Kamala Harris eclipses Trump in debate, but election still neck-and-neck

A debate between competing candidates does not always decide a presidential election in the United States of America. Hilary Clinton won all three such contests against Donald Trump in 2016, yet lost the vote. Joe Biden, now president, defeated Trump and was elected as well.

The televised 10 September clash of (symbolic) swords between half-Jamaican, half-Indian vice-president Kamala Harris and former president Trump was watched by 58 million viewers in the US, and possibly millions more on digital and social media.

The impact of such a major event, though, is not indefinite. It might, in fact, fade from memory only after a week or so.

It is the effect of the remainder of the campaign over the next eight weeks that will clinch the outcome of the 5 November polls. In other words, while Harris was widely seen as the victor in the verbal exchange, she has some distance to traverse before she can relax in what is still a contest too close to call.

The Washington Post’s assessment after speaking to uncommitted voters was: ‘Harris appears to have solidified the support of voters who were leaning in her direction.’ Whereas 4 out of 10 who said they would ‘probably’ back Trump before the debate, they changed their mind after it. ‘Harris’s performance also ranks up there with the most decisive wins in recent history… though it’s worth noting that a strong debate doesn’t always necessarily translate into a White House victory.’

In recent decades, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin have generally been recognised as bellwether states, which inevitably tilt towards the winner. A day after the debate, polling in the first had Harris at 49 per cent and Trump at 47 per cent; in the second, both were at 48 per cent each; and in the third, Harris was 50 per cent and Trump 47 per cent.

An ABC News national opinion survey on voting intentions on the same day indicated 47 per cent were in favour of Harris, 44 per cent for Trump.

Harris walked confidently towards Trump on the speakers’ podium holding out her hand to introduce herself as ‘Kamala Harris’. It was the first time the two had met.

As the debate got underway, Trump branded Harris a ‘Marxist’ (almost a generic term of abuse in the US). The latter’s repartee was her opponent was a ‘laughing stock’ among world leaders.

It was a no-holds-barred live debate hosted by ABC News. It’s unlikely, though, that the two will face-off a second time. Not because another debate has not been scheduled, but because Trump may be wary of risking another confrontation, which might bruise him further.  

He said it differently, though. On Truth Social, Trump wrote: 'Comrade Kamala Harris is going around wanting another Debate because she lost so badly - Just look at the Polls! It’s true with prizefighters, when they lose a fight, they immediately want another.'

A flash poll conducted by CNN elicited that 63 per cent to 37 per cent of viewers felt Harris turned in a better performance at the debate, however. Forbes reported that in an election betting odds tracker, which consolidates betting numbers from four separate markets, bookmakers now believe Harris has a 51.8 per cent chance of winning, compared to Trump’s 46.9 per cent.

Trump characteristically complained about the two moderators, who were compelled to repeatedly fact-check and correct him as he typically resorted to falsehood. "It was obviously three-on-one," he alleged. He would later remarked he was not sure if he would do another debate. His aides certainly wouldn’t advise it.    

Meanwhile, asked if she bore any responsibility for the US troops’ chaotic 2021 pull-out from Afghanistan, Harris declared she supported Biden’s decision: "As a result American taxpayers are not paying $300 million a day we were paying for the endless war… Donald Trump, when he was president, negotiated one of the weakest deals you can imagine. He calls himself a deal maker. Even his national security adviser said it was a weak, terrible deal… He bypassed the Afghan government, he negotiated directly with a terrorist organisation called the Taliban.

"The negotiation involved the Taliban getting 5,000 terrorists, Taliban terrorists released… and this [pause] former president, as president, invited the Taliban to Camp David, a place of storied significance to us as Americans. A place where we honour the importance of American diplomacy, where we invite and receive respected world leaders."

That pause was made much of on social media.

Trump retaliated: "These people (Biden and Harris) did the worst withdrawal, in my opinion the most embarrassing moment in the history of our country. And by the way, that’s why Russia attacked Ukraine, because they saw how incompetent she and her boss are."

On the Russia–Ukraine war, Trump was asked if he wanted Ukraine to win. He ducked the question. Instead he responded: "I want this war to stop... It will lead to World War III." He also wanted Europe to contribute an equal amount of money to the Ukrainian war effort as the US.

Harris was more direct in asserting that Ukraine’s is a "righteous defence" of its "sovereignty".

On West Asia policy, Harris labelled Hamas as a "terrorist organisation" and said: "Israel has a right to defend itself — and how it does so matters. Because it is also true far too many innocent Palestinians have been killed. Children, mothers... What we know is that this war must end. It must end immediately". She spoke of a ceasefire deal being the way to achieve that, "with the hostages out".

She added, "We must work around the clock on that, work around the clock also understanding that we must chart a course for a two-state solution [which implies an independent Palestine]."

Trump retorted: "If I were president, it would have never started. If I were president, Russia would have never ever — I know Putin very well — he would have never… have gone into Ukraine… I will get that [the Israel–Palestine conflict] settled and fast and I’ll get the war with Russia and Ukraine ended. If I am president elect, I will get it done before even becoming president."

Trump was, according to pre-debate opinion polls, seen as enjoying a slight edge on the topics of economy and immigration. Yet, he blew it on both issues.

On the economy — which is most important for US electors — Harris said, "I imagine and have a plan to build an opportunity economy."

She promised a tax cut of $6,000 for middle-class families, adding, "My plan is to give a $50,000 tax deduction to start-up small businesses, knowing they are part of the backbone of the American economy. My opponent on the other hand, his plan is to do what he has done before, which is to provide a tax cut for billionaires and big corporations."

When it came to Trump’s turn, he went off on a bizarre tangent about "millions of people pouring into our country from prisons and jails, mental institutions... and they are coming in and taking jobs which are occupied right now by African Americans and Hispanics, also unions... These are the people she and Biden let into our country, dangerous, they are at the highest level of criminality and we have to get ‘em out, get ‘em out fast."    

On immigration, he repeated his rant about migrants being criminals and being allowed in by the Biden administration in their millions.

He was questioned on how he would deport 11 million undocumented immigrants. Preferring not to reply, he claimed crime was down all over the world, but up in American under Biden, destroying the fabric of the US. He called it "migrant crime".

He was politely but firmly corrected by one of the moderators: "As you know, the FBI says overall crime is actually coming down in this country." Trump called it a "defrauding statement", saying the statistics "did not include the cities with the worst crimes".

Harris saw her opportunity and went for the jugular: "This is so rich, coming from someone who has been prosecuted for national security crimes, economic crimes, election interference, has been found liable for sexual assault and his next big court appearance is in November at his own criminal sentencing."

The governor of California, the US’ biggest state, described his fellow Californian Harris’ performance as a "masterclass".

Sometimes it was a classic Cassius Clay rope-a-dope: Harris would lure Trump into a trap and he would fall headlong into it.

It was unequivocally a battle settled. But the war is yet to be won.