Susan Page: Different worldviews on display
HEMPSTEAD, N. Y. The debate before the debate began was all about which Donald Trump would show up on stage. Provocative Trump, who unexpectedly claimed the Republican presidential nomination over a dozen rivals with stronger political résumés? Or Presidential Trump, who in recent weeks has toned down his rhetoric and, in another political surprise, managed to pull even with rival Hillary Clinton in national and battleground polls? Welcome back, Provocative Trump. In response to the opening question from the moderator, NBC’s Lester Holt, Trump delivered his signature, dire view of the state of the nation. “We have to stop our jobs from being stolen from us,” he said, denouncing the threat from Mexico and China and elsewhere. “We have to stop our jobs from leaving the United States and with it firing all our people.”
Clinton’s response to the first question reflected her own signature style as well, cramming a dozen bullet- point policy proposals into a two- minute answer, from infrastructure investment and a
higher minimum wage to equal pay for women and debt- free college.
Then, despite all the speculation beforehand that she would try to come across as more likeable, she chose to be a counterpuncher. That said, her response to him seemed marked more by amusement than anger, and shemade a point of smiling.
He blamed her for the rise of Islamic State.
“I have a feeling by the end of this evening, I’m going to be blamed for everything,” she replied. “Why not?” he interjected. “Just join the debate by saying more crazy things,” she replied.
They jabbed each other in the fiercest and most personal series of exchanges in a presidential debate in modern times. He portrayed her as one of the political hacks who has led the nation dangerously astray. “It’s all words, it’s all sound bites,” he said dismissively, repeatedly interrupting her and at times audibly snorting as she spoke.
She portrayed him as a questionable businessman with few specific plans and a limited grasp of the facts, advocating economic policies she repeatedly dubbed “Trumped- up trickle- down.”
She accused him of racist behavior in questioning President Obama’s birthplace and questioned what he was trying to hide by refusing to release his tax returns while they are being audited.
Holt tried with limited success to limit the interruptions and keep the debate on schedule.
The setting inside the debate hall at Hofstra University looked dignified enough to fit in the White House itself, with a dark blue backdrop, a discrete band of white stars and a depiction of a golden eagle soaring over the two contenders.
But the mood surrounding the opening forum was almost gladiatorial.
No presidential election in modern times has defied the conventional wisdom as much as this one, which has ended up pitting a political neophyte and reality- TV star against the wife of a former president, a member of the family that defines the Democratic establishment. And no presidential debate in the television age has been more hotly anticipated.
A few hours before the debate, Trump was needling Clinton on Twitter, a platform he has perfected as a political weapon.
“My team of deplorables will be managing my Twitter account for this evenings debate,” he wrote, a reference to her description at a fundraiser of his followers as a “basket of Deplorables.”
Clinton was tweeting about the same time: “Trump told 31 outright lies just last week.”
History demonstrates that the opening debate can be powerful enough to boost a candidate or wound one, with lasting consequences.
Eleven campaigns have included debates in the television age. In nine of them, it shaped the trajectory of the campaign that followed in fundamental ways. The first debate helped elect John Kennedy in 1960 and Ronald Reagan in 1980. It helped defeat Michael Dukakis in 1988 and Al Gore in 2000.
They typically have had themost impact when an incumbent president isn’t running, and when the candidates come in with something to prove, and when the contest is close and fluid. That is, in a campaign like this one.