Harris takes upper hand in US presidential debate

What’s happened?

On September 10th the Democratic vice-president, Kamala Harris, and the former Republican president, Donald Trump, held their first (and potentially only) presidential debate ahead of the November election. Despite a slow start, Ms Harris maintained the upper hand for most of the debate, which we expect will put further momentum behind her campaign.

Why does it matter?

Ms Harris withstood most of Mr Trump’s attacks, including on issues that will register most with critical voting groups. She stumbled in her initial statements about the state of the economy, an issue that continues to top voter interest polls. However, she regained her footing as the debate progressed, and managed to pivot more convincingly to her plans to combat inflation and grow the economy, although Mr Trump rarely pressed her on details. On abortion rights—an issue that has long mobilised Democrats and swing voters—she framed Mr Trump’s preference for state-level restrictions as extreme and “immoral”, to which he failed to respond clearly. On immigration—one of her more vulnerable issues—she highlighted Mr Trump’s role in killing a bipartisan bill to strengthen border security and benefited from his fixation on baseless conspiracy theories, which diluted the potency of his attacks. She consistently neutralised his attempts to paint her as a radical leftist, including on issues such as fracking, gun control and public healthcare. If her goal was to strike a sharp contrast with Mr Trump on age (he is 78 and she is 59), tone and coherence of messaging, she broadly succeeded. A post-debate endorsement by the American pop star, Taylor Swift, will also boost Ms Harris’s standing with young voters, an important demographic for Democrats.

At least part of Ms Harris’s debate success is attributable to Mr Trump’s failure to stay on message, which could further hamper his election bid. Mr Trump rarely probed on issues where Democrats have faced difficulty attracting support from within and outside their party, including on immigration and the Israel-Hamas war. Instead, he continuously veered into rants about unrelated topics, including the size of crowds at his campaign rallies, which made him appear flustered and unprepared. He focused repeatedly on extreme claims about abortion and border security, which the debate moderators quickly clarified were not true. He also failed to outline his plans on any major policy issue, including reforming the Affordable Care Act, which only flattered Ms Harris’s otherwise hastily assembled platform. His statements on foreign policy further worked to his disadvantage, feeding into Ms Harris’s claims that he prefers to work with authoritarian leaders and other actors that are against US interests.

What next?

The next scheduled debate is on October 1st and will be between Ms Harris’s and Mr Trump’s vice-presidential picks. Ms Harris has already expressed interest in holding additional presidential debates (none is scheduled at the moment). Mr Trump has not accepted her offer and may well refuse, given his poor initial performance against her. Polls remain tight between the two candidates, with Ms Harris holding a narrow lead in national polls and gaining ground in the battleground states. We expect her debate performance to further entrench her position, and an anticipated strong showing by her running mate, Tim Walz, at the vice-presidential debate should help to maintain this momentum into October. If this translates into stable polling leads for Ms Harris, we will revise our election forecast from a Trump to a Harris win.

The analysis and forecasts featured in this article are accessible through EIU’s Country Analysis service. This comprehensive solution provides unmatched global insights covering the political and economic outlook for nearly 200 countries, enabling organisations to identify potential opportunities and risks effectively.