Trump- Harris 2024 Presidential Debate: Inferring The Unspoken

Policy Update
Naushaba

After the Trump-Biden debate debacle and Biden’s exit from the presidential candidature, Trump – the Harris debate was much awaited. Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump met for their first debate or rebuttal for the 2024 election on September 10 – which was hosted by ABC News. The debate took place at the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia, with the aim of a spirited and thoughtful exchange of ideas, unsurprisingly, after the debate, Trump, declined Vice President Harris’s invitation for the second presidential debate.

The Core Issues

The 2024 presidential debate went on for 90 minutes, during the period various issues of national importance and geopolitical concerns were taken and discussed with both candidates running for the presidential election. Topics included the economy of the USA and its cost of living; Abortion; Immigration and Border Security; the January 6 Capitol Attack; the Israel-Hamas War; the Ukraine War; Withdrawal from Afghanistan; Race and Politics; Obamacare; Private Insurance; and most importantly – the existential crisis of 21st Century i.e. Climate Change. 

Apart from these topics bought in by the moderators, China without being called out directly became an essential part of the debate. The fracking ban by Harris, Trump on Climate Hoax, Project 2025 & the National Abortion ban by Trump, Trump on higher tariffs, rising unemployment rates, and opportunity economy by Harris were also discussed among the candidates.

The Psycholinguistic Analysis

A speech can tell a lot about the personality of the speaker and it is the words spoken by the speaker that persuade the choice of the audience, The conversation analysed the debate to help voters make sense of the debate and its candidates. The data revealed that Trump focussed more on himself suggesting that he centred more on individual agency while Harris referred to “We” indicating a more group-oriented approach.

Trump also brought in the issues related to war more frequently than Harris suggesting his interest and concern in the area. He also referred to Russia more which highlighted his concern over geopolitical matters related to Russia than other powers. However, both equally emphasised on Ukraine, suggesting a shared interest. Israel also was of equal significance to both the presidential candidates however, neither of the candidates mentioned Palestine.

It was also analysed that regarding uncertainty and motivations, Trump showed a slightly higher level of uncertainty and ambiguity while making statements in the debate. Harris used more power and affiliation-related words than Trump suggesting her emphasis on control and authority in her speech. Trump in his speech made more references to the past and future to frame his narrative around what he has done and what he will do while Harris focussed on present issues and immediate needs.

Subtle Sexism, Racism & Xenophobia

From casual sexism to racism and xenophobia was seen clearly in the 2024 presidential debate. Former president Donald Trump refused to refer to Vice President Harris directly and acknowledge her by her title which indicated he “anonymized” Harris. There were also frequent interruptions by former president Trump during the debate which gave him the upper hand of 7 minutes over Vice President Harris. Further, if looked strategically and not from the political culture of the US, Trump was referred to as President instead of former which again gave VP Harris a backseat.

Another stereotypical misogynistic remark was made by a Russian TV anchor suggesting Harris that she would be better off hosting a TV cooking show irrespective of her statement on Putin. Racism and xenophobia were also part of the debate as Trump questioned the race of Harris, “I didn’t know she was Black until a number of years ago when she happened to turn Black, and now she wants to be known as Black.”

Trump also dehumanised the immigrants by falsely claiming, “In Springfield, they’re eating the dogs. The people that came in. They’re eating the cats. They’re eating — they’re eating the pets of the people that live there. And this is what’s happening in our country.” He also emphasised insistently that, “we have millions of people pouring into our country from prisons and jails, from mental institutions and insane asylums. And they’re coming in and they’re taking jobs that are occupied right now by African Americans and Hispanics and also unions.”

The Geopolitical Context

The Russia-Ukraine war and the Israel-Hamas war consumed a large amount of time in the debate, where questions and retaliations were basically on which candidate supported which country. The former President claimed to end the war within 24 hrs to which the Ukrainian President while speaking to the BBC replied, “Trump’s victory would mean hard work, but we are hard workers.” Trump also veered away from the question of whether he supported Ukraine’s victory in the war or not, reliving the Russian counterpart with his victory. While Vice President Harris indisputably supported Ukraine and called Putin “a dictator who could eat Trump for lunch”.

