By Sergey Strokan, Kommersant columnist
The first debate between US presidential candidates Donald Trump and Kamala Harris may not have been a moment of truth, but it did set an important tone for the rest of the campaign.
The main conclusion is that Harris – initially considered a weak polemicist who had previously been the target of an onslaught of derogatory assessments from her opponent – managed to do far more than simply ‘not fail.’ Without a shadow of timidity, and a smile on her face, she repeatedly put the ball in the court of her more experienced opponent, who has already sat in the presidential chair and has been through all the challenges of American politics.
Trump clearly did not expect this turn of events and was not prepared for it. Having previously enjoyed arguing about the allegedly low mental capacity of the ‘Biden surrogate’, he could not find a way to prove what he had always been deeply convinced of: the seemingly obvious, impenetrable stupidity of the Democratic Party candidate.
However, post-debate commentary – which assigned victory to Harris – still didn’t quite capture the significance of what happened.
It would be more accurate to say that it wasn’t a smarter, more knowledgeable Harris who defeated Trump. It was political technology.
The debate was unusual in that it was like a contest between two athletes who had previously competed in different sports, but were now vying to decide who is stronger. While Trump can be considered an established politician – who has directed his own show from the start and persistently gone against the American mainstream by building his own platform of American nationalism and isolationism – Harris cannot yet be called a top-rank politician.
Forced into the race after the Democrats ousted Joe Biden, the incumbent vice president ended up taking on a role that didn’t belong to her. She is still not a finished product, but she is now a better functioning operator. If you like, she’s a political chicken that is now being hastily raised on hormones – in the form of powerful infusions from Democratic donors.
Harris has shown us that all the effort and investment in her was not in vain. After accusing Trump of not having an economic program (even though the economy has always been the Republicans’ strong point), the younger candidate has, as it turns out, managed to steal her rival’s main trump card, if you’ll excuse the pun. And now it’s up to ex-president to somehow convince voters that it’s not he who doesn’t understand the economy, but his opponent.
Of course, Trump has already said he is “less inclined” to have another live debate with Harris after this week’s drubbing.
Who would have thought it would turn out like this?
The debate failed to answer the most important questions about where America will go after the November election and what kind of leadership will emerge from Washington. Overall, this was not a complex game of chess; instead all the pieces were swept off the board. There was little point to the debate, but there was a lot of Kamala, who in the end solidified her lead in the race.
This article was first published by Kommersant, and was translated and edited by the RT team.
You can share this story on social media:
Follow RT on![RT]()
Comments are closed.