It’s finally here. In a few hours we will witness what could be the first and only debate between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump. An unmissable date, charged with tension and expectation. Television debates, as we know, have always played a crucial role in American presidential elections. But which ones have been the really decisive ones? The ones that have left an indelible mark on U.S. history? Let’s find out together.
The history of televised debates begins in 1960 with the legendary confrontation between Richard Nixon and John F. Kennedy. Nixon, uncomfortable and sweaty in front of the cameras, against a relaxed and telegenic Kennedy. A confrontation that forever changed the perception of American politics, marking the beginning of a new media era. The result of that encounter is known to all: a triumph for Kennedy, a disaster for Nixon.
Let us turn to 1976. During a debate with Jimmy Carter, Gerald Ford declared that there was no Soviet domination of Eastern Europe, insisting that countries like Poland, Romania, and Yugoslavia were free from Moscow’s control. This was an absurd claim, which aroused disbelief around the world and proved to be a serious political mistake.
In 1984, Ronald Reagan — already the oldest president in U.S. history to run for re-election — was challenged on a question about age. His answer, however, was a masterpiece of humor and political intelligence: “I will not make age an issue in this campaign. I will not exploit, for political purposes, the youth and inexperience of my opponent.” It was a masterstroke that sparked laughter and wild applause, leaving Walter Mondale, his challenger, literally speechless.
In 1988, during a debate among vice presidential candidates, Dan Quayle, deputy to George H.W. Bush, compared himself to John F. Kennedy, claiming that he had more experience than Kennedy himself when he became president. The response of Lloyd Bentsen, deputy to Michael Dukakis, remains among the sharpest ever: “I knew John Kennedy. Kennedy was a friend of mine. Senator, you are not John Kennedy.” A fulminating quip that dismantled Quayle and became iconic.
Let’s turn to the big loser of 2016, Hillary Clinton, who in a 2008 Democratic primary debate frontally attacked Barack Obama for acknowledging a historic role for the Reagan presidency, accusing him of sympathizing with ultraliberal Republican policies. Obama did not hesitate to respond, “That’s not true. I fought Reagan’s policies while you were a corporate lawyer and Walmart board member.” It was a response that demolished Clinton on the air, to the point that Republicans used that video during the 2016 campaign to discourage Democrats from voting for her, highlighting her inconsistency and political opportunism.
Four years later, in the 2020 Democratic primary, Tulsi Gabbard – who now supports Trump – attacked Kamala Harris, painting her as hypocritical and inconsistent, highlighting her attempt to position herself on the left despite her past as a prosecutor. Harris appeared displaced, unable to respond effectively. It was a foretaste of the problems she would encounter in her political career, often accused of changing positions based on the wind of the polls.
A few months later, Joe Biden during a debate with Donald Trump called the story about his son Hunter‘s laptop computer, published by the New York Post, “Russian disinformation.” A statement that turned out to be completely false: subsequent investigations showed that the computer was real and contained compromising evidence, later used to convict Hunter Biden. Mark Zuckerberg recently admitted that Facebook was under pressure to censor that news story, and the “TwitterFiles” released by Elon Musk showed that Twitter had also received similar pressure to suppress the story. In other words, Biden and the mainstream media lied through their teeth, manipulating public opinion and withholding information crucial to the outcome of the election.
The same media that has been grasping at straws all these years by painting Biden as “perfectly lucid,” except for abruptly changing their story in the aftermath of the disastrous June 27 debate with Trump, when they began promoting Kamala Harris as a potential leader, trying to set the stage for the future.
In light of these historical precedents and ongoing media dynamics, it is clear that the debate between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump could prove decisive. Harris has long been portrayed by the mainstream media as a charismatic figure, a progressive leader ready to take the helm of the Democrats and the nation. However, her behaviors, her inconsistency and her apparent reluctance to openly confront political opponents tell a different story.
The media have blatantly worked to build an image of Kamala Harris as a strong and determined leader, but the reality is that her campaign has shown anything but. Suffice it to say that since her candidacy to date, Harris has given only one interview (the one she gave to CNN), while Donald Trump has given about 40. One fact that speaks for itself: Harris appears incapable of expressing himself without a script and extreme control over what is said and asked. When she has not had the protection of the media or a script to follow, as evidenced by the disastrous CNN interview, she has revealed all her frailties, showing herself to be totally lacking in charisma as well as a clear and coherent vision.
Tonight, however, Kamala Harris will no longer be able to rely on the shield of complacent media or well-researched statements. She will be on stage alone, facing an opponent known for her aggressiveness and ability to destabilize anyone in front of her. She will have to show that she has the ability to sustain a straightforward debate and withstand the brunt of attacks without appearing to be the constructed figure many critics see in her.
On the contrary, Donald Trump has already demonstrated on several occasions his natural vocation for leadership, which also emerged sharply from his iconic reaction to the attack he suffered in Butler only 59 days ago and hastily dismissed by the mainstream media, whose partisanship also emerges from the data of the conservative watchdog Media Research Center: on the ABC, NBC and CBS networks, coverage of Kamala Harris is positive 84 percent of the time, while coverage of Donald Trump is negative 89 percent of the time.
Good debate to all.
