Posted on 09/30/2020 6:21:08 AM PDT by lasereye
President Trump came into Tuesday night’s debate trailing both nationally and in key battleground states. The debate gave him the largest audience of the campaign and provided him the first real opportunity to press his case against Joe Biden and shake up the race. Instead, it ended up as a blown opportunity.
Right out of the gate, Trump pursued an aggressive strategy of interrupting Biden, speaking over moderator Chris Wallace, and launching a flurry of attacks.
At first, one could perhaps see a method to his madness, as Biden seemed frustrated and rattled. At one point, an exasperated Biden snapped, “Shut up, man!”
As the debate wore on, however, the constant cross-talk and interruptions and arguments with Wallace overshadowed the debate. Nobody will remember any of the actual details of the debate. They will just remember it being a chaotic mess.
In all of his interruptions, Trump, despite his reputation for being a master at messaging over the TV medium, lost chances to damage Biden. He often set up attacks only to fall back into repeating phrases that didn’t communicate to outsiders what he was talking about.
Trump, if he had one goal, was to establish that Biden, despite his centrist image, would ultimately be beholden to the radical Left. However, he never clearly explained this point.
For example, when he said that Biden would usher in socialized medicine and lead 180 million people to lose health coverage, he didn’t offer details. Had he taken a breath, he may have been able to point out that Biden’s running mate, Sen. Kamala Harris, explicitly said during the primary that she wanted to eliminate private coverage. Or, Trump could have explained how the purpose of Biden’s plan to add a government-run “public option” to Obamacare is to migrate to a socialized health insurance system over time. Instead, Trump just started shouting about socialism.
Biden, explaining his plan, falsely claimed that his public option was only limited to those poor enough to qualify for Medicaid. “Anyone who qualifies for Medicaid would automatically be enrolled in the public option,” Biden said. “The vast majority of the American people would still not be in that option.”
Yet Biden’s actual healthcare plan says the public option would be made available “whether you’re covered through your employer, buying your insurance on your own, or going without coverage altogether.” Rather than apply to a small number of people, in other words, the option could eventually replace every form of private insurance that exists.
Instead of explaining this to voters, Trump interrupted Biden with statements such as, “Joe, you agree with Bernie Sanders, who's far Left, on the manifesto we call it, that gives you socialized medicine.” But what sort of voter who is learning about Biden’s healthcare position knows what Trump was referring to?
Trump then interjected multiple times during Biden’s same answer with pointless political analysis. When Biden denied supporting socialized medicine, Trump replied with, “You just lost the Left” — a silly comment given that the whole point of this line of attack is to convey that Biden would be beholden to the Left if elected. Trump then said Biden got lucky in the primaries because “if Pocahontas would have left two days earlier, you would have lost every primary.” What does that sort of punditry, and potshot at the increasingly irrelevant Elizabeth Warren, do to advance the ball for Trump? And why was it so important to make this comment that it was worth interrupting Biden for?
There were other examples, such as on the Green New Deal and tax policy, on which Trump failed to land obvious blows because he was too busy interrupting with pointless cracks.
Another problem was that Trump’s constant barrage of interruptions threw a lifeline to Biden when it would have been better to step back and let Biden stumble over the answer.
Toward the end of the debate, Trump went down the rabbit hole of discussing mail voter fraud, Michael Flynn, the Logan Act, spying on his campaign, and so forth. While such issues may receive a “Thatta boy!” from the talk radio crowd, Trump already has the vote of those this will impress. The point of the debate was to win over undecided voters, or to convince those leaning toward Biden to give him a second look.
One could argue that the mess of the debate essentially made it a draw. Biden failed to land his planned blows on Trump on tax returns, the coronavirus, or the Atlantic story claiming based on anonymous sources that Trump referred to service members as “suckers” and “losers.”
But debates cannot be viewed in a vacuum. They must be viewed in the context of the broader campaign. And given that Trump is losing, he needed to show that Biden was too far left and too mentally unfit to be president. But Trump did not accomplish that. After months of attacks claiming Biden doesn’t even know that he’s alive, Biden exceeded that low standard by showing he could stand and debate for 90 minutes, remaining more or less composed in the face of Trump’s relentless attacks. The tie, thus, went to Biden.
If there are two more debates, something that has to be seen as uncertain after Tuesday’s debacle, Trump is going to have to change his strategy to make focused and substantive attacks on Biden. Because the status quo means that Trump likely loses the election.
Trump can capitalize on his expressed anger - by announcing some indictments.
That debate was the worst thing I've ever seen & I was in The Star Wars Holiday Special.— Mark Hamill (@HamillHimself) September 30, 2020
With all due respect, I presume the answer is no.
Joe Biden! Hillary Clinton! Chuck Schumer! Diane Feinstein!
The groovy new kids who are the faces of the hip and with-it Democrat Party!
Far out!
George Bernard Shaw
Trump is running for reelection to be president of the United States of America; if he is not careful he will be elected champion pig wrestler.
I answered each question and yes, the answer is no.
I don’t think the debate matters for squat. In this day and age of constant information bombardment, I don’t think a debate moves the needle. It reinforces existing views formed by one’s absorption of the constant stream of information.
If you believe Orange Man Bad, then he lost.
If you believe Trump is good, then he won.
But both of those decisions were made long ago.
Undecideds are a myth. They have decided and don’t feel like telling anyone who they have decided upon.
Where are you living these days, Nathan?
Trump is his own worst enemy at times.
Try your personal attacks on someone else.
Asking where you live is a personal attack?
You’re better than that, Herr Nathan.
Good for you.
I am shocked at some of the critics.
I thought I stumbled onto a Leftist forum.
My observation about pig wrestling have to do with a reply which stated: "That debate was the worst thing I've ever seen & I was in The Star Wars Holiday Special.— Mark Hamill (@HamillHimself)"
My observation about pig wrestling was relevant to the reply in question. Your question about where I live is utterly irrelevant and inappropriate just as my question directed to you about your income patently is.
I try always to avoid the ad hominem, I would be grateful if you would extend the same courtesy to me.
Asking where you live is an ad hominem attack?
No, I don’t think so.
Wie gehts?
May I suggest you appear to be increasingly out of touch with reality on the ground in the US?
There are no pro-Trump car rallies or flotillas in Europe.
Wie gehts?
You obviously think you know where I live, therefore your question about where I lived was disingenuous, calculated, and malevolent.
Your denial that the question was not ad hominem is obviously mendacious.
For example, I watched the debate last night, the run-up to the debate last night, and the postmortem of the debate last night on Fox on the Internet.
I am actually likely better informed than many in the states because I am retired and have the time to devote to our politics.
You’re good at dancing, Nathan.
Where do you live?
nathanbedford changed course some years ago and became determined to write thoughtfully and well.
nathanbedford reviews his work, before he posts.
I appreciate his efforts, and I wish that the same performance was expected by most members of FreeRepublic.com, of, and by, themselves.
NB, you are OK.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.