The anticipation leading up to Tuesday evening’s matchup was charged, some desiring to paint the scene as 78-year-old Donald Trump clashing with the energetic younger contender, Kamala Harris, at 59. Any hopes of seeing Trump emerge as an age-weakened contender were promptly dashed. Donald Trump’s onstage presence was characterized by clear eyes, lively demeanor, and coherent, if occasionally unconventional, discourse. In the initial thirty minutes, Trump appeared as a fighter for whom the stakes couldn’t be higher.
However, as the night progressed, Trump remained authentically Trump. Rather than hone in on Harris’s campaign’s ostensible weak points – principally the economy and border security, to appeal to the critical swing state voters – he took a unique detour. Diving into an intense Trump-style discourse, he touched upon topics as diverse as border issues involving migrants and contentious state-level decisions perceived as counterproductive or unjust.
To truly shine in Tuesday’s debate and in the subsequent November showdown, Trump needed to embody discipline and consistency, presenting his view of Harris as an unfit, ineffective and overly liberal candidate. The adherence to these tasks appeared less steadfast than expected. Yet, Harris is decidedly different from her associate, Joe Biden. She is young, dynamic, and articulate. Still, these are not the reasons she seemed to momentarily outshine Trump.
Her prowess, honed during her days as a prosecutor, was on stark display as she sought to dissect the former president’s interactions with Russia and his criminal record. She attempted to showcase her grasp on multifaceted policy and geopolitical matters, and her demeanor was posed and polished. Following this debate between Trump and Harris, some might suggest this incident might have sealed the former president’s fate, yet the election remains wide open.
It’s a general understanding that women must always perform at an exceptionally higher level than the proverbial bar, while their male colleagues simply have to appear at the event. This seemed to be the understanding Kamala Harris possessed, and she appeared to well exceed the prescribed expectations. Supplementary to the event, an immediate public poll suggested that 63% of viewers considered Harris as the victor, while only 37% felt Trump’s performance was superior.
However, such encouraging figures for the Democrats should not precipitate premature celebrations; it’s important to remember the recent past. In an identical snapshot poll conducted immediately following the first general election debate between Trump and Clinton in 2016, Trump, surprisingly, scored even lower, locking only 24% votes in his favor. However, the subsequent election results were dramatically different to public expectation.
Despite the debate demonstrating the challenges Trump can face, it would be erroneous to think the electoral race is over. We’ve experienced previous election surprises. In 2016, Hillary Clinton took the national popular vote by a margin of 2.1 points, yet lost in the battleground states, and Biden in 2020 won by 4.5 points at the national level, but barely edged out in battleground states. This suggests that for a decisive win, Harris needs to dramatically outperform Trump nationally, and the current performance scores do not guarantee this.
Let there be no misconceptions: this election holds the potential for unexpected outcomes. The electoral college framework typically provides a slight favor towards the republican party, and multiple surveys indicate a public sentiment of the country veering off course. On key election issues – the economy, immigration, and the Middle East – voters still predominantly tilt towards Trump.
Recollections of watching Democratic spokespersons on cable news following the debate, and Wednesday mornings after that, invariably hark back to a similar timeframe in 2016. Back then, a sense of overpowering confidence had defined Clinton’s campaign, enough to spark an early celebration aboard the campaign plane on the election day itself. On that evening, my former boss, Governor Cuomo, was scheduled to speak at Hillary Clinton’s victory party at the Javits Center.
The choice of the Javits Center, with its symbolic all-glass roof, ironically reflecting expectations that Hillary would easily shatter the glass ceiling that night, was poignant. By 10:30 pm, when we got to the venue, the New York Times’ election predictor unexpectedly leaned towards a Trump presidency. Governor Cuomo, despite the shock, proceeded to stick with the message planned out prior to this twist, following advice to act as though nothing was amiss.
Three hours later, Donald Trump was declared the victor, and the only audible shattering that night came from a champagne bottle dropped on the pavement near the Javits Center. The expectant festivity at the Javits Center remained subdued, a moment Democratic supporters in 2020 would do well to remember.
Trump stakes in this election are immense, with aspirations that stretch far beyond political wins. Losing may not send him retreating to a comfortable retirement in Mar-a-Lago, but rather fighting potential legal battles. This makes it clear he will not back down easily, and his supporters can be difficult to gauge based on poll surveys alone.
So far, Harris has steered clear of missteps, possibly leading her to demand more debates. If accepted, her stand and confidence could be a win for her, and if declined, Trump’s refusal could be perceived as his acknowledgment of his inability to best her. There are 54 days left for the election day, leaving room for considerable political play. With this in mind, Harris and her team should emulate the posture of the underdog in the race, a strategic approach that could land them ahead.
Trump’s Energetic Performance Defies Age Expectations at Debate appeared first on Real News Now.
About Author
