GOP lawmakers and analysts virtually unanimous that Trump was second best to Harris in first presidential debate

GOP lawmakers and analysts virtually unanimous that Trump was second best to Harris in first presidential debate

Donald Trump’s campaign was in damage control mode on Wednesday amid widespread dismay among supporters over a presidential debate performance that saw Kamala Harris, his Democratic opponent, repeatedly goad him into going wildly off-message and missing apparent opportunities to tackle her on policy.

Even with Trump insisting to have won the debate “by a lot”, Republicans were virtually unanimous that Trump had come off second best in a series of exchanges that saw the vice-president deliberately bait him on his weak points while he responded with visible anger.

The Republican nominee – who took the unusual step afterwards of visiting the media spin room, a venue normally frequented only by candidates’ surrogates – was non-committal on Wednesday to the Harris campaign’s proposal for a second debate. Despite widespread opinion to the contrary, Trump suggested she needed it because she had lost. “I’d be less inclined to because we had a great night. We won the debate,” he told Fox & Friends.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    801·
    2 months ago

    Also, I forgot to ask about this last night…

    “Where is he?” Trump asked. “They threw him out of the campaign like a dog.”

    Does Trump think you just kick dogs out of your home and they go away?

    • wjrii@lemmy.world
      13·
      2 months ago

      That’s one of his go-to turns of phrase, and like all his go-tos he grinds it into dust through overuse. Apparently, he is not a dog person.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        8·
        2 months ago

        At the same debate, Trump also claimed that he was thrown out of office, that he doesn’t know whether or not he’s alive and that Kamala Harris IS Joe Biden.

        So I don’t think he actually knows that.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        7·
        2 months ago

        Yes, but more to the point, he doesn’t understand them or what people do to them. You can hate dogs to the point that you kick every dog you see, but you’ll still likely understand that if you throw a dog out of the house, the dog won’t usually leave and never come back.

  • elrik@lemmy.worldEnglish
    45·
    2 months ago

    What kind of lame equivocation is “second best?” If he’s “second best” in a debate with two people, then that means HE LOST.

    Are these GOP lawmakers and analysts so spineless and beholden to Trump that they cannot discuss this as just one more - in a long list - of his failures?

    • barsquid@lemmy.world
      5·
      2 months ago

      They probably don’t want their inboxes filled with bomb and rape threats from the very domestic terrorists they radicalized.

    • dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world
      2·
      2 months ago

      It’s worse than that. They think that toeing the line and refusing to deviate is the strong position to take here. Always has been.

  • rustyfish@lemmy.worldEnglish
    43·
    2 months ago

    Second best?! Really? Now we think participation trophies are fine? Ok whatever.

    As for the aftermath of the debate. I like it. I enjoy that orange fuck getting made fun of and the memes are superb. But as expected, he could have yanked his pickle out and jerked off live on TV and his cultists would still defend him. I am 100% sure that this would have been the case. And there still would be people who are undecided!

  • thawed_caveman@lemmy.world
    25·
    2 months ago

    OK so Biden had a bad debate, was visibly incoherent for a while beforeheand, and they took him out of the race.

    Now Trump has had a bad debate and has been visibly incoherent for years. Is the GOP going to take him out of the race for a stronger candidate?

    I don’t want to make a false equivalency, these are different parties and different candidates; Trump supporters are more loyal than usual, and he would take them with him as he’s not likely to accept his exclusion, so the GOP taking Trump out of the race is riskier than Dems taking Biden out of the race.

    But, seen from the left, conservatives are the ones with a reputation for ruthless pragmatism when it comes to electoral politics. They’re the ones who sacrifice their values by voting for candidates that do advance their goals.

    A lot of leftists, out of idealism, wouldn’t vote for Clinton in 2016 or Biden in 2020; meanwhile evangelicals made the pragmatic decision to vote for Trump, the least christian man in the whole GOP, because he furthers their anti-abortion agenda. I argue that conservatives are absolutely correct in this, voting for a candidate that you don’t like just to advance your goals is the correct approach to representative democracy. My evidence for this is that evangelical voters were rewarded for their vote when of Roe v Wade was overruled thanks to judges from the Trump administration.

