The long-awaited debate between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris showed, for the first time, in a clear and incontrovertible way, how populist discourse was swept away in a confrontation that will go down in the history of electoral debates. Trump may never have been a good television debater. His bullying style, based on the use of lies, insults and rudeness, broke the mould and served to spread an unbeatable style throughout the world.
Perhaps it was a mistake to conclude that Trump won the debate in Atlanta in June. On that fateful night, it was Biden who lost. In Philadelphia, it was not just the candidates for the presidency of the United States who were facing off. There was also a fierce battle between two groups of advisers who proposed two completely different working models and two completely different strategies.
Jason Miller led a team of tough experts in dirty tricks and the spread of Trumpism as a language. He is a regular on far-right talk shows, after having been expelled from CNN, after it became public that he had secretly administered an abortion pill to a stripper whom he had impregnated. Also on Trump’s team of trainers was Congressman Matt Gaetz, a defender of the Proud Boys extremists and who, after the assault on the Capitol, maintained the theory that it had been organized by undercover anti-fascist groups. Finally, another of the strong men on his team has been Stephen Miller, a well-known far-right white nationalist, with a long history of obsessive anti-immigration struggle.
The strategy laid out for the debate with Harris was focused on preparing arguments to casually ignore the Democratic candidate and direct their criticism towards the absent Joe Biden. Their main invectives were limited to the economy, immigration and the lack of authority of the current president. That was how things had gone well for them in June and there was no reason to think that a candidate like Kamala Harris would be able to change their fortunes.
Curiously, the vice president had the same team that accompanied Biden until the day he withdrew and who had been plagued by the events of the June debate. Leading the preparation was lawyer Karen Dunn, a specialist who has participated in presidential debates alongside Ron Klain since the Obama era.
The strategy they put forward in the debate was based on trying to offer a presidential image of Harris, completely different from Biden, who would represent a renewing, hopeful and solid figure compared to Trump. As Dunn has explained on occasion, attacking an opponent can be effective, but if you manage to counterattack someone who believes themselves to be the favourite and goes against you, it is devastating.
Knowing what’s happening outside means understanding what’s going to happen inside, so don’t miss anything.
KEEP READING
Kamala Harris was technically perfect in the debate. She showed extraordinary gestural ability that contrasted with Trump’s angry and contemptuous face. In all her interventions, the vice president combined a proactive speech with harsh attacks against a Trump who lost his temper at various times. Harris and her team demonstrated how to destroy the demagogic and populist discourse that has allowed Trump to impose his style these years. Trumpism was buried with coherence, firmness, positivism and a relentless fight.
The last and obligatory mention must go to David Muir and Lindsey Davis, the ABC News moderators. Both of them prevented Trump from lying with impunity. They corrected him when he gave false information and questioned him again when he evaded each answer. Against extremist demagogy, politicians can confront it using the extraordinary democratic weapon that implies a public and clean debate. But it will always be ineffective if the moderators do not collaborate in defense of the truth and their own professional integrity.
#Trumpist #discourse #ends