Debate or Debacle

If you haven’t heard about the Harris-Trump debate, you may be one of the reasons that America is so divided politically. I don’t mean that in the sense that you caused the nation’s division (though I can’t say that you may not be involved), but because you aren’t paying attention and only the two sub-sets of the population are fighting for their respective sides. Nothing unusual about that in politics, but the views and concepts that are being generated are let’s say not very original or innovative. Maybe this lack of new insights in our politics is why you didn’t watch or don’t pay attention to the campaigns or our politics. If you did watch the debate, you have your views and likely your side/alignment.

So, how did the debates go? Ugh! They were more or less what I expected; and that is in fact the problem. Was there a winner, sure! Who it was I am confident depends upon very much on if you are aligned with a particular party; and if you are not it may depend upon an issue more than the candidate.

This assessment (critique) will focus on where the candidates succeeded or failed, on some issues, and on the debate structure & execution.

How did the candidate do in general?

Trump was the Trump that I think most people expect and expected. He knows how to “fix” everything that is “wrong”, and only he apparently can do this. If he isn’t elected, then the ‘end of the world’ will occur; and it will all be the fault of Harris (and Biden) or (fill-in the blank). It’s just a standard line and theme of his. Whether you like it or not, agree with it or not, and understand it or not doesn’t matter to this assessment. He has a plan for everything, or a concept, or if he can find something better then he’ll act on it. But if you expected to know or learn anything about those plans or thoughts it wasn’t evident in the narratives. Trump didn’t seem to be able to stay on point with the topics his advisers say they recommended repeatedly.

Harris was more of the candidate that we have come to expect in these debates. I don’t mean that to be considered a positive assessment but just a placement on the spectrum of presidential candidates in a debate. Thus, better then Biden did in his last performance but not as well as say Reagan did against Mondale. She did appear to have both a strategy to provoke her opponent and was able to respond to some of his claims and attacks competently. She did miss a number of opportunities to use some of Trump’s statements as productively as she might have.

Both candidates avoided, evaded or pirouetted their responses to some questions. It’s hard to know what that says about either candidate since you must know the condition(s) that motivated or caused the non-responsive answer. Which candidate did the DC side-step more often is likely subjective for most people, but it could be objectively measured with a little effort. This does offer a suggestion to the media entities that have the naivete to think they know how to hold and conduct a political debate.

What about the issues?

The Economy is a big election issue. And the Reagan’s “Are you better off now than you were four years ago?” question did come up.

Harris had the prepared response, and I would guess thus hasn’t satisfied a number of voters who are intently focused on this issue. This was one of the bigger missed opportunities for her. There were any number of superior answers and ways to use this question to much better effect and as an attack on Trump. But it requires an more analytic assessment of how the public views and thinks about the question and the Economy.

Trump’s opportunity on the “better off now” question was more on target, except that is was overlayed with too much that opened him to being attacked on this very question. His vulnerabilities on the “Economy” will only matter if the Harris team can see and use the openings. So, a to be determined situation. His tariff solution policy approach is one of the biggest opportunity for Harris, and may lose him more undecided voters if those voters understand tariffs and their economy consequences.

Abortion and Reproductive Rights is and has been a political issue that has moved voters for decades.

Trump’s answers were familiar ones, though their consistency with prior statements in other venues is problematic. As with almost every policy, position and statement that he makes there are opportunities that can be used to blunt his positions. There wasn’t much new here. Trump could improve his policy view and position on this issue, but he needs to see how to define a better policy position and statement, and not mess with it.

Harris’s answers were also familiar one. I can’t see that they were inconsistent with her prior views. She did have a good comeback on Trump’s claims, but didn’t seize the moment to introduce some new challenges and question on the abortion issues. This is no more a failure on her part then it is for everyone engaged in the seeking making Reproductive Rights and access to abortion access to women as their right and choice.

Immigration and The Border Issue

Trump’s position is basically unchanged. The narratives justifying his “build a wall” solution and deport people is his weakness. Attacking immigrants with crazy claims that his supporters love doesn’t seem to play well with at least half the population. It’s not only old and tired, it reenforces the ‘confirmation bias’ that Trump is a bit shy of a full deck.

Harris’s position seems to be a recurring “fix the Immigration System” policy. How that is to be accomplished given the members of Congress that voters send to Washington just seems based on the hope that voters choose competent representatives; and hope is a bad strategy. She needs some options that haven’t been considered, including using a Republican attack theme to her benefit.

Leading on Foreign Policy. The Israel / Gaza-Hamas War, Ukraine-Russia War, and other international issues.

Trump’s answer was just more “I can fix this” without any useful information. It’s the worst of all political statements that to many politicians make. It is basically just saying, “Trust me” and voters being foolish enough to “believe a politician” and forgetting that is both unpatriotic and un-American.

Harris’s answer followed the ever evolving and adaptive reliance upon diplomatic and negotiation-based approaches. There is nothing overtly wrong with the using these strategies in general because these are necessary activities that are just fundamentally required if you are going to engage in resolving any problem between two or more parties, including issues just between the US and another nation(s). But I think politicians have come to think that diplomacy as an act can bring about change; while I would assert that you need to know or have strategies that will or can be used via diplomatic efforts to resolve the problem(s).

Neither Trump nor Harris provided an answer here that could convince me that they had a solution strategy to deal with any of the many international issues that American is or ought to be involved in addressing. This is clearly an areas with both candidates could use some new thinking and likely advisers.

The Media and Their Debate Management

ABC didn’t do any worse, and disappointingly they didn’t do any better either, than the news media has been doing with political debates (presidential, vice presidential, or other) for decades. In general it seems the presidential debates get less and less useful every election; and they decline because the format and management of the debates are pathetic.

This is not just ABC. It is every news media entity. If social media entities were to do debates, I have to believe that they would be even worse. The coverage of the debates by other news entities doesn’t improve this picture; and social media displays almost everything that demonstrates how dangerous and abusive these platforms can be to any activity which people need to have at least a moderate level of confidence in; rather then being the agents of abuse, corruption, and harm.

ABC or any news media entity ought to seek advice and guidance on how to do future debates competently and to the benefit of the America people. It is not like it would be difficult to define, create and implement a variety of more effective formats and processes for these debates. It may not be a skill set and competency that news entities possess, but that doesn’t prevent them from have individuals who the requisite skills from providing them with any number of superior debate formats, capabilities, and approaches that would make them stand out from the middling inept quality delivered by new networks and entities today.

Who Won The Debate?

Well, the polls tell us, right? Except the polls tell different folks different answer to who won?

Who do I think won the debate? I think most Republicans think Trump did. I think most Democrats think Harris did. Based on what I have seen in the news media, I put Harris a little over Trump. The answer may most accurately be assessed by measuring whatever you think constitutes a “win”. Is it funding raising, voter registrations, or future poll results that tie some change on an issue to the debate (polling data which may never occur).

Who do I think won the debate? I would give the crown to whichever candidate can identify the opportunities that were on display during the debate, assess those opportunities, and develop smart and effective strategies for their campaign that produces the one metric that matters. Who wins in November. If the question is just, who’s performance was worth having to set through that debate, and that was hard to do, I give it to the individual who passed my standard first-order test: How did they do on Intelligence exhibited?