    So i think, if the GOP replaces Trump but keeps an equally extremist agenda, there’s a world where electoral pragmatism causes those voters to transfer over, leading to better odds of a GOP victory. And a conservative presidency other than Trump would push their agenda more efficiently than the first Trump presidency did or than a second Trump presidency would.

    Uh… So DON’T do that. That should not happen. It would be the right thing for the GOP to do, which means it’s the wrong thing and i hope it doesn’t happen.

    • bitwaba@lemmy.world
      27·
      2 months ago

      The thing that allowed the Democrats to switch candidates was that the Democratic National Convention had not happened yet, which is when the candidate is officially locked in as the party’s candidate on ballots for president.

      The Republican National Convention was mid July. Trump and Vance are locked in. To swap candidates now would be considerably more difficult for them (not to mention having to fight against a self centered toddler that will refuse to let anyone other than him run).

      Swapping out candidates would be good for the Republicans. The process of swapping out candidates would not be.

    • nifty@lemmy.world
      12·
      2 months ago

      meanwhile evangelicals made the pragmatic decision to vote for Trump, the least christian man in the whole GOP, because he furthers their anti-abortion agenda. I

      Conservatives get abortions as soon as their own daughters get pregnant. They’re consummate hypocrites. Voting republican has always been about keeping workers deprived of rights and wage increases. No conservative gives a shit about the culture war stuff. The culture war is and has always been a distraction from creating welfare states like in EU.

      • Fedizen@lemmy.world
        9·
        2 months ago

        The culture war is an important piece of the conservative agenda- it isolates and eliminates the various groups that will group together to support non-conservatives.

    • barsquid@lemmy.world
      11·
      2 months ago

      They cannot swap him out because he will not cooperate. Attempting to swap him out would do nothing but split the vote for them.

      Repubs have spent decades propagandizing their fear-addicted voters with racist delusions. Donald has taken over that mechanism.

      The sane but sociopathic Repub leadership is experiencing the classic trope of a monster they thought was tame (the racist voters they have been agitating) turning on them (a dementia patient they have no control over blathering about eating cats during the debate).

  • Nuke_the_whales@lemmy.world
    17·
    2 months ago

    I’m surprised nobody is going after him for how low energy he was at the debate. He looked like he was gonna fall asleep. The only time his eyes opened wide was when she called out his crowd sizes

  • Kokesh@lemmy.worldEnglish
    16·
    2 months ago

    He can’t ever be prepared. He is stupid, narcissistic, impulsive and damn senile. Not the best combo.

  • rustydrd@sh.itjust.works
    15·
    2 months ago

    Republicans: “What a bad and unprepared debate that was! He didn’t even get to the part about how life begins at conception and guns are more important than children!”

  • untorquer@lemmy.world
    6·
    2 months ago

    Business interests, evangelicals, and cops/white supremacists.

    Oh yeah, and that 50+ year campaign of gerrymandering, voter suppression (e.g. vote on tuesday, in person, during business hours, no time off work), abstracting the election process away from the ballot, and designing the court system to favor conservative calls in disputed elections.

    America has a rather anti-democratic voting system…

  • Marleyinoc@lemmy.world
    5·
    2 months ago

    Wait until their secrets are threatened to be exposed and then see how they all change their tune in the next couple days.

  • Letsdothis@lemmy.world
    440·
    2 months ago

    First, im no trumpster, i dont like the guy. The MM is really pulling out all the stops on spinning this one. Trump did just fine, Republicans think he did just fine, and some even consider it a win. It’s crazy how strong the MM is pushing it a major Harris win and that Trump did very badly, and that even Republicans think he lost, the headline “Republicans dismayed” is just bullshit, I know a lot of Republicans, and none have claimed to be “dismayed”. That’s the spin. I know everyone here thinks it was a big Harris win and no one denies it, so I’m just here to tell inform yall that those of us who live in reality don’t consider it a big win for Harris or that Trump did badly. All the big news stations are helping to push that narrative of a MAJOR Harris win. As always, MSNBC, USAtoday, CNN, NBC, NYtimes, Washington Post etc. I know most of yall trust these news outlets and don’t think they have bias, but they most certainly do.

    Kamala pissed me off with all the stupid faces she was making, she also just sounded like a whinny B---- several times. My personal opinion is that it was more like a tie than anything, Harris had no content to what she said. But Trump did let her get under his skin. They both lied… and quite a bit.

