The Guardian - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for The Guardian:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: Medium - Factual Reporting: Mixed - United Kingdom
Wikipedia about this source
Search topics on Ground.News
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/sep/11/trump-harris-debate-analysis
Nope.
Trump fans don’t care.
Harris fans saw confirmation.
Disinterested voters didn’t watch.
…and a news media that desperately needs a horse race for clicks will continue to hold Harris to a higher standard than the orange Mr. Magoo.
A convicted rapist literally claimed that you’re allowed to murder babies - then we put them side by side and double check if Harris said something that was slightly exaggerated. What’s so weird about it?
Ajnt Ornj: “non white ‘illegal immigrants’ are literally coming to eat your pets and the democrats want to let them”
Media fact checker: "this may not be entirely true, as no evidence has been produced to support the claims, however we found a Twitter post that… "
Harris: “those polling numbers increased by 18%”
Media fact checker: “This is blatantly false. The number actually increased by 17.86%”
Idiots online: BOTH SIDES LIE THEY’RE EXACTLY THE SAME
Yep, had a conversation about it with a coworker who won’t be voting. His stance on roe v Wade (he brought it up) was that both sides have points but he didn’t understand what the decision was about as evidenced by him thinking that the government just shouldn’t have a say in medical decisions.
Precisely. Harris is losing ground nationally and is losing ground in battleground states. Unless this debate significantly moves the needle, which I don’t think it will for the very elegant reasons you summed, current trend lines indicate Harris losing steam and Trump continuing to pick up voters. No amount of wishful thinking will change that.
I’ve been tracking polling all year and you can see the past few weeks of progress here:
https://lemmy.world/post/19253997
Harris is losing ground in AZ, GA, PA and MI. If that slide continues with no debate bump it’s going to be super hard to pull out a win.
WI moved to toss up. MI is on the verge of moving from Harris to toss up next week. PA and AZ have outright moved to the Trump category.
There’s time to reverse it… but man…
Yeah. The surprise nominee change and DNC bumps are ebbing and the debate will likely be a blip at best.
It’s like there’s an unceasing gravity to Trump’s numbers, like being choked by a boa constrictor. I think that’s largely a result of his polling numbers being much “harder” than Harris, i.e. the percent of each candidates numbers that will never change their mind for and reason whatsoever and will always and fully support their candidate no matter what is much higher for Trump than Harris.
Disinterested voters didn’t watch.
It was a highly entertaining debate. Plenty of folks who dislike them both showed up with big bowls of popcorn to root for injuries. And Trump was true to form, just stepping into rake after rake for the full 90 minutes.
The debate actually infuriated me. There was no real content. Just two people screaming at each other thet the other one sucks.
Harris did better than trump because she didn’t lie, but she still didn’t say anything usefull. Mostly she didn’t even respond to his “arguments”, wich is sad, because they were that easy to respond to. Instead she continued to say what she learned by heart before the debate and what her team tokd her to say.
Saying stuff off-the-cuff is not the purpose of a debate. It’s to tell people positions that you already hold. Harris did this on several occasions here. She stated actual policy goals as well as personal positions on different topics. Trump just yelled about all the typical things and never once stated an actual reason he should be president. The best we got from him was “I have concepts of a plan.”
I agree it was infuriating, but Harris did some some things of substance, even if anyone paying attention would have already known it.
Will this actually matter though? I somewhat doubt it, but I’ll wait to see. I’m hoping it does, but we may be well beyond reason as a society.
You miss that part about:
Working to make housing more affordable
$50k tax break for small businesses just starting out
Expanding the ACA to more people
Making pharmaceutical companies negotiate with the government to make more drugs more affordable
Making tax cuts permanent for the work class
BTW: continuing to say what you learned by heart before the debate and what your team told you to say is extremely important in a debate.
It’s called “staying on point”
What we have learned from 10 years of Trump is that you lose when you respond to his arguments. His entire jig is to constantly shift the focus of the debate. He wants you to talk about Biden’s age and buttery males, instead of the economy. The best thing Harris could do (and she did) was to stay on topic.
