Yesterday was the first and probably the last round of the Harris-Trump presidential debate. The rules were the same as the Biden-Trump debate: no audience and controlled microphones. The candidates spoke about a wide range of topics from migrants eating pets of innocent American citizens to the war in Ukraine. Harris described the difference between herself and Trump as she looks to the future to lift Americans up and Trump dwells in the past and pulls people down. Trump described Harris as actually she is Biden and if she comes to power will lead to the destruction of the USA. 

The debate began with two candidates walking into the room and Harris advancing towards Trump’s stand extending her hand to introduce herself - as it was the first time they actually met - and wishing a good debate. The tension in the air was visible on the hesitancy of the handshake and indeed the cordiality did not last long.

The first question of the moderators was on their economic plans. Harris began with describing her growing up in a middle-class family and her care about small businesses, after pronouncing that she has a plan for the future of the Americans. After that  she managed to strike Trump saying that his only plan is to introduce a 20% national sales tax that will cost middle class families an extra 4,000 USD/year and to bring tax cuts for the rich because Trump only thinks of himself.

This strong attack pushed Trump to defence by denying the plan to introduce a national sales tax and even denying any involvement with Project 2025 - the Republican blueprint for a second Trump administration that proposes a total restructure of the US taxation system . Trump countered Harris by claiming that she is a Marxist and that if she becomes President the US economy will shrink while the economy of China and other countries that parasitise the USA will expand. 

Harris opposed this claim by reminding that under the Trump administration the US sold China microchips that allowed them to upgrade their military and called that an outright selling out of the US. Trump answered that the US no longer produces microchips and actually Taiwan sold them. On the split screen behind the muted microphone, it was visible that Harris did find this claim to be true.

The second question was for Trump on abortion rights of the women which is a tricky question for both sides. Trump accused democrats of supporting the execution of babies by allowing abortion on the ninth month. This statement was rejected by the mediator before giving the right to answer to Harris. Indeed, during the debate the two moderators often fact checked many claims of Trump and shared it with the audience.

Harris expressed her strong conviction that the state had no right to decide about women’s bodies. Trump continued not to give a straight answer about his plans on the topics but claimed that he is actually “a leader on IVF (in-vitro fertilisation)” when Harris accused him while Trump plans to ban abortion, denies IVF treatment for the couples of dreaming for a family. Trump tries to be especially vague on both topics to appease his supporters without alienating much of the undecided voters.

The third question was on the immigration problem which is a staple for the Trump rhetoric. Indeed from the beginning of the debate he wanted to open this topic while moderators urged that they will come in due time. When the question was asked and well after the topic was closed, maybe because he felt underwhelmed by Harris, he attacked Harris in his unrestrained attitude pressing all the buttons at once from accusing migrants of eating Americans' pets to taxpayer-funded sex change surgeries for illegal immigrants in prisons and detention centres.

On her turn Harris called Trump’s claims exaggerated and accused Trump of obstructing the congress bill on border security to prevent a solution to the problem. After that she successfully baited Trump to speak on the dwindling crowd size in his rallies.

The first question of the second half of the debate was on the war in Ukraine when the moderator asked directly if Trump wanted Ukraine to win the war. Again the ex-US President did not give a direct answer and replied that he wants to end the war and to save lives. He claimed that if he was in power President Putin would never have invaded Ukraine. He emphasised Russian nuclear capabilities expressing his fear for an escalation. Repeated his argument that the EU does not contribute as much as they should despite being the main beneficiary if Ukraine wins. He claimed that both Zelensky and Putin respect him so that he can negotiate a deal for peace. When he was asked a second time if it is in the best interests of the US for Ukraine to win, he replied that he wants peace.

On her turn, Harris replied that she guesses that when Trump says that he can finish in 24 hours because he would give up Ukraine. According to her this is not how Americans are. Moreover if Putin is allowed to win, his next target would be Europe beginning from Poland and the Baltic States. She gave a brief description of her involvement in the formation of the coalition that stays behind Ukraine. 

The 10 minutes debate on the war in Ukraine was the beginning for Harris to become more confident depicting Trump as a person who sells American principles for personal flattery and also likes dictators and aspires to be one. Maybe the punching line was Trump's delusion that strong men of the world respect him. Harris claimed actually the dictator - Putin - whom Trump takes as a friend would eat him at lunch. 

During the debate Trump lost momentum attacking the policies and inability to prevent Putin from invading Ukraine giving Harris the opportunity to remind Trump that he was in a race against her, not Biden. 

Many other topics from the Hamas-Israel war to the peaceful transfer of power were talked about. The debate generally is evaluated by the analysts as a clear win for Harris. She relayed the message that she has a plan for the American people and the role of the USA in the world. Meanwhile Harris managed to bait Trump to dwell on the declining interest in his rallies and his tired rhetoric on migrants. 

The undecided voters that will break the 50-50 tie between the two candidates may be more interested in the plans of Harris than Trump’s rumblings of making the US great again. Nonetheless the role of the debate on election results will be better evaluated in retrospect.

‍