move to a different country, because that’s never gonna change
I’m right where I need to be. 😉
“Still not voting for genocide”
You say as you side with Hamas who openly calls for the genocide of the Jewish race.
They don’t do that these days, and all the people that did are dead at this point. The lifespan for Palestinians is pretty short.
Aaaaaand that’s a block
Did you need to read past the .ml?
As much as I want us to do something more than wash a finger at Netanyahu, there is not the support for anything more than voting for that.
Genocide isn’t on the ballet
It is if you don’t vote for the two genocidal candidates. There are non genocidal choices, even if they’re just protest votes.
Don’t cut off your nose to spite your face.
Don’t support genocide.
I haven’t seen a single soul on here support genocide. I do see a lot of people encouraging you to not take the easy way out.
Have you seen the debate?
Harris’s policy is a two-state solution. A ceasefire that by definition ends the genocide.
Trump’s solution is to, no joke, entirely wipe out Palestine.
How is this in any way comparable? You HAVE your anti-genocide option right now!
No hard feelings when I get the order to round up your kids to put into the camps after Führer Trump gives the signal, right? I’ll just be following orders, and don’t worry, work will set you free someday! I’m sure the dead Palestinians from our nuclear launch will thank you from the afterlife for sticking it to The Man.
Guess you’re not voting then.
I was going to write in Aaron Bushnell for President but I think I’ll vote PSL
Democracy exist so we don’t have to reach that point, please, go vote.
Democracy exist
Half the presidents in my lifetime lost the popular vote.
I wish MAGA gave up this easily.
Agreed, but democracy isn’t built anew at every iteration, its assembled by the people that cares.
God this take is such a loser position. “Fine, I’ll just take my ball and play a different sport!”
Guess what dummy, you’re playing soccer with these Yahoos whether you like it or not so pick a fucking side and THEN ALSO DO MORE."
…burn the fucking barn down with the animals in it, ya dumb bystander…
Guess what dummy, you’re playing soccer with these Yahoos whether you like it
Yeah, actually a lot of us are very aware of the game and how it’s played. Are you? You know most of us aren’t in swing states, right? So what is my protest vote going to affect again? My vote already doesn’t matter in a presidential election. It’s literally never mattered as long as I’ve been a voting adult.
or not so pick a fucking side and THEN ALSO DO MORE."
Yeah I have picked a side. The anti-capitalist side. Which of these parties are anti -capitalist, again?
99% of y’all are calling out this user saying they’ll “do nothing and be smug” instead of voting, but y’all are just gonna vote blue and similarly be smug, do nothing, but continue to run defense for millionaires and one of the most powerful capitalist political parties in the world.
At least this user won’t be doing the latter.
Sitting on the sidelines while the world burns around you and complaining about it is highly effective. Withholding a protest vote (for either side) and supporting voter apathy is lame as hell.
At least when the capitalists are fucking you, regardless of who wins, you can smugly yell “I didn’t consent”.
Withholding a protest vote (for either side) and supporting voter apathy is lame as hell.
What are you talking about? You know there are more than two candidates running, right? I’m literally saying I will be voting third party in a presidential election as I always have, and me voting third party has literally never mattered because the electoral college. Who’s withholding their vote? Although, that doesn’t mean I think voting in a bourgeois democracy is actually a meaningful expression of political power and organization.
You’re all hand winging about people on the left who just don’t want to vote Democrat, again even in states where the result is already known. You can’t even dare to criticize Democrats or send any message even in safe states like CA, WA, or NY. Because the handful of conscientious leftists are definitely gonna flip CA red or could definitely flip MS blue if they sucked it up and went for Kamala.
When the capitalists continue to fuck us , you’ll have done fuck all to push socialism because you spend all your time, again, running defense for one of the two most powerful capitalist institutions in the world.
In a fptp system, only the two main candidates matter once the primaries are done.
We know this.
In an electoral college system, only swing states matter.
But parties will pay attention if votes are siphoned from them. If you’re not in a swing state, a third party vote has basically no negative effect but may have a positive effect of influencing a major party.
I think it’s more than arguable that voting for Kamala in Louisiana or Mississippi or even potentially California is a bigger waste of a vote than voting third party.
What, are you gonna be on the front lines with your guns shooting? The overwhelming majority of people with this mindset have never held a firearm in their entire lives and have no idea what they’re even talking about. What are you even insinuating here? Is your end goal that we burn the entire country down because “wahhhhh both sides aren’t perfect”? Grow up, only children refuse to see greater good through compromise because they can’t see past not getting what they want. Single issue voters love to stick their head in the sand and pretend the one issue that they’re whinging about is the most important in the world.
