Debate was a blown opportunity for Trump

Washington Times ^ | September 30, 2020 | Editorial

[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.

[demkicker]

Like Dan Bongino said on Fox last night, this is a base turnout election.

Like I said earlier, Trump's base is with him no matter what so his objective should have been to reel in some fence sitters. Otherwise, what's the point of debating if it is merely a base turnout election?

Trump needs all the votes he can get because the fraud will be rampant.

[Atticus]

If any Republican nominee ever called the sitting president a “clown” during a nationally televised debate, the media would immediately declare the challenger unfit for office. What a double-standard! As for Trump’s performance, he could have handled some issues better in hindsight, but I have learned to trust his instincts even though they ofter don’t align with mine. Trump prevented Biden from being unanimously declared the winner, and that is good. Also, I don’t know how reliable the Telemundo poll is, but if it is remotely accurate, that is huge.

[Atticus]

If any Republican nominee ever called the sitting president a “clown” during a nationally televised debate, the media would immediately declare the challenger unfit for office. What a double-standard! As for Trump’s performance, he could have handled some issues better in hindsight, but I have learned to trust his instincts even though they ofter don’t align with mine. Trump prevented Biden from being unanimously declared the winner, and that is good. Also, I don’t know how reliable the Telemundo poll is, but if it is remotely accurate, that is huge.

[Zhang Fei]

[Would you care to list Trump’s lies from last night? ]

---

Portland’s sheriff endorsed him. I think it was a great lie, and no one will hear the truth. The key is the larger truth, which is that Trump is the law-and-order candidate, and Biden is the candidate of violent criminals and revolving door justice.

There are people with rose-tinted glasses about Trump (and politicians in general), but people in politics (and business) lie for personal and political advantage all the time. In politics, the key to victory is to be all things to all people. Unfortunately, many of those things are diametrically-opposed, in the mind of key voting blocs.

[AndyJackson]

so his objective should have been to reel in some fence sitters.

According to Telemundo 65% of Hispanics thought Trump won. I'll take those fence sitters and give up the 3 fence-sitters in Washington DC whose vote makes not a wit of difference to anything that is going to happen anyway.

[FlipWilson]

You are correct that impressions count. Two days after the debate is over, nobody remembers what this guy or that guy said. They remember impressions.

Here is the impression that (IMO) they will remember. Wallace had to prop up Biden. People today are taking about Wallace. They are barely taking about Trump or Biden. They are talking about Wallace.

[Zhang Fei]

[Would you care to list Trump’s lies from last night? ]

---

Don’t get me wrong. I wasn’t keeping a running tally. Trump lies like every other politician. It’s necessary to keep all of the various factions in the party together. The issue isn’t whether he lies - it’s whether he’ll take better care of our interests than the other guy. It’s not even close. Biden is the candidate of violent criminals, thieves and rapists.

I know what Trump’s policies are. I don’t need to tune in to a debate to find out. My focus during the debate was on how many punches he landed against Biden. The media blackout on the bribe Biden took from Moscow through his son Hunter and other shenanigans, made it essential that Trump bulldoze his way through Wallace’s interjections. And punch his way through he did. Anyone who listened in now knows that a country with thousands of nukes aimed at us paid Biden* a $3.5m bribe.

* It was obviously not a bribe aimed at Hunter, who’s a nobody. Joe, as vice-president, would be in a position to do favors for Russia.

[BEJ]

Very cool Rob!

[libertylover]

I think Trump talked over Biden too much as well, so it wasn’t his best.

Still, the biggest indicator of how the debate went is to look at how many on the left are advising Biden to pull out of the remaining debates.

[FlipWilson]

Quote: “ In another reply on that thread I based my argument on the fact the Trump is vulnerable in the geography of the electoral college and therefore must believe the polls or at least the Real Clear average of polls which is about all we have to work with right now.”

Then I posit we are flying blind. One simply cannot assume that the media run polls will not be as hell bent on distorting the truth. It is hard for me to envision that the same media who brought you “moderator” Chris Wallace can possibly bear to bring you an honest poll.

Might they be correct about the election? Surely, they might. But the chances that they are wrong are even because those who create the polls simply cannot being themselves to accept any reality other than Trump must be destroyed.

Nonetheless, it’s a great idea to always campaign like you are twenty down. That is something the Dems never do. Still, you can tell how they truly feel about their chances based on their conduct. That conduct is to focus on a mail on scam. Why scam if you have it in the bag?

