At the most consequential event of this year's election season - the ABC News presidential debate held in Philadelphia on Tuesday night between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump - Kamala Harris needed a knockout.
She came up short, far short.
While Trump had his good and bad moments - we thought he focused too much on immigration and unconfirmed reports about immigrants eating pets - the purpose of the debate was not for Americans to know who Trump is. They already know more about him than they do about most of their relatives and friends. Trump recognized this fact early on and even said, "Everybody knows I'm an open book. Everybody knows what I'm going to do."
The challenge was for Harris to introduce herself to the world, look presidential, and prove that she could run the country's affairs for the next four years. But, she failed.
Her body language was disrespectful to Trump throughout, making her appear far less presidential. She consistently dropped the title of "President" when addressing him only as "Donald Trump," a severe deviation from established protocol when opponents address each other with the highest title they have earned—like Governor, Senator, or Congressman—even if they are no longer in office. Once, to a question about Election 2020, Harris insulted the 45th president: "I have talked with military leaders, some of whom worked with you. And they say you're a disgrace."
She faked a smile to express scorn when Trump spoke and looked angry when Trump used a line of attack. For someone who repeatedly tried to assure America that she would unite the country, she kept viciously attacking Trump—about J6, Charlottesville, his court cases, including felonies, and temperament in the White House. [According to the New York Times, she spent more than half her 37 minutes of speaking time attacking Trump]. In her closing statement, Harris said that her vision is "focused on the future, and the other (Trump's) is focused on the past." If she is so focused on the future, why have her administration and allies continued to litigate against Trump over the past four years?
Harris was weak on her policy proposals, which were packaged and released only a day before the debate. She struggled to convince Americans tired of Biden’s economic policies of taxing, borrowing, and spending that her "Opportunity Economy," heavily dependent upon borrowing, would bring much-needed relief.
On immigration, she stuck to the safe position that she would sign a comprehensive immigration bill, knowing well that such legislation would never pass Congressional muster. Harris did not have a solution for the Israel-Gaza war other than to repeat that she favors a two-state solution that the warring parties do not want. On the Ukraine-Russia war, she repeated the same old NeoCon lines that America should support countries defending their territory but never once talked about how she would bring peace.
The two ABC News moderators, David Muir and Linsey Davis, were more accommodating of Harris, not challenging her on her performance as Vice President. On the economy, the moderators did not ask Harris why Americans had to suffer for her borrowing and spending policies. They didn't ask her about her support for Build Back Better (BBB), the $6 trillion boondoggle that would have wrecked the economy even more had not West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin stopped it. Many of her current economic policy proposals are taken from BBB. The moderators never pressed her on why, as a border czar, she supported executive action orders that let more than 15 million immigrants enter the country illegally.
On Ukraine, Harris said: "If Donald Trump were president, Putin would be sitting in Kyiv right now. And understand what that would mean. Because Putin's agenda is not just about Ukraine." These have been classic NeoCon lines peddled by the Military Industrial Complex. And, as expected, the moderators did not challenge Harris. What it also means is that if Harris is elected, the Biden approach to the war in Ukraine will continue despite millions killed and wounded, more than 14 million people dislocated, Ukraine in shambles, and America in deep debt.
Nor did the anchors challenge Harris on any topic that would show her in a bad light. This election year's most noteworthy point was when the Democratic Party swapped Biden for Harris. Trump alluded to it when he said: "But he (Biden) had 14 million votes. They threw them out. She got zero votes. And when she ran (in 2020), she was the first one to leave because she failed. And now she's running. I don't understand it, but I'm okay with it – because I think we're going to do pretty well."
It would have been the perfect time for the anchors to ask Harris what her role was in propping up Biden for three years as sane - repeatedly lying to Americans even through the Democratic Primaries that Biden handily won - and then, suddenly, participating in a palace coup to dislodge him from office on the grounds that the party needs a new face, something that has never happened in American history. Instead, Davis turned to the Israel-Hamas war. Failing to question Harris’s role in covering up Biden’s frailties was a glaring omission and a clear example of the media’s well-practiced bias by omission strategy. The moderators were intent on protecting Harris.
President Biden seems to be slipping mentally, which even the New York Times now bluntly admits, reporting that “Biden’s lapses are said to be increasingly common and worrisome.” There is a dangerous power vacuum at the top, with the White House effectively being run by aides, not the president himself. In a recent TIPP Poll, 41% of voters said Biden should "step down" or "be removed" from office, while 62% expressed concern that he poses a national security threat through January 2025. The ABC moderators are not among them.
It was left to Trump to remind everyone during his closing statement: "So, she just started by saying she's going to do this, she's going to do that, she's going to do all these wonderful things. Why hasn't she done it? She's been there for 3 1/2 years. They've had 3 1/2 years to fix the border. They've had 3 1/2 years to create jobs and all the things we talked about. Why hasn't she done it?"
At one point, Harris said, "Well, first of all, it's important to remind the former president that you're not running against Joe Biden; you're running against me." The debate proved that a Harris administration would be a second Biden term on steroids, with all the spending and taxing that she is proposing. Harris did not acknowledge a single Biden administration error, nor did she suggest a plan that would deviate from Biden policies, which have kept America on the wrong track (the latest RealClearPolitics average shows that more than 60% of Americans think so) for more than three years.
On January 6th, Trump said:
I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.
Dr. Omission cleverly left out the two keywords by design, yet another classic example of media bias by omission, which Trump had to correct. In summary, despite facing a 3-against-1 debate, Trump prevailed.
Job promotion requires candidates to prove that they have done well enough in their current jobs, have a realistic plan for the future, and are not just peddling euphemisms like hope and joy. Based on these critical evaluating factors, Harris failed to convince voters she was ready to become America's 47th president.
