Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump debated on Tuesday, discussing hot-button topics surrounding the economy, immigration, and healthcare.
Although this was the second debate for this election, it was the first for Harris. The previous debate in June between President Joe Biden and Trump led Biden to drop out of the race due to concerns about his re-electibility. Harris was quickly endorsed by Biden and became the Democratic nominee. This may be the last debate of this election cycle, as Trump stated after that he would not be open to a second.
The M-A Chronicle spoke with some of M-A’s history, government, and debate experts about the candidates’ performances. Here’s what they had to say.
Sam Harris
Government and AP US History Teacher
Did anything surprise you?
“I was surprised that Trump took the bait even though it was clear Harris was going to try to goad him into topics that would be triggering to him. He would love nothing more than to make this race about race and dominate the headlines like he did in 2016. I think the Harris campaign has done their homework, and they know what works and doesn’t work with Trump. Maybe it was unplanned, but it was effective.”
How important are presidential debates?
“The previous debate in late June was probably the most significant debate in our history, and it’s the only one that has led to a candidate dropping out of the race. Will this one have as big of an impact? Probably not, but this will have an impact on undecided voters and even just uninspired voters.”
How do presidential debates affect democracy?
“There’s nothing in the Constitution requiring presidential debates. Just because a candidate doesn’t give a good debate doesn’t necessarily mean they are going to be a bad president. The debates cheapen the electoral process a little bit.”
There’s nothing in the Constitution requiring presidential debates.
Sam Harris
Vesta Kassayan
Debate team member, sophomore
Who do you think won?
“If you analyze what they said, I think it’s pretty clear Harris won, but I don’t think Trump did as bad as the news outlets are saying. Their bases are going to be untouched by the debate, and in terms of swing voters, Trump did an okay job. He kept repeating ideas people want to hear like ‘I’m going to lower taxes’ and ‘I’m going to solve Russia’ but he didn’t give any policy—which is kind of hypocritical—but he told those undecided people what they want to hear.”
What was abnormal?
“The live fact-checking was new for this debate, and while it is more ethical, it ended up attacking Trump’s strategy because he did what he usually does, which is say what people want to hear, lie, and dodge the tough questions. By being called out for it by someone other than Harris during the debate, it hurt his case.”
Stephanie Cuff-Alvarado
Government and Economics Teacher
How do you think debate decorum has changed over time?
“You can track decorum by who the ‘enemy’ is in the debate. If we go back to the 1950s and President Eisenhower, the debate was just about, ‘Here’s why I am good.’ In the ‘60s and ‘70s, it was, ‘Here’s why I am going to do a better job at defending the United States from an enemy,’ the enemy usually being some threat via the Cold War. As you get into the ‘80s and ‘90s, it gets slightly more contentious, and in the 2000s it turns into, ‘My opponent is not as good as me.’
More recently, it’s ‘Obama is my enemy,’ or ‘Trump is my enemy.’ The idea is ‘The other side is ruining the nation,’ which I think is interesting, because you can see that heated passion in the decorum of these debates. I think that reflects an overall change in how polarized we are as a nation.”
How do presidential debates affect democracy?
“The greatest threat to democracy is our own polarization. When citizens and candidates are not willing to listen to that other side whatsoever, that breeds apathy. Democracy relies on people participating. Democracy is just not something that naturally occurs. You have to participate. And if you’re apathetic or you’re afraid of getting yelled at, then that democracy crumbles.
We do need to combat this fear of talking to each other and the hatred we show each other. It’s really hard to do in a classroom because I want every student to feel seen and heard no matter what their political background is. But it’s hard to validate one person’s reality without challenging the complete realities of the country.”
What stood out to you?
“I found it astounding the number of times supplied evidence was very strategic and not holistic, and the analysis or the explanation of that evidence was sugar-coated. I think it’s easier to spot certain holes in people’s evidence the more grandiose a claim is, but we have to be careful of well articulated statistics and quotes. If you say anything confidently enough, people will believe you.”
Democracy relies on people participating. Democracy is just not something that naturally occurs. You have to participate. And if you’re apathetic or you’re afraid of getting yelled at, then that democracy crumbles.
Stephanie Cuff-Alvarado
Neel Gangam
Debate team captain, junior
Who do you think won the debate?
“I ended up thinking that Harris might have won this debate because she seemed more confident and was lying less. It felt like the commentators were trying to fact-check Trump every five seconds and Harris felt like the more relatable, truthful candidate, which is what she wants to be.”
How do presidential debates affect democracy?
“Presidential debates are great for democracy because they help bring discourse to light, help candidates talk to each other, and avoid a whole ‘he said, she said’ media battle. The public can see the two candidates for the first time in the same room and hear their policies better. It’s really great public discourse.”