Analysts have observed that Israel’s Prime Minister Netanyahu has been deliberately stalling the ceasefire deal until the election, in the hope that Trump will be more sympathetic to Israel than Harris. Although Harris has supported Israel’s right to self-defence, keeping in mind the international humanitarian law. None of the candidates spoke out directly for the state of Palestine. Similarly, there was no direct reference to China but Harris accused Trump of “selling American chips to China to help them improve and modernise their military”. However, irrespective of who wins the 2024 presidential election, it will be tough for China to maintain a strategic position vis-a-vis its rival superpower the US.

Both the presidential candidates blamed each other’s administration for the failure in Afghanistan as it was under Trump the deal was negotiated and under Biden, the deal was enacted. Despite dodging the ball on each other side and playing the blame game, it can be analysed that both administrations were responsible for preparing and enacting an unfeasible plan that not only costed the US but Afghanistan and its people also. Interestingly, of all these superpowers and world leaders, it was Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban who enjoyed the show as Trump called him a “strong man.”

Debate v/s The Race

A set of new polls conducted across the US after the 2024 presidential debate suggested that Kamala Harris outperformed Donald Trump and exceeded the expectations of the voters, prior to that the voters were evenly split on who would do a better job. The voting pattern post-debate suggested a slight increase of votes in favour of Harris while votes for Trump remained steady. Debate watchers viewed Trump as a stronger president in sectors of economic growth and immigration control while Harris showcased strong candidature in protecting democracy and abortion rights. The further dissection of votes again suggested casual sexism by dividing the stereotypical role of men and women. 

image 3

(Source: CNN survey conducted by SSRN)

Despite a steady increase in votes in favour of Kamala Harris after the debate, analysts suggest that the race remains deadlocked except in the state of Pennsylvania where Harris holds an edge over Trump. Reviews after the debate indicated that people of every racial group, different age brackets, different educational levels and even typical white voters who have clear support for Trump gave her positive feedback. Hence, the debate gave Harris an upper hand and helped her truly represent herself to its citizens. Yet the fate of these candidates is not clear which can only be showcased with changing events and polls.

image 4

(Source: The New York Times)

Way Forward

The US presidential debate is watched closely by world leaders as it is one of the key superpowers in the multipolar world and many nations have vested interest in it. As a result, its presidential election held every 4 years becomes the talk of the town. The 2024 Presidential debate brought a myriad of major issues to the floor for the presidential candidates, Former President Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris. 

A deep analysis of the debate not only showcased the personality traits of these leaders but will also help voters to choose their leader precisely. The debate involved casual sexism and racism by Trump towards Harris and xenophobia towards immigrants. The presidential candidates pursued red herring, to distract the audience from potential concerns and blame other parties for all the failures and issues. Fallacious and false claims were also made by both leaders during the debate which resulted in the release of fact-checks by the US media channels. 

Although the debate proved beneficial to Harris as reports suggested an increase in approval for Harris after the debate, it is still difficult to predict who will win the actual 2024 Presidential race which is going to be a neck-and-neck tussle. The change in presidency will see domestic and foreign policy change and so the world will closely watch the race between the donkey and the elephant

References

About the Contributor– Naushaba (she/her/hers) is a research intern at the Impact and Policy Research Institute and a postgraduate student of the Academy of International Studies, Jamia Millia Islamia. Her research interests lie in Global Politics, Gender Studies, Climate Change and Sustainable Development.

Acknowledgement– The author would like to express her sincere gratitude to Dr Arjun Kumar, Ms Aasthaba Jadeja, Dhruv Tapadia, and Goutam Sinha for their invaluable contributions to this article. Their support, guidance, and expertise were instrumental in its completion.

Read more at IMPRI:

PM SHRI Yojana (2022): Transforming Schools, Empowering Futures

Bridging Gaps: Financial Inclusion as a Tool for Climate Resilience in India

Authors

Related Posts

Talk to Us