Have fun standing on your “genocide” comment when you’re in a fascist dictatorship run by nazis. “but but but the genocide wah”
I’m insinuating that we can become ungovernable and force the government to capitulate to our demands. Mass protest, general strike, public disruptions, boycott, we have options to fight back.
Instead of just voting every couple years.
You’re organizing those things, or at least joining others who are organizing, right?
As much as we can, plus financial support.
But I’m not going to organize a protest in a rural cornfield lol
So you support genocide because you live in a cornfield? Cool.
It’s not like you’re out there fucking volunteering for Harris anyway. Do you want Trump to win??? 🙄
Why not both?
Go ahead.
But I’m not voting for genocide. I’d rather die.
Part of Harris’s platform is a cease fire and a two state solution. Voting for her wouldn’t be “voting for genocide”.
You have three options:
- Kamala’s policies
- Trump’s policies
- “I don’t care” (no vote)
- surprise mystery 4th option: vote 3rd party
One set of policies is more helpful to ending the war peacefully than the other is. If you cared about your cause instead of grandstanding, you’d vote for it. Not voting sends no signal, and on average ends up with a policy somewhere between the two options, which is worse than the better option by definition. If you’re going yo waste your vote, at LEAST vote third party so that your message will be heard.
You first.
That’s… Not how it works?
We do it together…
So you support genocide. Got it.
You have quite a fantasy going for yourself.
Hey guess what? Fascists dont give a fuck about that shit, youll end up in a puddle of your own blood cause ya wont have the numbers. If it didnt work out for the fighters at Blair mountain a hundred year ago what makes ya think youll achieve anything.
Fuck ya’d have a better chance doing random acts of terrorism that put the fucken IRA to shame. Still probably end up in a ditch but you could probably kill some of the ones trying to kill you.
If you actually believed this sky is falling bullshit you’d be doing a hell of a lot more than voting. Do you even own a gun? lol
EDIT sorry don’t answer that. What I mean I, I doubt you own a gun because you do not believe you’d ever need one, because you do not believe fascism is actually coming. This is all rhetoric.
Fuck ya’d have a better chance doing random acts of terrorism that put the fucken IRA to shame. Still probably end up in a ditch but you could probably kill some of the ones trying to kill you.
We don’t talk about that on Lemmy.
Im a Redneck, course I own a fucken gun. But heres the thing the Republicans are a party of fucken fascists, even if they dont get as bad as I suspect theyll still most likely use the police to gun down protesters and strikers. I just aint an idiot who assumes shit will work out, so I take every fucken step I can to keep the worst from happening. “Prepare for war hope for peace” is a pretty solid summary of alot of my philosophy.
I assume for the worst and the worst involves concentration camps, firing lines, and the destruction of civil liberties. Sure ya can probably take out the local police with an ad hoc militia, but can ya take out say an SS or SA equivalent? What about the National guard or the military itself? Cause my rough guess is that the corruption would take about ten years minimum to destroy the professionalism and tech advantage of the US military.
Voting costs nothing and depending on where one lives can have an outsized impact.
Over people dying in another country? And not for important things like disenfranchising and taxes?
Yikes. Genocide is pretty fucking important.
Important, but not to the level of civil disobedience like when we protested police abuse and systemic racism. Like a 4/10 judging by people’s actions.
2023 was the most deadly year for police shootings. Systemic racism and police abuse didn’t go away. Yet, no one is in the street.
Why do you think that is?
But instead you’ll do nothing, and feel smug about it.
I donate to bail funds and support resistance groups financially, because I live in the middle of fucking nowhere and there aren’t protests for me to join.
So you support genocide because you live “nowhere”? OK.
Yeah I’m pretty pathetic - I’m doing as much to stop genocide as you are to stop Trump lol
Start one then if you feel that strongly about what’s going on in Gaza
Oh come on, that’d expose them to actual risk from their neighbors who likely don’t share their views, and they surely cannot do that. Except when they become ungovernable when things get worse partially because of their vote, and then they’ll magically be capable of winning a revolution or whatever.
How many hours have you volunteered for Harris? Don’t you want to stop Trump?
It wasn’t a masterclass. It was functional. What she did masterfully was bait Mangolini into showing how incoherent he really is.
Some Republican politicians will switch perhaps.
Fox News poll, right after the debate.
Boomertown.
Fox is conservative STATE propaganda. No different to Russian or North Korean state propaganda. Regardless of the blatant bias, there is literally nothing stopping them from manufacturing this “poll” out of thin air.
