Trump Cedes the Middle to Harris
Published in Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung
(Germany) on 11 September 2024
by Nikolas Busse (link to
original)
Kamala Harris is presenting herself as a moderate Democrat; Donald Trump again appears to be an apocalyptic prophet. The contrasts are clear after the televised debate, but the outcome of the election is not.
One thing can be said for certain about the televised debate between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris: It is probably not going to decide the election. After Biden’s disastrous performance against Trump, the Democratic leadership was quite right to worry about its chances of winning the election. The same cannot be said after this evening in Philadelphia.
The vice president made a confident appearance. In an initial flash poll, voters identified her as the winner. That fact should not be overestimated. But at least after this evening, Harris is sailing against the wind of left-wing media and politics from her own camp, as was the case with Biden.
No Political Science Seminar
Polls before the debate indicated that voters wanted to know a lot more about Harris. They already know plenty about Trump. This wish was only partially fulfilled. A campaign debate is no political science seminar, especially not one that involves Trump. For that reason, the candidates exchanged keywords more than they clashed over concrete policies.
The contrast was clear, nonetheless. Harris presented herself as a moderate Democrat who owns firearms, for example. She emphasized generational change and mobilizing topics among her party, such as abortion. Trump, in contrast, appeared once more as America’s prophet of the apocalypse and kept to the main Republican issue, immigration. It is not surprising that he did not hesitate to take up rumors that immigrants are supposedly eating household pets, although it is a new low in American debate culture.
It is notable that Trump, like his vice presidential candidate JD Vance, pander strongly to their core supporters. That opens a chance for Harris in the middle.
For Europe, the debate confirmed the assumption until now about the country’s future foreign policy. Under Harris, the U.S. would remain a leading power. Under Trump, in contrast, it would retreat into isolationism and nonstrategic “deal-making.” That could have more serious consequences for European security than his first term (think: Ukraine).
But the Europeans are not the ones voting on Nov. 5. They have to prepare for either scenario.
One thing can be said for certain about the televised debate between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris: It is probably not going to decide the election. After Biden’s disastrous performance against Trump, the Democratic leadership was quite right to worry about its chances of winning the election. The same cannot be said after this evening in Philadelphia.
The vice president made a confident appearance. In an initial flash poll, voters identified her as the winner. That fact should not be overestimated. But at least after this evening, Harris is sailing against the wind of left-wing media and politics from her own camp, as was the case with Biden.
No Political Science Seminar
Polls before the debate indicated that voters wanted to know a lot more about Harris. They already know plenty about Trump. This wish was only partially fulfilled. A campaign debate is no political science seminar, especially not one that involves Trump. For that reason, the candidates exchanged keywords more than they clashed over concrete policies.
The contrast was clear, nonetheless. Harris presented herself as a moderate Democrat who owns firearms, for example. She emphasized generational change and mobilizing topics among her party, such as abortion. Trump, in contrast, appeared once more as America’s prophet of the apocalypse and kept to the main Republican issue, immigration. It is not surprising that he did not hesitate to take up rumors that immigrants are supposedly eating household pets, although it is a new low in American debate culture.
It is notable that Trump, like his vice presidential candidate JD Vance, pander strongly to their core supporters. That opens a chance for Harris in the middle.
For Europe, the debate confirmed the assumption until now about the country’s future foreign policy. Under Harris, the U.S. would remain a leading power. Under Trump, in contrast, it would retreat into isolationism and nonstrategic “deal-making.” That could have more serious consequences for European security than his first term (think: Ukraine).
But the Europeans are not the ones voting on Nov. 5. They have to prepare for either scenario.
Previous article![]( "How Trustworthy Is America and Europe’s Friendship?")
Next article![]( "‘We Are Seeing Way Too Many Guns from the United States Coming across the Border’")