    Anyway, I know where I am, I know the responses I’m going to get in this liberal echo chamber. So come on.

    • ulkesh@lemmy.world
      9·
      2 months ago

      First, im no trumpster

      Perhaps, but you are clearly thinking and writing like one.

      those of us who live in reality

      I’m not so sure you do. Trump said some of THE most inane things he’s ever said, yet you are effectively equating that to what Harris had said, which had more substance in a few words than Trump had in the whole debate.

      she also just sounded like a whinny B----

      Right out of the Fox News talking-point playbook. And the proper spelling would be “whiny”. Unless you’re comparing her sound to a horse’s neigh.

      in this liberal echo chamber

      Right out of the Fox News talking-point playbook.

      I wish you luck in your endeavors. This “both sides”-ing doesn’t really work when they are most definitely not the same.

      • Letsdothis@lemmy.world
        18·
        2 months ago

        I can play this game…

        Perhaps, but you are clearly thinking and writing like one.

        That’s an opinion. You sound politically color blind. If praise isn’t being solely given to the candidate you support, sutely, he must be for the opposition.

        “those of us who live in reality”

        I’m not so sure you do. Trump said some of THE most inane things he’s ever said, yet you are effectively equating that to what Harris had said, which had more substance in a few words than Trump had in the whole debate.

        Way to take that quote out of context and then argue something else. This is the whole sentence:

        I know everyone here thinks it was a big Harris win and no one denies it, so I’m just here to tell inform yall that “those of us who live in reality” don’t consider it a big win for Harris or that Trump did badly.

        I wasnt talking about the substance here. It was commentary about how it is being claimed that it was a “big loss for Trump” and/or a “major win for harris,” which it was neither. People who actually interact with other people “in the real world” have a better understanding of how people actually perceived the debate.

        Right out of the Fox News talking-point playbook. And the proper spelling would be “whiny”. Unless you’re comparing her sound to a horse’s neigh.

        Is it? I don’t ever watch Fox, so I wouldn’t know. Assuming and generalizing, not a good strategy.

        Right out of the Fox News talking-point playbook.

        Lol. Again, even. And even if it is, it’s not wrong. This place is a liberal echo chamber. The sooner you’re able to understand/accept this, the better off you will be overall.

      • Letsdothis@lemmy.world
        110·
        2 months ago

        Ah, the first purely ad hominem. I love it. It confirms that many here have nothing intelligent/important to add.

        • GeneralVincent@lemmy.worldEnglish
          7·
          2 months ago

          And your ad hominem of saying Kamala was making stupid faces that pissed you off and sounded like a whiney bitch confirms you have nothing intelligent/important to add either.

          Sometimes it’s not an echo chamber, and you’re just wrong. Not about the spin put on the headline, just in general.

          • Letsdothis@lemmy.world
            16·
            2 months ago

            I see you’re not ready to admit or able to recognize this place is an echo chamber, and that’s fine. It can take time.

            Hah, I guess I can’t argue the first part too much. Although, I believe it’s still relevant because who wants want a president making stupid faces and being whinny. Putin would own her. She’s good at staying on script, but I’d like to see her have a conversation about things that she hasn’t been able to rehears.

            • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
              6·
              2 months ago

              You do realize these are all things said in the debate, that you called normal and sane, right?

              • Letsdothis@lemmy.world
                15·
                2 months ago

                Uhg… these things you said were said in the debate, you’re not even paraphrasing. You’re twisting what was said, turning them into personal insults. Secondly, why are you claiming I called them normal or sane, i never said that? You’re using strawman tactics erroneously to try to make a point. So, ad hominems, strawman tactics, and lying about what I said… got anything else to add?

    • webadict@lemmy.world
      4·
      2 months ago

      You post a lot of defense for Trump for someone that doesn’t like Trump. You also post a lot of attacks against Harris and Walz.

      Trump is at best a misinformed bumbling dumbfuck who thinks immigrants eat pets and children get surgeries in school, whereas Harris’ lies are at worst the typical politician lies about supporting things she doesn’t really support.

      It is insane if you think these are on the same level.

      Anyway, vote Harris because Trump will try to January 6th us again.

    • andrewta@lemmy.world
      112·
      2 months ago

      I hate trump but I agree. This wasn’t a landslide victory for Harris. She won in my opinion but only by a thin margin.