Fox isn’t state media. I dislike the mendacious fuckers as much as the next guy but let’s try and stick to facts.
The US has very few state media organizations. Voice of America is one. Radio Free Europe is another.
Fox is an independent organization, if they were state media the Biden admin would have control of their news. That obviously isn’t the case.
OP didn’t say it was US state media
I know this is about Fox, but I want to continue to share that neither is NPR. It is an independent nonprofit that operates independently of the government and gets less than 1% of it’s operaiting budget from federal sources.
Yeah most of our state media is aimed at foreign countries. Not even npr is state media anymore
The US is a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie and Fox is one of its propaganda arms.
It’s not state propaganda because the state, itself, is subordinate.
You mean oligarchy, not a dictatorship, because a group of people hold power instead of one individual.
A dictatorship isn’t always ruled by a single leader, it can be ruled by a group of leaders. In fact, in practice, every stable dictatorship is ruled by a clique rather than just a single dictator.
The labels are wrong on this graph.
The question was: Are you a racist piece of shit?
Yes
No
I don’t know
The comment about Haitian immigrants eating cats definitely clenched it for me.
My ass cheeks that is. As I was dying laughing.
Looks like 25 people voted, one of them is sane and one is in a coma.
Good news is 8% managed to get their head out of their ass. Who is answering that poll besides hardcore conservatives?
Russian Bots
It will change a lot.
This will dramatically increase the number of Republicans who will tell everyone they’re not voting for him, and then vote for him.
A few Republicans I know said they were going to vote libertarian or just not vote after watching the debate so she did pretty fucking well.
I’m sure they said that.
I like to lie about things I’m ashamed of too.
“She makes some good points. I might vote for her if she wasn’t a Democrat” - Republicans
“…or a woman, or not white.”
I have too many principles to vote for anyone like him!
*votes for him while touching self in booth to thought of capital gains cut
A few Republicans I know said they were going to vote libertarian or just not vote
Very funny that he is straight up Biden-ing himself.
libertarian
Is there even a candidate now that wormbrain dropped out?
Oh yeah they have their own candidate. Just some guy. Probably the guy that doesn’t talk about age of consent laws too much. They try to pick a composed member of the party for that spot but who knows lol
He fucked up dropping out as well as everything else. People can still vote 🪱 in a bunch of states.
Despite how much they go on about how nuanced and special their views are, libertarians will find a way to vote GOP like they always do.
You are likely right sadly.
I think it will, but people won’t think it did. Harris was dropping slightly in the polls, Polymarket odds were up to 52/46 Trump. The betting markets being the most responsive item to check, it’s currently 50/49 Trump, back to tied. I think polls will look similar, back to essentially tied, but that’s where things were a couple weeks ago so it might just erase the mini slump from everyone’s mind.
Did she? I listened to the debate and she sounded mid for most of it. She spent more time attacking Trump than she did answering the questions she was asked.
Sure, she fared better than her predecessor, but “not shitting her pants” is a low bar. Trump was definitely worse than her, but again, if the bar is “don’t act butthurt when your opponent says your rallies are boring”, then congrats, I guess.
Reading comments from both sides, it seems that the left sees her not being geriatric as a win; and the right thinks that Trump was unjustly treated (targeted questions, live fact-checking, etc…), which is absurd considering that (a) they also asked Harris difficult questions (fracking and Israel, for example, which she did have a hard time answering), and (b) he was given free reign to talk out of order more times than I can count.
I think Harris “won” because Trump sucked. He sidestepped questions regarding an abortion ban (“I haven’t talked with JD about it” fucking lol) and Ukraine (“Do you want Ukraine to win the war?” “I want the war stopped” TWICE in a row, followed by “I know Putin really well” and a rant about the awesomeness of Victor Orban); he repeatedly told lies (post-birth abortion and pets-eating immigrants being the highlight) which were promptly caught by the live fact-checker, and even showed weakness and undecisiveness (“do you have a plan?” “I have concepts of a plan”).
But those are blunders that Trump committed, not something that Harris should take credit for. Nothing I heard screamed of “masterclass” debate, and I doubt that it will give her an edge in the upcoming elections or sway electors one way or the other. After all, the people who lived under four years of Trump’s presidency and watched January 6th unfold live, and still call themselves “undecided” are pretty much lying to themselves at this point.
Those still undecided aren’t going to change their vote because of actual policy. But some don’t want to be associated with losers - and showing just how much of a loser Trump is might make them at least not vote for him.
