Although it kills me to say so, former President Donald Trump’s performance at the ABC News showdown in Philadelphia on Tuesday night failed to meet the moment. Those of us hoping he would deliver a humiliating Tulsi Gabbardesque takedown of Vice President Kamala Harris were sorely disappointed.
Trump repeatedly allowed himself to take Harris’s bait, something he should have expected and been prepared for. Rather than pivoting and going on offense, he instead became rattled and defensive. He wasted precious time responding to Harris’s attacks on irrelevant topics, such as Trump’s calls for vengeance against the Central Park Five, five black and Latino teenagers from Harlem who were wrongfully convicted for raping and beating a white woman in 1989.
Perhaps the biggest takeaway from Harris’s performance was her nonstop smirking while Trump was speaking. Her expressions ranged from disdainful to derisive. They were distracting, disrespectful, and childish. And, reminiscent of then-Vice President Al Gore’s unforgettable sighs and eye rolls during his first debate with then-Texas Gov. George W. Bush in 2000, they began to grate early on.
Harris told lie after lie after lie. She began by tying Trump to Project 2025, a conservative roadmap for America’s future coordinated by the Heritage Foundation. Although Trump has repeatedly made it clear he does not support this initiative, Harris continues to use this line of attack to scare voters.
Harris also insisted that Trump would sign a national ban on abortions. Although he declined to say he would not sign such a bill, he explained it was a moot point because the issue of abortion has been returned to the states.
She even lied about hoaxes that have been long-debunked by left-leaning fact checkers. For example, Harris accused Trump of saying Neo-Nazis and white supremacists were “very fine people” after the 2017 Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, and that there would be a “bloodbath” if he lost the election, carefully omitting the context.
But, despite her countless lies and obnoxious facial expressions, the most unexpected takeaway from Harris’s performance was that she was prepared. Gone were the “word salads” we’ve come to expect from her. Instead the vice president was uncharacteristically articulate even if her words were laced with lies. Remarkably so. She had literally memorized her handlers’ carefully worded talking points and delivered her lines as an actor would, complete with emotions and hand gestures. She took five days off the campaign trail to do so.
To be fair, Harris wasn’t Trump’s only opponent on the debate stage. He was, of course, outnumbered by 3:1. Those who expected the relative fairness of CNN’s Jake Tapper and Dana Bash, who moderated the June debate between Trump and President Joe Biden, were likely surprised by the unconcealed bias of the ABC moderators, David Muir and Linsey Davis, who attempted to fact-check Trump in real-time, while giving Harris a pass on her numerous, and sometimes egregious lies.
[Note: On Monday, the Media Research Center released the results of a study which found that between July 21 and Sept. 6, Muir, who hosts ABC’s “World News Tonight,” had provided 100% positive coverage of Harris and 93% hostile coverage of Trump.]
It’s also worth noting why Harris was so willing to debate Trump on ABC — and only ABC. Last month, the New York Times reported that Harris’s “longtime friend,” Dana Walden, is a top-ranking executive at the Walt Disney Company, “whose portfolio includes ABC News.”
The Times made it clear that Harris and Walden, whom they noted “is both revered and feared in Hollywood,” are not mere acquaintances. Describing the bond between the two, the authors wrote: “But rare is the genuine, enduring friendship like that between Ms. Harris and Ms. Walden. Their closeness is no secret in Los Angeles and Washington circles, though it has become more notable in light of Ms. Harris’s ascension to the top of the ticket — and ABC’s confirmation on Thursday that the network would host a prime-time debate that could make or break the vice president’s political future.” I reported on this story here.
In fact, as Megyn Kelly explains in the video below, Walden is even responsible for Harris’s introduction to her husband, Doug Emhoff.
At any rate, by the end of the night, this much was clear: one candidate had been well-prepared for the debate and the other had not.
Nevertheless, the debate was not a debacle for the former president either. He was strong on the economy and on border security. He also portrayed Harris as a Marxist and accused her of supporting “unrestricted abortion-on-demand until birth,” a position that’s a bridge too far even for many pro-choicers.
Moreover, post-debate flash polls and focus group discussions showed that voters were not all buying what the vice president was selling.
Below, a participant in a CBS News focus group said that Trump “spoke facts.” Another noted that Harris was trying to hide behind a moderate “facade,” just as Biden had done in 2020.
In the clip below, Dr. Phil asked members of a focus group which candidate they believe took a stronger stance on the border issue. Just four people chose Harris while a large majority chose Trump.
In the following clip, an undecided voter tells Dr. Phil she “still didn’t get answers from Kamala to fundamental questions that we need to know as voters.” Specifically, she did not hear any details about Harris’s “economic plans,” adding that “we know that Donald Trump CAN fix the economy.”
CNN asked voters before and after the debate which candidate they feel would better handle the economy. In the pre-debate poll, 53% chose Trump and 37%, Harris. Post-debate, Trump had edged up to 55% while Harris declined to 35%.
Trump ended on a strong note. He told voters, “They’ve had three and a half years to fix the border, three and a half years to create jobs, and all the things we talked about. Why hasn’t she done it?”
Overall, Trump did not have a great night. And, unfortunately, this debate is likely to be his only opportunity to confront Harris face to face on the abysmal failures of the Biden-Harris administration and on her radical past.
But the debate was not a train wreck for Trump either. And this election is far from over.
Elizabeth writes commentary for The Washington Examiner. She is an academy fellow at The Heritage Foundation and a member of the Editorial Board at The Sixteenth Council, a London think tank. Please follow Elizabeth on X or LinkedIn.
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY