The second presidential debate of the 2024 U.S. presidential debate contrasted a polished, occasionally evasive performance by Vice President Kamala Harris against an aggressive, defensive performance by former President Donald Trump.
Virginia Tech political scientist Karen Hult and media communications expert Cayce Myers discussed the results of the debate.
Karen Hult on the effectiveness of the debate
“Vice President Harris evidently did much of what she had hoped to this evening: calmly and articulately responded to questions — if answering them only infrequently — and appearing to be in charge from the moment she walked on the stage and shook Mr. Trump’s hand. She succeeded in baiting him almost from the start,” Hult said.
“Former President Trump appeared angry almost throughout the debate. He settled into the familiar, self-indulgent exaggeration and free association rambling often seen at rallies. He was noticeably less disciplined than he had been in the June debate against President Biden,” Hult said.
“The moderators covered a great deal of ground with their questions, but the follow-ups were not as strong as they might have been and the efforts at fact-checking were ineffectual,” Hult said.
“I still believe it is important for presidential candidates to face questions and at least minimally engage with each other. Forums like this evening, though, seem more likely to deepen viewers’ and listeners’ disappointment with and distrust in politics an government,” Hult said.
Cayce Myers on the candidate performances
“As expected, the debate was acrimonious with both Harris and Trump attacking each other. Kamala Harris was clearly well prepared and baited Donald Trump on many issues. She remained calm during the debate and used her time to frame Trump and his policies. As expected, her attacks on Trump focused on temperament and style. She also did well in her description of abortion rights and the other issues related to abortion access and a woman’s right to choose. This has been a core issue for Democrats, and it has resonated in other races with voters. However, Harris sidestepped specifics in her discussion of her changes on policies. Overall, she performed well,” Myers said.
“Trump’s performance was inconsistent but had moments where he was effective in advocating his core campaign issues. His best moments came when talking about border security and the economy. He successfully pivoted on some questions, tying many questions back to border security, which is one of his strongest campaign issues. However, Trump did take the bait from Harris and repeated some claims that were fact checked in real time, the most noteworthy being the claim that immigrants were eating dogs and cats. That comment went viral during the debate, and it is the type of comment that has the potential to derail the narrative of Trump’s larger policy points,” Myers said.
Find more Virginia Tech election experts here.
About Hult
Hult, professor of political science at Virginia Tech, serves on the faculty of the School of Public and International Affairs’ Center for Public Administration and Policy with expertise in the U.S. presidency, federal and state politics, policy and governance, and federal and state courts. Read her full bio here.
About Myers
Myers, director of graduate studies at the School of Communication in the College of Liberal Arts and Human Sciences, specializes in media history, political communication, and laws that affect public relations practice. Read his full bio here.
Schedule an interview
To schedule an interview, contact Mike Allen in the media relations office at mike.allen@vt.edu or 540-400-1700.