That’s a strategy.
Tell yourself if it’s more important to make Trump look like an idiot or to say actual policy right now. We’re all voting for Kamala we just need the idiots to not vote for Trump
it seems that the left sees her not being geriatric as a win
Who on the left?
Enlightened centrist bullshit
Yes, that whole paragraph sounded like “She won” in an awful lot of frustrated and apologetic words
For fuck’s sake, y’all should stop this “enlightened centrist” bullshit whenever someone is slightly critical of the leftist candidate.
Trump sucks. It’s incredible that he’s even allowed to be a candidate for presidency after the shit he’s done. He’s dangerous for the US and dangerous for the democracy of the entire world. If there’s some justice left in the US system, he will lose the elections and he will pay for his crimes.
Not liking Harris’ speech doesn’t make me an “enlightened centrist”. It just means that I don’t think her words were strong enough, or bold enough, to win her new voters, which should be the point of the presidential debate. I think she won because Trump’s ineptitude will bleed him some voters, but I’m not willing to credit that to Harris’ speech skills.
I’m not sure what debate you watched, because her performance was not only good in comparison to Biden or Trump, on an absolute scale I’d probably still give it at least a B+. Your comment came off as just shitting all over Harris and trying to bring her down to Trump’s level. Because that vibe was so strong, I didn’t even read the whole comment. Which is on you, not me.
Kamala Harris is not a leftist.
This is sealioning
This is a leftist being extremely fucking mad that liberals are wrapping themselves in our colors and calling themselves “left” and “progressive” and shit.
Who is the leftist candidate and why are the Democrats fielding a back the blue prosecutor instead of them :(
Have you considered stopping the enlightened centrist bullshit instead?
I think she actually attacked him less than she should have. Trump said he didn’t know who the President is anymore. That seemed like a perfect opportunity to call out how much his age is affecting his judgement and clearly everyone else can tell you who the President is.
I hate to agree but I don’t think you’re wrong, and accept the down votes in advance. She did some things well though, the trolling on rallies was actually her sneakiest trick to rattle him. I think she could’ve performed better but maybe she learned some lessons for a second debate.
Overall I think there was a double standard on mic control, whenever he wanted to talk they let him. He even got to speak during fact checks, what the fuck is that? On the flip side, they didn’t unmute her on rebuttals and he made a point to tell her to shut up if she spoke over him.
He is saying that she didn’t win, he lost.
Which is a longer way of saying that she won, he is contradicting himself.
She spent more time attacking Trump than she did answering the questions she was asked.
But those are blunders that Trump committed, not something that Harris should take credit for.
I don’t think it’s generous to conclude that many of those blunders can in fact be credited to Harris deliberately striking his ego.
The debate actually infuriated me. There was no real content. Just two people screaming at each other thet the other one sucks.
Harris did better than trump because she didn’t lie, but she still didn’t say anything usefull. Mostly she didn’t even respond to his “arguments”, wich is sad, because they were that easy to respond to. Instead she continued to say what she learned by heart before the debate and what her team tokd her to say.
Screaming? Did we watch different ones?
What we have learned from 10 years of Trump is that you lose when you respond to his arguments. His entire jig is to constantly shift the focus of the debate. He wants you to talk about Biden’s age and buttery males, instead of the economy. The best thing Harris could do (and she did) was to stay on topic.
Agreed. Respond to his policy points when he actually makes them. “Never would’ve happened if I was still President,” is not a policy point and it’s barely even a selling point. What question would that not work for? Inflation, illegal immigration, housing, school shootings, Ukraine, energy prices, climate change, and Israel: never would’ve happened. All because the Supreme Ruler Trump said… “Don’t do it!”
Saying stuff off-the-cuff is not the purpose of a debate. It’s to tell people positions that you already hold. Harris did this on several occasions here. She stated actual policy goals as well as personal positions on different topics. Trump just yelled about all the typical things and never once stated an actual reason he should be president. The best we got from him was “I have concepts of a plan.”
I agree it was infuriating, but Harris did some some things of substance, even if anyone paying attention would have already known it.
Will this actually matter though? I somewhat doubt it, but I’ll wait to see. I’m hoping it does, but we may be well beyond reason as a society.
You miss that part about:
Working to make housing more affordable
$50k tax break for small businesses just starting out
Expanding the ACA to more people
Making pharmaceutical companies negotiate with the government to make more drugs more affordable
Making tax cuts permanent for the work class
BTW: continuing to say what you learned by heart before the debate and what your team told you to say is extremely important in a debate.
It’s called “staying on point”
