Harris won the debate, but would it make a difference?

IT IS safe to say that there are few people on this planet who are not familiar with Donald Trump or do not have a strong opinion either way about the former US president – that he is a loudmouth demagogue who promotes political divisions and xenophobia, or an assertive nationalist and inspiring populist who wants to make America great again.

So when the Republican presidential candidate showed up for the televised presidential debate hosted by ABC News in Philadelphia on Tuesday (Sep 10), the chances that his remarks would have changed anyone’s view of him were slim. Even if he had tried, he would have found it difficult to redefine himself in the eyes of the voters.

Meanwhile, many Americans have been found by opinion polls to consider Vice-President and Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris to be an unknown quantity, given that she is a late entry into the race for the White House.

With under two months to an election that is shaping up to be neck and neck, her main challenge on Tuesday night was to define herself – and to do so before Trump does. She had to help voters find an answer to the main questions on their minds: Who is Kamala Harris? Is she ready for the top job?

Indeed, Trump and his campaign tried to get ahead in the lead-up to the debate: They depicted the VP as a “San Francisco radical”, a dangerous Marxist, weak on foreign policy and national security, and with no policy plans – and someone who would continue the policies of President Joe Biden, and drive America into decline and World War III.

But on Tuesday, Harris rose to the challenge. She had the chance to define herself as an optimistic woman who is advancing practical plans and focusing on the future. In the process, she also succeeded in defining her Republican opponent, whom she baited, and helped depict him as a confused, self-centred public figure.

She declared: “Clearly, I am not Joe Biden. I am clearly not Donald Trump. And what I do offer is a new generation of leadership for our country – one who believes in what is possible, one who brings a sense of optimism.”

As a result, she put him on the defensive as she taunted and goaded him – and he took the bait.

He indulged in personal grievances and narcissism, talked about the past and Biden, as well as the immigrants in Ohio who supposedly ate pets. Instead of speaking about the future and how he would improve American lives in the next four years, he insisted, once again, that he won the 2020 election and claimed that the large crowds Harris had drawn to her campaign events weren’t real.

Calling her the “worst vice-president in history”, he painted a picture of an America that has plunged into chaos and despair. He also tied Harris to the immigration crisis under the Biden administration, alleging that they were allowing people “from prisons, mental institutions and insane asylums” to enter the country illegally.

On her part, Harris reiterated her support for a bipartisan Senate Bill that would have given the president the authority to stop processing asylum seekers if the number of crossings rose too high. This draft law was negotiated earlier this year, but was blocked by Republicans who had been asked by Trump to oppose it.

“He’d prefer to run on a problem instead of fixing a problem,” Harris said.

She portrayed the former president as a man of the past and asked voters to “turn the page”. She took on the mantle of the “change” candidate and repeated her proposals to give tax breaks to small businesses and increase the supply of housing. “Not everybody got handed US$400 million on a silver platter and then filed bankruptcy six times,” she said in a jab at Trump, even as she contrasted her economic agenda and middle-class upbringing with his.

“I am actually the only person on this stage who has a plan that is about lifting the middle class and working people of America,” she said. “Donald Trump actually has no plan for you, because he is more interested in defending himself than he is looking out for you.”

It is not clear whether the debate would prove decisive in terms of influencing swing voters. What is clear is that the electorate continues to be closely divided, and in that context, most of them already have a firm view of Trump.

The question is whether Harris’ performance would persuade swing voters to support her. Her team is hoping that the debate would have an effect on two important constituencies – women and Republican voters seeking a Trump alternative.

Women voters have been gravitating towards her, say pollsters, although Trump continues to have an edge among white women. However, his aggressive “manly” attitude on full display at the debate – faced as he was with a woman seeking to be the first female president of the United States – could bring undecided women voters in her direction.

Another constituency targeted by the Democrats include Republicans who had voted for former United Nations ambassador and South Carolina governor Nikki Haley during the Republican presidential primaries.

Many of them are looking for a reason not to vote for Trump, and Harris may well have provided them an alternative.

The fact that leading conservative Republicans – including former VP Dick Cheney and his daughter and former congresswoman Liz Cheney – have also announced they plan to vote for Harris could give this group of Republican voters the impetus to do the same.

The impact of singer Taylor Swift’s endorsement of Harris should also not be underestimated, given her large fan base and the sway she likely has over voters aged 18 to 31, especially those residing in the battleground states.