top of page

The Debate, A Critique

Updated: Jan 17

By Jessie Seigel / June 30, 2024




The biggest problem with last Thursday night’s presidential debate hosted by CNN is that the public has been trained by politicians and the media to value optics over substance.

 

Over many months, the media has frequently featured former president Donald Trump’s contrived attack on President Joe Biden as old and doddering rather than addressing the records of the two men and what they bring to the table—progress or horror—for the future. In advance of the debate, the media and its pundits—even on MSNBC—largely hyped the notion that putting to bed doubts about age was the main task President Biden had to accomplish. Instead of debunking it, they gave deference to this manufactured strawman created by Donald Trump. Trump—whose every sentence at his rallies prior to the debate was filled with incoherent rambling when it was not a stream of baldfaced lies.

 

Furthermore, at the debate, the moderators allowed Trump to spout—as the New York Times put it--“wild accusations riddled with falsehoods.” That is, lie after lie after outrageous lie. Heaven forbid that the so-called moderators should fact-check or that the media should do so in real time. No. They left Biden alone having to expose Trump’s zillion lies in addition to responding to the moderators’ questions and stating his own positions. When faced with a barrage of lies, where does one start? Three minutes (two minutes for presentation and one minute for response) on each question is hardly enough time to accomplish that, let alone address the real issues.


Yet, as aptly argued in The Hill, based on a transcript of the debate, Biden won. I will not summarize the article’s points since it is succinct and well worth reading in its entirety. It can be found here

 

For Biden and His Team—A Prescriptive Critique

 

The flaws in Biden’s performance at Thursday night’s debate were attributable to shortcomings in his debate preparation. While what I write herein may seem like Monday morning quarterbacking, it is meant as advice for the future.

 

Optics

 

On the split screen, Trump was made up—orange or not—to look alive. Biden’s face looked extremely pale and washed out—ghostly. Given that optics was a known factor bound to affect the public’s perception, where were the Democratic staff to be sure that Biden, despite his cold, was properly made up and placed for television cameras?

 

Second, Biden’s cold made his voice hoarse and a bit weak. He also has a stutter with which he has had to contend life-long. The combination easily accounts for his stumbling over a few words and thoughts in the moment here and there. But his team should have found a way to remind the public of these matters before the debate. Absent that, before answering his first debate question, President Biden could have charmingly and humanly asked the public to bear with him since he had a cold that was making him hoarse.

 

Strategy

 

President Biden’s biggest mistake was playing Trump’s game instead of his own.

 

The most blatant example was when he let Trump draw him into a “who’s more fit” non sequitur about golf. Trump went on about how he won two club championships, boasting: “To do that, you have to be quite smart, and you have to be able to hit the ball a long way. And I do it. He doesn’t do it. He can’t hit a ball 50 yards.”

 

Biden answered with stats about his own golf game and saying he’d play golf with Trump if Trump would carry his own clubs. In doing this, he allowed Trump to make the issue their comparative physical fitness. Biden should have responded: “It’s the job of the President to govern the nation, not to spend his life playing golf like you.”

 

Biden played defense throughout when he should have been playing offense. Even when he attacked Trump, it was from a defensive posture—and with too many statistical details (a fault many Democratic candidates share—feeling they must back up every point with extensive facts rather than simply present the broad picture).

 

A few examples:

 

When Trump lied about Democrats wanting to “murder babies,” Biden tried to defend with details about what Roe v. Wade did and didn’t do, and the effect of six-week abortion bans on women. Instead, he should have simply dismissed the “baby murder” charge as absurd and raised the mothers bleeding out in parking lots waiting to be close enough to death for a hospital or doctor to treat them.

 

On the military—instead of beginning by defending his own record on veterans, Biden should have led with the fact Trump told four-star General John Kelly that soldiers are suckers and losers. And then, contrasted that with his own respect for veterans and passing the PACT Act to better veterans’ insurance.


Rather than individually referencing the Charlottesville Nazi march, Trump’s threats of vengeance, and Trump’s promise to pardon those who are in jail for fomenting a coup at his direction, Biden should have highlighted the fascism writ large that is inherent in those actions. Highlight Trump’s statements about becoming a dictator on day one, that General Kelly should be executed for lack of personal loyalty, and that he intends to use the power of the presidency to go after his enemies regardless of whether they’ve committed any crime.  

 

Furthermore, in attacking Trump, Biden should not—for the most part—have addressed Trump directly. Doing so gave Trump the dignity of making it a spat between the two of them. Instead, Biden should have taken the posture of addressed the public and treating Trump as an exhibit.

 

For example, on Trump’s big lie about the 2020 election, Biden said, “You’re a whiner. When you lost the first time, you continued to appeal and appeal to courts all across the country. Not one single court in America said any of your claims had any merit, state or local, none. … if you lose again, you can’t stand the loss… Something snapped in you when you lost the last time.”

 

If Biden had phrased it, “He’s a whiner…” etc., that would have defined Trump, rather than coming off as part of a direct tit-for-tat exchange between the two of them.

