Emotional Populism vs. Rational Leadership
The September 10, 2024 debate between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris left many wondering: who came out on top? Both candidates, representing starkly different political styles, captivated audiences in unique ways. Trump, known for his emotional populism, leaned heavily into the issue of illegal immigration, while Harris strategically positioned herself as the rational and firm Democratic candidate that her base has been waiting for. But who truly won this high-stakes clash?
Trump’s Emotional Mastery and the Weaponization of Justice
True to form, Trump’s strategy was to tap into his base’s emotions, centering his message on illegal immigration and its impact on the country. He consistently framed immigration as a national crisis and painted Harris as merely an extension of Biden’s failed policies.
Yet, as political analyst Fernando Monzón pointed out in his post-debate analysis, Trump introduced a significant new narrative during this debate: the weaponization of justice. He claimed that the legal challenges he’s facing are politically motivated attacks, designed to bring him down. By portraying himself as a victim of a corrupt justice system, Trump further solidified his outsider status and victimhood, resonating with those who feel similarly disenfranchised by traditional institutions. This narrative, combined with his emotional appeal, kept his core supporters engaged.
Harris’s Reinvention and Appetite for More
Kamala Harris used the debate to reintroduce herself—not as Biden’s vice president, but as a presidential contender in her own right. She made a strong case by firmly defending reproductive rights, positioning herself as the voice of women’s autonomy. Harris also tackled foreign policy, defending the administration’s stances on Ukraine and the Middle East, while distancing herself from Biden with the emphatic declaration, “I am not Joe Biden, and certainly not Donald Trump.”
A particularly interesting point raised by Monzón is Harris’s growing confidence. By the end of the debate, Harris wanted more. The debate left her feeling empowered, and she expressed interest in having another face-off with Trump. This shift in confidence marks a turning point in her campaign, signaling that she’s ready to go head-to-head with Trump again.
Trump, however, seems less eager for a rematch. Though he initiated the debate challenge, Monzón noted that after Harris’s assertive performance, Trump may feel he achieved what he needed with just one debate and is less enthusiastic about continuing. The balance of enthusiasm has shifted, with Harris now pushing for more opportunities to solidify her leadership.
Viral Moments and Memes
As with any modern political debate, the true impact often plays out in the viral moments that follow. Trump’s shocking claim that illegal immigrants are “eating pets” instantly spread across social media, drawing both outrage and memes. Harris’s emphatic defense of abortion rights, stating, “The government has no right over a woman’s body,” also went viral, capturing the attention of her base and beyond.
Monzón emphasized the importance of these viral moments. While few people watch the debates in full, these soundbites and memes carry the candidates’ messages far beyond the event itself. Trump’s ability to generate these moments remains unmatched, but Harris’s newfound assertiveness gave her a significant presence in the post-debate media landscape.
Who Really Won?
Ultimately, it depends on who you ask. Both Trump and Harris achieved their goals, speaking directly to their respective audiences and consolidating their support. Trump, as always, tapped into the emotional pulse of his base, while Harris redefined herself as a rational, powerful leader ready for more. As Monzón aptly pointed out, “The real winner is the candidate who captures the memes,” and in this case, both candidates walked away with viral moments that resonated with their followers.
