PHILADELPHIA (The Thursday Times) — The first 2024 presidential debate between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump provided a fiery spectacle, with both candidates demonstrating their strengths while exposing significant weaknesses. Moderated by David Muir and Linsey Davis in Philadelphia, this debate offered voters a clear contrast between the policies and personalities that define this election. While both Harris and Trump delivered notable moments, neither escaped criticism, as fact-checkers and analysts dissected their statements and tactics throughout the 90-minute event.
Kamala Harris entered the debate with the weight of the Biden administration on her shoulders, aiming to defend its track record on the economy, immigration, and foreign policy. However, her performance was marred by several misleading statements and exaggerated claims. For instance, when discussing the January 6th Capitol riot, Harris inaccurately suggested that Trump was directly indicted for inciting violence—a statement that was quickly debunked by fact-checkers. Trump’s charges pertain to conspiracy and obstruction, not incitement of violence. Harris’s overreach on this issue left her vulnerable to criticism, suggesting she was more interested in scoring political points than presenting facts.
On the economic front, Harris touted the Biden administration’s recovery efforts but failed to acknowledge the struggles many Americans continue to face with inflation. Her framing of Trump’s economic policies as solely benefiting the wealthy oversimplified a more nuanced issue. Trump’s tax cuts did reduce corporate taxes and benefited high-income earners, but they also led to increased investments and economic growth pre-pandemic. Harris’s reluctance to engage with the complexities of these policies undermined her credibility in the eyes of some voters.
Trump, meanwhile, showcased his familiar debate style—brash, confrontational, and unapologetic. While this approach appeals to his base, it also alienates a significant portion of the electorate. Throughout the debate, Trump interrupted Harris repeatedly and employed his usual strategy of attacking the media, labeling it as biased. These tactics, while effective at rallying his core supporters, do little to win over undecided voters who may be looking for a more composed and solution-oriented leader.
One of Trump’s biggest missteps came when discussing immigration. While he criticised the Biden administration’s handling of the southern border, claiming it has been overwhelmed by illegal immigration, his rhetoric lacked depth. He failed to acknowledge that immigration is a deeply rooted and complex issue that has spanned multiple administrations. Furthermore, while Trump was quick to point out Harris’s failure to control the border, he glossed over the controversies surrounding his own immigration policies, including family separations at the border.
Harris, for her part, struggled to defend the current administration’s handling of immigration. As vice president, she was tasked with addressing the root causes of migration from Central America, and while there have been some improvements in those areas, the overall migration crisis has worsened. Her answers felt evasive at times, and she failed to offer concrete solutions to the ongoing border challenges.
On foreign policy, Trump and Harris traded barbs over the U.S.’s standing on the global stage. Trump attacked Harris for what he described as the Biden administration’s weakness, particularly in its handling of China and Afghanistan. While Trump’s criticisms of the Afghanistan withdrawal were valid, given the chaos that ensued, he offered little in the way of alternative strategies, merely criticising without providing a clear plan. Harris, in contrast, sought to emphasise the administration’s rebuilding of international alliances, but she failed to convincingly address the administration’s missteps, such as the strained relations with some key allies.
One of the most glaring weaknesses for both candidates was their reliance on outdated talking points. Trump continuously attacked Harris with recycled criticisms from the 2020 campaign, while Harris leaned heavily on the Biden administration’s talking points without offering new insights or solutions. Neither candidate provided a clear, forward-looking vision that addresses the pressing issues of today’s America—such as the rising cost of living, the growing political divide, and the threats to democratic institutions.