 

Finally, rather than attempting to respond to each and every lie Trump told, Biden could more effectively have applied a variation of Reagan’s “There you go again.” Once Trump began his barrage of lies, Biden could have said something along the lines of: “The man to my right lies when he breathes. His only tricks are to change the subject or accuse his opposition of what he himself does or has done. Watch for that as we continue this debate.”

  

To Those Advocating Biden’s Replacement on the Democratic Ticket

 

Are they kidding? If not, they should be. The election is less than five months away. Democrats would never unanimously agree on a substitute candidate. The vying amongst contenders would only be a prescription for further division and utter chaos. That’s no way to win an election. It's a fantastic way to lose one.

 

In his first three and a half years as president, Joe Biden has governed superbly. Despite an obstreperous congress and reactionary Supreme Court, his accomplishments include 15.6 million jobs created (eight times more than the last three Republican presidents combined), gun safety legislation, lower prescription drug costs, and an infrastructure package to rebuild bridges and roads, among others. In addition, he rebuilt the international alliances that Trump did his best to undermine. If reelected, Biden will fight for further progress as well as beating back the reactionary agendas of the Trumpist cabal. Biden has earned our faith in his ability to do that.

 

But, for the sake of argument—suppose Biden’s health did fail while in office. So what? No president does his work alone. One must have trust in a president’s choices of staff and those who will advise him. There is absolutely no contest between Biden’s choice of advisors and those of Trump. Furthermore, those trying to beat the age drum act as if Biden had no-one to succeed him. When Franklin Delano Roosevelt died in office, his vice-president, Harry S. Truman, very competently succeeded him. The eminently skilled Vice-President Kamala Harris would do the same for our current president.

 

The Bottom Line

 

As Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro has put it, “This election is a referendum on us.” Will we be shallowly influenced by appearances or see through to the essence of the two men? On the one hand, Biden, who—regardless of his debate performance—has a proven ability to govern, to do so with basic humanity, and a firm belief in democracy. And on the other hand, Trump, who has a big mouth full of insane lies and has demonstrated over and over both that he only cares about himself and that he wants to make himself a dictator.

 

It is time to suck it up. Stop the handwringing and the divisive propositions. Instead, get out there and double up on fighting the fight to get President Biden re-elected to the White House along with a Democratic congress. That is the necessary route to save the country’s democracy.


If you like what you read at My Washington Whispers, please feel free to subscribe below. It costs nothing, requires solely your email address, and will result only in a bi-weekly email announcing the latest issue. Feel free to pass articles on to your friends and acquaintances! And if you have thoughts, pro or con, about what is written here, please leave a comment below. (Subscribing, sharing, and commenting are greatly appreciated.)

 

 

111 views15 comments

15 Comments


Guest
Jul 05, 2024

An excellent article. It points out the massive holes in Democratic messaging. Why has that been a con-

start feature after Obama's election?


Like

Guest
Jul 02, 2024

I must resprctfully disagree with the Washington Whisperer. The best summary of what I and many millions of others saw and heard in last Thursday's debtate was the New York Times Editorial Board's editorial, ""To Serve His Country , President Biden should Leave the Race." The problem is not that we have an 81 year old candidate, but that we have a senescent 81-year old candidate.

I agree as to the inadequacy of the moderators in not holding Trump accountable for blatant lies. The lack of fact checking I think was agreed on pre-debate in part to protect Biden.

Today Biden presented a forceful and very welcome statement on the horrific Supreme Court decision on Presidential immunity-- and then wal…

Like
allegras7
Jul 04, 2024
Replying to

a. I very strongly doubt that the agreement not to fact check was to protect Biden. It was far more likely a Trump team condition for going along with the rest of the debate limitations. And Biden did not say anything that was inaccurate, let alone a lie. No one fact-checking after the debate even suggested that.


b. Kim Atkins Stohr's statements on a July 3 segment of Nicole Wallace's MSNBC show, Deadline White House, best states and enlarges upon my view: https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-white-house/watch/biden-s-debate-crisis-what-i-want-is-for-democrats-to-get-a-grip-and-to-fight-214177861739 Jessie

Like

allegras7
Jul 01, 2024

Any ideas about best way to approach them?

Like

Leipow
Jul 01, 2024

You are spot on about everything Biden should have said. But he didn’t. We need a president who can and will say those things. In addition to having the “right” ideas about the direction the country should be going, we need a president who inspires us and gives us confidence in his mental acuity, and based on what I saw at the debate I have serious concerns about his ability to lead for another 4 1/2 years. The possibility of a replacement should be explored.

Like
Guest
Jul 01, 2024
Replying to

I agree with your analysis, allegras7! The staff made a mistake by not allowing more time for rest after the successful foreign events! However, we have lots of time to make up for a problem created in a 90 minutes debate! We, supporters of JOE, must do everything we can to voice our SUPPORT to everyone we encounter.

Like

blochouse
Jul 01, 2024

Spot on, as usual.

Like
bottom of page