Amy Hamm: Trump lost bigly 

He could have easily won, had he not missed several opportunities to attack Harris

Published Sep 11, 2024  •  Last updated 4 minutes ago  •  3 minute read

Viewers gather to watch a debate between Democratic presidential nominee Vice President Kamala Harris and Republican presidential nominee former President Donald Trump at the Angry Elephant Bar and Grill, Tuesday, Sept. 10, 2024, in San Antonio. (AP Photo/Eric Gay)

Two sentiments can summarize last night’s Trump-Harris presidential debate: a surprisingly small serving of word salad from Harris, and a landslide of lost opportunity for Trump.

Harris was the clear — and unexpected — winner. It seems that even her own party was surprised. They’ve kept her under wraps since she emerged as the Democratic runner in August, avoiding media interviews and public appearances while inviting widespread speculation about her presumed incompetence. U.K. journalist Douglas Murray, for instance, rightly noted that “Kamala has the air of someone who has been vastly over-promoted.” When she speaks, she has a tendency to say very little, while using an enormous number of words.

Article content

Harris soundbites and clips have thus far been excruciating to watch — the combination of her airy sentiments about nothing — like lipstick on a Starbucks lid — and nonsensical, handcrafted idioms. The significance of the passage of time, anyone? And then there’s her cackling laughter, which seems a nervous tic more than an expression of the “joy” she promotes as a campaign strategy.

Harris began the debate with a grin that looked as involuntary as a patient on a psychiatric ward, and frequently broke into laughter as Trump spoke. But that changed: we could all see her confidence — and seriousness — building as she quickly realized that she had Trump fumbling and cornered. She delivered several knockout lines about Trump’s flirtatious and — according to Harris — naïve approach to world dictators. “Putin would eat you for lunch,” she snarled. Trump was rattled. As Harris grew calmer and more prosecutorial, Trump became louder and even more unable to focus than usual.

Trump blew several low-hanging opportunities to best Harris: He should have had no issue winning a tête-à-tête on the divisive nature of the identity politics which rule the Democratic Party. It was just over a year ago that Republicans scored a major win when the Supreme Court struck down affirmative action as the racist nonsense that the party has been calling it for years. Instead, Trump fell into Harris’ trap and allowed her to frame him as the race-obsessed — and even racist — candidate. Similarly, he could have easily won a scrimmage on immigration and borders, but stupefyingly decided to ramble about Haitian immigrants killing and eating neighbourhood cats and dogs — an unproven accusation that smacks of intolerance or racism to the average voter.

Article content

Article content

The cleverest move of the night was made by Harris: She painted her opponent as a narcissist, concerned more with ego than country. Why was this so clever, despite seeming an obvious play? Because patriots — no matter their political stripe — saw in Trump, following his attempted assassination, an American leader: his fist pump and defiant declaration, “fight,” were indisputably inspirational. Americans were united in that moment — and Harris needed to shatter this perception in the public’s eye. She did.

Trump only managed a single, regrettable line about his attempted assassination: “I probably took a bullet to the head because of the things they say about me,” he said. And just like that, Trump did precisely what Harris wanted him to do: He undermined the patriotic valence of the attempted killing — and made it all about himself and his enemies. About the politics of division. It was no longer about uniting America. Kudos to Harris.

At times, both lied, deflected, and evaded. Little was said about policy. The moderators appeared to favour Harris at several instances, but likely not to the extent that it affected the outcome — though Republican pundits, and Trump, will argue the opposite. That is merely a salve.

Article content

The (maybe) good news for Trump: He knows how to perform in the next debate, if there is one. He will be coached to deal with Harris, as he was clearly coached to deal with Biden in the disastrous June debate that saw Biden drop out of the presidential race. In that debate, Trump was uncharacteristically reticent in the face of a supremely easy target. The Republicans knew what to expect and planned accordingly. They did not, by contrast, know what to expect last night — and it may have lost them the election.

Who wins may simply boil down to which image has more staying power with the American public: Trump, face bloodied, fist in the air, while a U.S. flag waves in the background; or Harris, with a knowing and subdued smile, hand on her chin in condescension and disbelief, staring at Trump across the debate stage.

National Post

Recommended from Editorial

1. 

   Jamie Sarkonak: Joe Biden's long unblinking stare is fit for retirement

2. 

   Carson Jerema: The left pretends Trump's 'rhetoric' is worse than assassination attempt

Article content