From commentary of specialists and polls, the general consensus seems to be that Democrats are more confident in their candidate compared to Republicans after the Sept. 10 presidential debate between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump.
Ninety-five percent of Democrats say Harris won, while 75% of Republicans say Donald Trump won. Among independents, 61% picked Harris, according to an ABC News poll.
In general, 58% of adult Americans say Harris won the debate, swapped from the Biden-Trump match in June, where Trump was polled as winning by 66% of adult Americans.
Additionally, 37% say the debate made them feel more favorably toward Harris, compared to the 23% who reported feeling less favorably.
On the other hand, Trump, despite retaining his supporters’ favor, did not expand his support base: People expressed with a 2 to 1 ratio that the debate made them see him less favorably.
Back on June 27, when Trump debated Joe Biden, his performance was more impactful to his supporters as Biden often entertained Trump’s debate traps. Trump relied on red herring arguments, gaslighting and name-calling to distract from talk of anything substantial or policy-related.
Fortunately for the democratic party, the Sept. 10 debate demonstrated promise, as candidate Harris effectively maintained her composure and stayed focused on key issues, methodically navigating through Trump’s classic traps.
Harris even played Trump’s own game. Many viewers noted he got visibly angry as the debate went on, as well as becoming defensive about the size of his rallies.
As Trump’s anger increased, the name-calling and jabs toward his opponent did too: this juxtaposed Harris’ calm, sharp and composed demeanor which lasted for the duration of the debate.
This gave viewers the message that she is stable, collected and unlikely to be sidetracked by emotion. In other words, she has traits that make an ideal leader.
Even if they don’t, Republicans should admit that one of Trump’s fatal flaws as a politician is his character, more so the rudeness he shows toward certain demographics in America.
Harris made sure his lack of professionalism and empathy stuck out during the debate while she showcased her own.
There were numerous moments where, under different circumstances, Harris would have rightfully been justified in anger – like when Trump referred to her as weak, repeatedly called Biden her boss, demeaned her sorority and condescendingly criticized her for speaking out of turn, despite her doing so far less frequently than he did.
Particularly astounding, however, was when he made the atrocious claim that Harris has used her race as a marketing tactic.
“I don’t know. I don’t know. All I can say is I read where she was not Black, that she put out. And, I’ll say that,” Trump said. “And then I read that she was Black. And that’s okay. Either one was okay with me. That’s up to her. That’s up to her.”
Wisely, the vice president pointed out Trump’s history of racist pursuits and that it’s tragic someone wanting to hold office facilitates a divide based on race. She centered her message on unity and emphasized our shared humanity rather than approaching harsh personal attacks with anger and defensiveness. These choices were the high route, effectively dismantling his claim.
“I meet with people all the time who tell me ‘Can we please just have discourse about how we’re going to invest in the aspirations and the ambitions and the dreams of the American people?’ Knowing that regardless of people’s color or the language their grandmother speaks, we all have the same dreams and aspirations and want a president who invests in those, not in hate and division,” said Harris.
Throughout the debate, pointing out Trump’s moral faults was a smart tactic of Harris’. It allowed viewers to assess the substance of Trump’s messages as well as take note of his shortsighted embrace of democratic values. They could then compare this to her professionalism and goal to assist all American people.
This motif of kindness contrasted the Republican candidate’s themes as many of his statements were clearly aimed at his extremist following, such as the false claim that Haitian immigrants were eating pet cats and dogs in Springfield, Ohio.
While Harris is clearly aligned with values of the democrats, she does not manipulate her supporters with false claims, as Trump does in and out of debates.
She distinguishes herself by refusing to pit one group against another, emphasizing her care for all Americans. Her amiable demeanor and ethical campaigning reflect her commitment to unity, setting her apart as a candidate who genuinely strives for inclusivity.
For those who appreciate reliability and maturity, Harris proved to bring that during this debate.
Harris discussed a concrete approach toward Russia’s war in Ukraine, expressing that she supports Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and will not be compliant with dictators like Vladimir Putin, the Russian president. She also showed that she has a clear idea of international policy and an interest in keeping democracy alive in other countries, as well as supporting NATO.
Unlike her opponent, Harris showed she had no problem being honest about her stance on the issue.
When asked if Ukraine winning the war would be in the interest of the United States, Trump could not answer the question, insinuating that if he was in power he would assist Putin in his illegal invasion and go against NATO.
Anna Wilhelmi is an attorney who works with the chair for Dekalb County Democrats and is also currently running for county board for District 11. She has been practicing law for almost 30 years and speaks of the structured norms that come with representing the law.
“When you’re an attorney, you know you go before judges, like everything is supposed to be very dignified,” Wilhelmi said. “You know there are certain protocols that is dignified, right, and also the ability to convey your message in a way that is rational, reasonable, based in facts is paramount, because if I as an attorney or Kamala Harris went to a court and provided a falsehood, that would be something that would so not only like ruin your reputation, like immediately with the judge right, because you go before judges quite often right? It would just ruin your intent, you know, your integrity, your character, which are paramount for an attorney, OK, we are licensed, we have to take ethics very seriously.”
Wilhelmi explains how integrity is an important trait in a lawyer, suggesting that a lawyer of Harris’ status would enforce and view the truth as significantly important.
“So you know she’s not going to get up there just based on her background, you know, her career, and tell lies and get away with it like theres no way she would do that because facts are so important based on her lifelong career and she, she is and what she has done in the past. She cannot tell falsehoods, right, like that is not in her being,” Wilhelmi said.
Harris was a prosecutor and served as the attorney general of California for six years. Having this background suggests that she approaches the law in an ethical way. This was apparent in the debate as she held up the dignified standard that is typical in a court and provided only factual arguments.
Harris’ approach during the Sept. 10 debate was very well prepared for who she was going up against: it was well executed, informative and elevating for her campaign.
