Posted on 09/11/2024 8:57:23 AM PDT by Lazamataz
1. This debate wasn’t close. The majority of the focus coming into Tuesday was about how Harris would handle her first-ever presidential debate with someone who had been on this stage many times. Could she answer questions about her position shifts; parry attacks from Trump, someone who tries to be the alpha on these stages; could she answer the attack that she’s light on policy; and could she appear “presidential”?
Vice President and Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris and former President and Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump speak during a presidential debate. Politics NPR fact checked the Harris-Trump presidential debate. Here's what we found She may have seemed nervous at first, but she quickly found her voice and more than acquitted herself well. All of those questions were quickly dispatched:
She explained her shift on fracking (“My position is that we have got to invest in diverse sources of energy, so we reduce our reliance on foreign oil”).
Harris was far more dominant than Trump, from beginning to end. She called him “weak and wrong,” inverting the political cliché that “strong and wrong” beats “weak and right.” Harris answered questions, then redirected and baited him on a host of issues.
She got under Trump’s skin — something he usually tries to do — by saying that people at his rallies leave “early out of exhaustion and boredom,” painting him as out of touch and a bad businessman for inheriting $400 million “on a silver platter and then filed for bankruptcy six times,” and chiding him for being “fired by 81 million people” in the 2020 election and now being “confused” about losing.
(snip)
And on the presidential question — Harris was calm, in command and in control and looked to the future, distinguishing herself from both Biden and Trump.
(Excerpt) Read more at npr.org ...
Sounds like DNC talking points. She did better than I expected, but I wouldn’t say she “won.”
It’s the equivalent of a 0-0 draw in soccer.
NPR, nuff said.
It was very obvious that all her lines had been well rehearsed.
Is it?
Domenico Montanaro is NPR’s senior political editor/correspondent. Based in Washington, D.C., his work appears on air and online delivering analysis of the political climate in Washington and campaigns. He also helps edit political coverage.
Montanaro joined NPR in 2015 and oversaw coverage of the 2016 presidential campaign, including for broadcast and digital.
Before joining NPR, Montanaro served as political director and senior producer for politics and law at PBS NewsHour. There, he led domestic political and legal coverage, which included the 2014 midterm elections, the Supreme Court, and the unrest in Ferguson, Mo.
Prior to PBS NewsHour, Montanaro was deputy political editor at NBC News, where he covered two presidential elections and reported and edited for the network’s political blog, “First Read.” He has also worked at CBS News, ABC News, The Asbury Park Press in New Jersey, and taught high school English.
Montanaro earned a bachelor’s degree in English from the University of Delaware and a master’s degree in journalism from Columbia University.
A native of Queens, N.Y., Montanaro is a life-long Mets fan and college basketball junkie.
Yeah. Since her ability as a debater was in doubt before the debate, a 0 to 0 outcome is good for her, but I doubt that many people changed their minds because of the debate. My guess is that concerns about the economy will drive the election.
“ She explained her shift on fracking (“My position is that we have got to invest in diverse sources of energy, so we reduce our reliance on foreign oil”).”
Which is what Trump did.
Trump knew this before she somehow learned this obvious truth, and he actually successfully did it in real life.
What did anything she had to say about Trump have to do with $100 worth of groceries in a small blue plastic bag? People will start to wake up by this afternoon thinking about her stupid attacks as, “yeah but what does that have to do with ME???!!!”
I think Harris won the debate but lost the election. No one in the world would look great when it’s 3 telling lie after lie against 1. Americans know a fair fight when they see one.
Hopefully that propaganda piece will
They both got their points in. But were those points equal in impact?
Harris’ points: Trump is a racist, Trump is a threat to democracy, Trump will ban abortion, Trump is unhinged, Trump is abusive to women, etc.
Trump’s points- She isn’t sincere in her newly found MAGA views, She has been VP for three plus years, whey hasn’t she done what she is promising now and why doesn’t she just go and do it?
To me, Kamala’s entire message was the same one delivered over four days of the democrat convention. Not sure how effective it was then or how effective it will be now.
No it isn't...at least not for me. What they have to say is as predictable as the daily sunrise and sunset.
I feel it is.
1. Republicans shouldn’t get bothered by Democrats whooping it up over their view of how the debate turned out. What counts is the opinion of the viewers.
2. On the other hand, an overconfident Trump clearly walked into an avoidable ambush. He should have at least insisted on a neutral forum.
Of course it is, in theory. I feel it is important to see it in practice.
They don’t say were he was born. In other words, probably came here as an illegal alien. That’s all you need to know. He is a foreign born communist piece of sh!t. /spit
Why are taxpayers funding this brazenly partisan organization ? Never mind. Trump will put an end to it.
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.