Agreed. Respond to his policy points when he actually makes them. “Never would’ve happened if I was still President,” is not a policy point and it’s barely even a selling point. What question would that not work for? Inflation, illegal immigration, housing, school shootings, Ukraine, energy prices, climate change, and Israel: never would’ve happened. All because the Supreme Ruler Trump said… “Don’t do it!”
Fox News poll, right after the debate.
Boomertown.
Good news is 8% managed to get their head out of their ass. Who is answering that poll besides hardcore conservatives?
Fox is conservative STATE propaganda. No different to Russian or North Korean state propaganda. Regardless of the blatant bias, there is literally nothing stopping them from manufacturing this “poll” out of thin air.
Fox isn’t state media. I dislike the mendacious fuckers as much as the next guy but let’s try and stick to facts.
The US has very few state media organizations. Voice of America is one. Radio Free Europe is another.
Fox is an independent organization, if they were state media the Biden admin would have control of their news. That obviously isn’t the case.
The US is a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie and Fox is one of its propaganda arms.
It’s not state propaganda because the state, itself, is subordinate.
Did she? I listened to the debate and she sounded mid for most of it. She spent more time attacking Trump than she did answering the questions she was asked.
Sure, she fared better than her predecessor, but “not shitting her pants” is a low bar. Trump was definitely worse than her, but again, if the bar is “don’t act butthurt when your opponent says your rallies are boring”, then congrats, I guess.
Reading comments from both sides, it seems that the left sees her not being geriatric as a win; and the right thinks that Trump was unjustly treated (targeted questions, live fact-checking, etc…), which is absurd considering that (a) they also asked Harris difficult questions (fracking and Israel, for example, which she did have a hard time answering), and (b) he was given free reign to talk out of order more times than I can count.
I think Harris “won” because Trump sucked. He sidestepped questions regarding an abortion ban (“I haven’t talked with JD about it” fucking lol) and Ukraine (“Do you want Ukraine to win the war?” “I want the war stopped” TWICE in a row, followed by “I know Putin really well” and a rant about the awesomeness of Victor Orban); he repeatedly told lies (post-birth abortion and pets-eating immigrants being the highlight) which were promptly caught by the live fact-checker, and even showed weakness and undecisiveness (“do you have a plan?” “I have concepts of a plan”).
But those are blunders that Trump committed, not something that Harris should take credit for. Nothing I heard screamed of “masterclass” debate, and I doubt that it will give her an edge in the upcoming elections or sway electors one way or the other. After all, the people who lived under four years of Trump’s presidency and watched January 6th unfold live, and still call themselves “undecided” are pretty much lying to themselves at this point.
She spent more time attacking Trump than she did answering the questions she was asked.
But those are blunders that Trump committed, not something that Harris should take credit for.
I don’t think it’s generous to conclude that many of those blunders can in fact be credited to Harris deliberately striking his ego.
For fuck’s sake, y’all should stop this “enlightened centrist” bullshit whenever someone is slightly critical of the leftist candidate.
Trump sucks. It’s incredible that he’s even allowed to be a candidate for presidency after the shit he’s done. He’s dangerous for the US and dangerous for the democracy of the entire world. If there’s some justice left in the US system, he will lose the elections and he will pay for his crimes.
Not liking Harris’ speech doesn’t make me an “enlightened centrist”. It just means that I don’t think her words were strong enough, or bold enough, to win her new voters, which should be the point of the presidential debate. I think she won because Trump’s ineptitude will bleed him some voters, but I’m not willing to credit that to Harris’ speech skills.
I’m not sure what debate you watched, because her performance was not only good in comparison to Biden or Trump, on an absolute scale I’d probably still give it at least a B+. Your comment came off as just shitting all over Harris and trying to bring her down to Trump’s level. Because that vibe was so strong, I didn’t even read the whole comment. Which is on you, not me.
I hate to agree but I don’t think you’re wrong, and accept the down votes in advance. She did some things well though, the trolling on rallies was actually her sneakiest trick to rattle him. I think she could’ve performed better but maybe she learned some lessons for a second debate.
Overall I think there was a double standard on mic control, whenever he wanted to talk they let him. He even got to speak during fact checks, what the fuck is that? On the flip side, they didn’t unmute her on rebuttals and he made a point to tell her to shut up if she spoke over him.