As for the debate, Biden May have had the chance to show he was Presidential. Wallace, inadvertently, stepped all over it. IMO the impression that will last was of Wallace debating Trump And that Biden needed a heroic amount of assistance just to be out there.

In short, Trump won but only barely. He edged out Wallace at the end. But why the hell did he ever let Biden moderate the debate?

[LibFreeUSA]

I totally agree with this article.

The debate was an opportunity to reach the masses on the major issues where we need to make sure they see the big difference between the two parties (Liberty vs Communism) as this was going to be the biggest audience for the election, all those that don’t pay attention to politics, all those that don’t attend or see his rallies, those that only watch MSM and not Fox News. I’m a huge Trump supporter, less because of Trump Himself and more because of the alternative direction for this country. Trump with his constant interruptions, faces, snide remarks, came off (not only to me but many of my Trump friends) as a bully, un Presidential, and thereby taking whatever negative focus could be brought upon Biden, away onto himself for his crazy behavior.

He needs to understand that this election has more riding on it than his ego.

[FlipWilson]

Yes, the debates used to move the needle. Back in the days when you watched the debate on TV and then had the opinion influencers tell you what you saw on a limited bandwidth, you had the alphabet networks and the usual sources.

Now? You have 70,000 bloggers and opinion writers telling you Biden won and 70,000 telling you the opposite.

[Dr. Sivana]

Now? You have 70,000 bloggers and opinion writers telling you Biden won and 70,000 telling you the opposite.

You make a good point. Oddly, the political theatre around optics of WHETHER you debate or not, and who's the moderator etc. etc. soaks up more bandwidth of all kinds than the debate itself. Kind of like the six hour long Super Bowl pregame show.

[LibFreeUSA]

I’m hoping that you’re right because this was the most stupidly wasted debate opportunity that I have ever witnessed and ranking FAR WORSE than Romney’s ‘Benghazi Debate’ against Obama.

[nathanbedford]

Did Biden come out of the debate looking more demented or more Oval Office worthy than before the debate?

Did Trump come out of the debate looking more presidential or more like a street brawler?

Did Joe Biden accomplish his mission? Did Donald Trump accomplish his mission?

Did Donald Trump enhance his advantage of incumbency or diminish it?

Respecting gravitas, did Donald Trump diminish the relative standing of Biden or diminish his own standing relative to Biden?

Did Trump win the debate against Chris Wallace? If so, how did it advance his campaign for reelection?

Do any of these questions focus attention to who really won the debate?

[grey_whiskers]

[demkicker]

So what exactly is your argument with me????

I want Trump to win as much as any supporter. Our country is at stake!!! I merely want him to appeal to more people. Great news about Telemundo but the more support he can get, the merrier for crying’ out loud! The nitpicking on FR is sometimes ridiculous.....

[nathanbedford]

It's amazing how FreePers can flip flop faster than lyin' Joe Biden when it comes to polls they like and don't like.

[FlipWilson]

Biden came out looking irrelevant. Not by virtue of his performance but by virtue of Wallace upstaging him.

Trump came out looking like he looked before, during and after the debate. After the constant savaging he has taken in the media for the past four years, he wasn’t going to change anyone’s minds.

Did Joe Biden even know what his mission was?

Donald Trump’s advantage is incumbency isn’t going to be shown in a debate. It is shown in the fact that day to day he controls events. It is in the use of his office.

Gravitas? Really, didn’t W lack that according to everyone? How did that work against him?

My point was that there shouldn’t have been a debate against Wallace. Wallace interjected himself to such an amazing extent that he made himself the story and reduced Biden to an afterthought.

Who wins these debates? Whoever one wants to or fear did. It is in the eyes of the beholder.

I thought the entire event was silly. It was no more than the usual White House presser with Biden present to give some rehearsed commentary. And the viewers are used to it by now. If you like Trump, it enrages you and reminds you of the stacked deck against conservatives. It motivates you. If you dislike Trump, it is just more hate porn, satiating you’re desire to see Trump get it stuck to him.

At the end of the day, all I keep hearing is that the President’s personality cost him. My response is that if that is the case, then the election was over years ago. The President’s personality (or anyone for that matter) wasn’t going to change.

[RevelationDavid]

1,000% Agree!!

I am a appalled at how many never Trumper’s have shown up on Free Republic in the last 24 hours… The pearl clutchers and Nancy boys are over-running this site!

I would gladly take one Proud Boy for 25% of the people who posted in the last 24 hours!!

Disgusting.